|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
L. wrote: "jawod" wrote in message ... RE-READ IT - there were TWO people here in the beginning "splitting hairs" about the use of or perhaps MIS use of the word "memorization. One was leaning towards "memorizing" "ANSWERS" purely to satisfy an exam....... i.e; ABCD.......... it isn't quite that simple. On the other hand, the other argument was in the "true" sense of the word - TO MEMORIZE (commit to memory for life). what it has been about is that couple of folks want to make out that somehow the NoCodeTechs are some how doing something altogether different from what has been done for years |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
t... jawod wrote: If MENSA membership is important to you, fine. Most of us find it a bit pretentious and downright silly. Ditto for the Morse code testing requirement. That was the whole point. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Let me set something straight. "I" was NOT beating my chest about "CODE". I was only in the argument with regard to the use/misuse of the word "Memorization". "I" think code has its place - but not as it once did. It sure isn't keeping the bands clean by keeping it in place. "I" don't use code - that often. I think also, it "can" be fun to learn for those who may want to try it. Some people may - as has been proven, still - others won't - which also has been proven. THAT IS MY stance on code. As to the "mis"spelling of "genius", hey - what can I say - I'm human, I DO make mistakes. I don't rely on "spell check" techniques - so ............ an error does tend to sneak through from time to time. It doesn't matter one iota to me if you do code or not. "I" surely am not here to pass judgement on you or anyone else by that ability or inability (since some DO have trouble getting it). OR lack of interest "may" be more specific. I have quite a few people I talk to on the bands who are "NO CODE Techs. They're not interested in the code - OR wanting to climb any higher in license class. Its cool with me....... That is their thing - not mine. It sure doesn't mean we can't have a decent conversation - be it on the air via repeater, simplex, computer mode or face to face. :) L. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
L. wrote: "Cecil Moore" wrote in message t... jawod wrote: If MENSA membership is important to you, fine. Most of us find it a bit pretentious and downright silly. Ditto for the Morse code testing requirement. That was the whole point. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Let me set something straight. "I" was NOT beating my chest about "CODE you are however enging a deabte flaming people on side of the map that tend to get you "counter battery fire sir face it or not as you choose |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
a MENSA
level IQ is worth magnitudes more to its possessor than is Morse code skill even within the Amateur Radio Service. If all the coded hams with IQ's less than 100 were transformed into nocode techs with MENSA level IQ's, the ARS would be much better off and a lot less prone to silliness. The ARRL might even stop publishing those gross technical errors, e.g. reflections don't exist. Cecil you're trolling, aren't you? If you truly believe this stuff, you're in sadder shape than I thought. Your MENSA membership is dreck, dribble, dross. With code, there is, at least, some grounding in practicality: a real world function. "Whew! I knew I was a genius but now I have PROOF!" How completely sad. MENSA has perverted the very nature of IQ in a manner not dissimilar to the way Home Owner Associations have perverted the notion of individual freedoms (guaranteed by our Constitution). Enjoy your little trophy but I'm sure you'll keep yourself insulated from the derision you richly deserve when you bring it up in this newsgroup. I can tell that you're not a bad guy...but, the mensa thing makes you seem, I don't know, ...(fill in the blank) Be Good. Hell, be more egalitarian for once in your life! We all share a HOBBY!!!! John AB8O |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On 12 Aug 2006 15:42:50 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote: oncce you accpet that much of the testing involves memizztion the question then comes down to where is your beef? Those who memorize answers instead of learning concepts - what you would have seen at the beginning of the thread had you paid attention. you tread awfully close to libel there AL Look up the definition of "libel". Part of it is "malicious defamation". Calling a penny a cent isn't malicious, nor is it defamatory. ask an lawyer if you don't believe me You need to take your own advice. Also you need to ask an English teacher - you don't seem to know the definitions of a lot of very common words. