On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:32:21 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:16:21 -0400, Al Klein
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 10:39:45 -0400, wrote:

your effort to smeear anybody that disagrees with you not withstanding
or indeed if you succeeded in producing a test I could not pass you
would exclude a lot of people besides me and kill the ARS

you reply which had zero relavance to my statement clipped

I hope you enjoyed arguing with yourself.

My statement if you enacted a standard that would in fact keep me from
passing, that would kill the ARS.

You're not that important, Markie. Or that well educated that if you
couldn't pass a test, very few others could.

That sort would require far more
than merely adding schamtics or going to short answer questions. it
would involved a test that would serious chalange Cecil and Len
Anderson both RF engineers, doing that would kill the ars as would the
asiine proposals of Mr Slow Code and many others

your notions are simplely not exexutable in anything like the current
sytem

Since you couldn't pass a final in a high school physics class, you
aren't qualified to determine what someone with an earned EE could or
couldn't do. As one who earned mine, I am.

the notion that multible guess is acceptable for pilots and drivers
(amoug others) but ham radio ops is silly

So you don't understand the difference between "choice" and "guess".
We'll just add that to the *L*O*N*G* list of things you don't
understand.

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:33:15 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:17:07 -0400, Al Klein
wrote:

You don't even know what an incompetent response is, so how can you
comment on it?\

it is like pron I can't define it but I know it when I see it

it works for the law on Pornographic materail

No, actually the SCOTUS said that it DOESN'T work, which is why they
came up with a definition.

Why not call it rec.radio.BS

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:41:18 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:22:13 -0400, Al Klein
wrote:
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 10:47:21 -0400, wrote:

"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.

impling that Cecil stole his license by passing the tests of the day

Not even close, but your accusation is close to being libelous.

the accusation is your not mine

Your accusation that I implied that Cecil stole his license is mine?
Not in this universe.

YOU want the license as some sort of badge of honnor

No, I want it to mean what it meant for decades - that the holder had
demonstrated a certain level of knowledge.

it has never meant that, not as a matt r of law

Just as a matter of fact (before you were aware of ham radio), not in
law. Now it doesn't mean anything in fact, just in law.

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:41:50 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:30:02 -0400, Al Klein
wrote:

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.
you knwo you efforts are getting boring

Then ... what's your famous line? Oh, yes, bail, Markie.

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:43:20 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:31:29 -0400, Al Klein
wrote:

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 are hearing anything seek medical help most like
but you are misreading the stament

You called me impolite because of my religious view.

you can politely disagree with re;ligoous beliefes without labeling
them as nonsense

I didn't label any religious belief as nonsense - that's in your head,
because you don't understand English.

it is not polite to label such thigs as nonsense

It's not impolite to label nonsensical things as nonsense.

if you were polite youd know that

If you were at least a tad intelligent, you'd know a lot that you
don't know now.

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 21:44:51 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 21:41:34 -0400, Al Klein
wrote:

Or typed something that was beyond your comprehension - a double
negative.

which is gramticaly incorect so you would NNOT do that

Says who?

On 14 Aug 2006 18:42:55 -0700, "
wrote:

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...:-)

Try reading what I wrote. "They didn't" ... "escape". Looks like the
impostor (as far as understanding simple English) isn't me.

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 21:49:43 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 21:43:48 -0400, Al Klein
wrote:

Are you telepathic? No? Then you can't know what I think.

where is your proof

That you're not telepathic? I don't need any - either you aren't
telepathic or you aren't on the planet legally.

without proving that I am not a telpath or simply smarter than you you
can't proove that assertion

No matter how smart you are, I still know what I think better than you
do You'd realize that if you were as smart as the average human
adult.

Indeed I asert the claim you can't know what you think, anymore than I
can. based on science the human often decieves itself therfore you
don't know in many cases what you truly think, anymore than I know
what I truely think

Solipsism is its own defeat, and that comes awfully close.

That I don't understand isn't.

prove that assertion

I made the assertion. (Figure that one out.)

you can't
So what you think is incorrect and that's another fact.
maybe it is incorrect maybe it isn't that is the fact
you can not prove otherwise

By any standard definition, the proof is by definition.

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.
yes they do

your point?

You mean the one you missed? Again?

do you have anything cogent to say?

Cogent in your eyes, no, since you and cogency have never met.

always the personal attack such a weak case you must have

In response to a personal attack there's nothing wrong with a personal
rejoinder.

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.

Develop "b)" a little more.