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On 12 Aug 2006 15:43:51 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote: Al Klein wrote: On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 14:41:33 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: Brenda Ann wrote: There's a difference between memorizing a formula or method and memorizing specific answers to specific questions. The former is called learning, and can be applied to many situations. The latter is called laziness, and teaches nothing that can be used for any other purpose. That is just hair-splitting. The same hair splitting as the difference between stealing money and earning it - they're both methods of obtaining it. again you tread close to libel and flatout insaity There's nothing either malicious not defamatory in that. ("Who" am I defaming? "Hair"?) But, since you don't know the difference between "learning" and "memorizing", nor which subjects fall into which category, you probably can't see the parallel. and again Telling you something true about yourself isn't actionable, unless done with certain intent, which you'd be hard-pressed to prove. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 23:51:28 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote: I am too lazy I think that says it all. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 00:37:41 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote: My MENSA membership number is 1006281. There ought to be a Godwin's Rule type of rule for using the MENSA crutch. Maybe I should declare one. Klein's rule - so you lose. (The claim "I'm so intelligent that ..." proves lack of intelligence.) |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 23:57:13 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote: Al Klein wrote: Since frequency assignments aren't theory, your question is both irrelevant and incompetent. So the questions on my Extra exam were irrelevant? No, but at least you're consistent - your response is non-responsive and incompetent. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 00:04:45 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote: Al Klein wrote: But, since you don't know the difference between "learning" and "memorizing", nor which subjects fall into which category, you probably can't see the parallel. Learning is impossible without memorizing. Memorizing is possible without learning. You are simply ignorant I'm not the one who doesn't understand the discussion, inverting "memorizing" and "learning". Maybe you need to stop being so lazy and actually learn something. Is English your second language? Third. My internal language is (was) my first. Brooklynese was my second. English is my third. Again, from Websters Again, Webster's is a compendium of common usage, not an unabridged (regardless of the trademark) authoritative source. those who cling to dictionary definitions as authoritative announce their lack of actual knowledge. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 00:08:14 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote: Al Klein wrote: Cecil Moore wrote: Here's the crux of your communications problem. From Webster's: "The absolutely worst source of the definition of a technical term is a non-technical dictionary. "Memorize" is NOT a technical word. As a technical term (the usage here) it is, by definition. Please get back to us when you have talked the IEEE into putting your special definition of "memorize" into their technical dictionary. As soon as the IEEE becomes a body of experts in the usage of the English language. In the meantime, why don't you go and learn something? Anything. New experiences can be quite enjoyable. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 00:22:31 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote: Al Klein wrote: Cecil Moore wrote: Laziness allows one to achieve a goal by the most efficient route. Some famous German military leader said he would lots rather have brilliant and lazy officers than ambitious and stupid ones. As I recall, he was also known as one of the most idiotic strategists the species has ever produced. His "fame" didn't stop him from being the almost single-handed reason his country lost its big war, did it? This was a WWI German officer and I don't recall his name. Then it's just an assertion of yours, isn't it? Being both intelligent and ambitious doesn't appear on your radar? The pride, lust, and greed usually accompanying ambition are a good percentage of the seven deadly sins. Sorry, I don't share your religious incredulity. I don't recognize "sin" as anything but a nonsense word. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 00:48:36 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote: Brenda Ann wrote: Some advanced appliance operators know enough to connect other peripheral devices such as digital mode devices or power amplifiers, but do not know how these devices work, nor how to construct such devices. An amateur radio license is an entry level license. There are a few classes - ONE class is entry level. It is not a university degree. When I obtained all amateur privileges at the age of 15, I didn't know squat. "When I robbed a man at the age of 15, I wasn't arrested." Does that make robbery legal? Your experience is only that - your experience, it's not definitive. All I had done is memorize the ARRL License Manual. Six years later I had a EE degree. What is wrong with learning the technical stuff after one obtains his entry level license? Nothing, if you don't care that the license means nothing more than that you have it. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On 12 Aug 2006 18:58:18 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote: wrote: How did capacitors escape getting color coded? ssshhhhh bb don't ask such questions please Since a) you don't know the answer and b) they didn't. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 10:32:06 -0400, wrote:
On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 23:55:15 -0400, Al Klein wrote: Parroting what I say doesn't make you look educated. indeed it would not but your point? That if you bought 5 clues you'd still be less than clueless. The fact that you posted something on your blog doesn't make it definitive, or even correct. never claimed otherwise now you are attacking for a having a sig line? http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ That's not a sig line, it's part of your post. Sigs appear UNDER the tear (and you don't even have a tear). Put your sig in the signature area, not as part of your post. (If you can figure out how to use Agent.) |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 10:34:58 -0400, wrote:
On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 23:54:12 -0400, Al Klein wrote: On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 19:13:23 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 18:24:46 -0400, Al Klein wrote: Your claim to know what I'm thinking better than I do? Only if your age is a single digit. sure I know better Then you're claiming to be a child. nope you are claiming to something contary to fact I'm claiming that I know what I think and you don't - which is a fact. you are worng it becoming hazing when the subject of the test is unrelated to the prevlegdes it grannts Nope - it's just a poor test. Hazing is something entirely different. you are dancing around sutblies in the menaing of emorizing like mad In your mind, because you can't understand the simple distinctions. and in the mind of engineer at least 2 of em and countless others as well Degrees don't guarantee competence - 50% of all engineers graduated in the bottom half of the class. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 10:54:10 -0400, wrote:
not in my opinion which for the pruposes of posting is all that counts No, actually, "for the purposes of posting", your opinion doesn't count at all to most people. But, since you have such a limited view of the world, you won't understand what that means. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 10:55:07 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 00:12:21 -0400, Al Klein wrote: Sorry, I don't share your religious incredulity. I don't recognize "sin" as anything but a nonsense word. you certainly a polite ham ....NOT Is that religious bigotry I'm hearing, Mark? "Accept my beliefs as fact or be labeled impolite"? |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:20:50 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:07:30 -0400, Al Klein wrote: On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 10:32:41 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 00:15:18 -0400, Al Klein wrote: On 12 Aug 2006 18:58:18 -0700, "an old friend" wrote: wrote: How did capacitors escape getting color coded? ssshhhhh bb don't ask such questions please Since a) you don't know the answer and b) they didn't. no I did ot know that answer and you lied they did I *HAVE* capacitors that are color coded, so you lied about my lying. then you lied when you typed " they didn't." or used english incoreectly or Or typed something that was beyond your comprehension - a double negative. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
From: Al Klein on Sun, Aug 13 2006 9:15 pm
Groups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna, rec.radio.amateur.policy, rec.radio.scanner, rec.radio.swap On 12 Aug 2006 18:58:18 -0700, "an old friend" wrote: wrote: How did capacitors escape getting color coded? ssshhhhh bb don't ask such questions please Since a) you don't know the answer and b) they didn't. Klein, you said you were an OF. Any olde-fahrt ought to KNOW that silver-mica capacitors were color-dot-coded for about a quarter century. [look in the 1976 ARRL Handbook] Those flat cases were eventually displaced by dipped silver-mica. Paper tubular capacitors in molded plastic tubular casings were marked with color bands and were on the market for at least 15 years, maybe 20...until aced out by ceramic disc capacitors for general bypassing and coupling applications (by both tube and transistor architecture electronics). ANYONE with hands-on experience in electronics between 1950 and about 1970 would KNOW that. [okay, folks, looks like there's another imposter here...at least this one isn't trying to pass hisself off as some marine NCO...:-) |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:22:26 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:09:43 -0400, Al Klein wrote: On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 10:34:58 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 23:54:12 -0400, Al Klein wrote: On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 19:13:23 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 18:24:46 -0400, Al Klein wrote: Your claim to know what I'm thinking better than I do? Only if your age is a single digit. sure I know better Then you're claiming to be a child. nope you are claiming to something contary to fact I'm claiming that I know what I think and you don't - which is a fact. prove it Are you telepathic? No? Then you can't know what I think. I don't think you truely understand what you think, that is another fact That you don't think I do is a fact. That I don't understand isn't. So what you think is incorrect and that's another fact. you are worng it becoming hazing when the subject of the test is unrelated to the prevlegdes it grannts Nope - it's just a poor test. Hazing is something entirely different. hazing is in the ye of the beholder No, words have actual meanings sometimes. do you have anything cogent to say? Cogent in your eyes, no, since you and cogency have never met. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
From: jawod on Sun, Aug 13 2006 8:16 am
an old friend wrote: Al Klein wrote: On 12 Aug 2006 10:10:55 -0700, "an old friend" wrote: Anyway,, Back in the old days, we used to walk 5 miles in the snow to the FCC field office to take our exams. You forgot: "uphill both ways, barefoot..." We had to kneel on radiators while we took the test. We used slide rules and crayons AND WE LIKED IT!!! You are still using crayons but I doubt you know how to use a 1950 slide-rule...too complex for brass-pounders. Oh, and FCC Field Offices were NOT 10 miles apart in the USA now, in 1956 (when I took a train 80 miles into Chicago), nor before then. Then we'd wait 3 years to receive our license which gave us time to teach electrons to enter and exit all the tubes...stupid little buggers, those. Wrongo, olde-fahrt. Electrons, fields, and waves will ONLY obey THEIR rules. You can't "teach" them anything. All you can do is provide paths for them...on THEIR terms. Boy, those were the days. When a ham was a ham, brass was for pounding and AM signals were as wide as the day is long. That was well before 1960...like before WW2. These "young" whippersnappers get off too easy. Pizza off, olde-fahrt. 51 years ago I would be walking a mile from a corner of an airfield NE of Tokyo to the transmitter house in the center which housed 41 HF transmitters ranging in power output from 1 KW to 40 KW. Not a single one of them used manual (morse code) radiotelegraphy modes. About two square miles of wire antennas doing 24/7 radio circuit transmission to CONUS, Hawaii, Phillippines, Okinawa, Korea, and a MAG in Vietnam. Six of those circuits used multichannel SSB (the commercial variety, like in-use prior to WW2). I STARTED that HF transmitter site work in '53, NO military schooling on kilowatt transmitters, RTTY, or SSB and NO "CW" skill necessary. I say, rank priveleges on the basis of how big an RF burn you can take, or on the basis of personal weight. Sounds like you had TOO MANY of those "RF burns." See Dr. Robeson in here...he will bandage your "burns" with one of his medical-practice certificates...those are sterile. I may have said it befo take the FCC out of it completely and go with the FDA. Those boys know how to grade. "Ham is the butchered meat of swine?" Last guy I heard utter that phrase is SK...used to work with him (he was a code-tested Extra)...he came out with that every once in a while when some amateur morseman got too full of himself. (Too much tea this morning!) Try a detox program, okay? QRT. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:24:36 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:12:03 -0400, Al Klein wrote: On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 10:36:29 -0400, wrote: you can't explain it to me or to a frormer (or current memeber of Mensa Being a member of MENSA doesn't mean anything more than potential. It certainly doesn't mean realized potential. nor it seems can you explain where it counts...The FCC I have to explain something to the FCC? Look up the definition of "libel". Part of it is "malicious defamation". Calling a penny a cent isn't malicious, nor is it defamatory. but calling someone a cheat on federal requirement is Post a link to my post calling you "a cheat on federal requirement" - or even just calling you a cheat. why? you would simply dey it I'd deny a link? Would you deny a sunrise? Are you *really* as daft as you sound here? but you compare those that took and passed the test required at the time to theifs that sure soound calling em cheats to me But since I never compared anyone to anything, it's all in your mind. |
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
From: jawod on Sun, Aug 13 2006 3:24 pm
Groups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna, rec.radio.amateur.policy, rec.radio.scanner, rec.radio.swap If MENSA membership is important to you, fine. Most of us find it a bit pretentious and downright silly. If someone wants to use MENSA to elevate themselves above the rest, they are perched on very rickety stilts. If MORSEMANSHIP is important to you, fine. Most of US find it a bit pretentious and downright silly. If someone wants to use MORSEMANSHIP to elevate themselves above the rest, they are perched on very rickety stilts. [I'll just add something like...]: Stilts are needed by morsemen because their appearance, relative to REAL radio people, are very short. They try to gain "height" of their reputation by using 1930s standards in the year 2006. Tsk, they don't realize that their new "height" still falls short of everyone else... |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:08 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com