On 10 Aug 2006 22:12:58 -0700, "cmdr buzz corey"
wrote:

an old friend wrote:

I am honest. I don't think CW has ANY value in todays world.

Kinda like you.

Except that code was useful once.

Al Klein wrote:
On 10 Aug 2006 22:12:58 -0700, "cmdr buzz corey"
wrote:

an old friend wrote:

I am honest. I don't think CW has ANY value in todays world.

Kinda like you.

Except that code was useful once.
before Iwas born

ywee you ever usefull yourself

you are not a good ham judging by the ham code

On 11 Aug 2006 05:56:28 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:


Al Klein wrote:
On 10 Aug 2006 22:12:58 -0700, "cmdr buzz corey"
wrote:

an old friend wrote:

I am honest. I don't think CW has ANY value in todays world.

Kinda like you.

Except that code was useful once.
before Iwas born

ywee you ever usefull yourself

you are not a good ham judging by the ham code

That thing going by about 500 feet overhead was the point. WHOOSSSHHH!

Al Klein wrote:
On 11 Aug 2006 05:56:28 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:


Al Klein wrote:
On 10 Aug 2006 22:12:58 -0700, "cmdr buzz corey"
wrote:

an old friend wrote:

I am honest. I don't think CW has ANY value in todays world.

Kinda like you.

Except that code was useful once.
before Iwas born

ywee you ever usefull yourself

you are not a good ham judging by the ham code

That thing going by about 500 feet overhead was the point. WHOOSSSHHH!
you are a clearly a poor ham as maeasured by the amateur code

you clealy have this notion that that rules have ever required thing
NOT in the rules

you are rude and abusive (and then to top that object to being treated
the same by others)

that you are rude enough to call a man you have never met useless as
ignored out of coutesy not missed

the fact is Ham radio sound very miuch like cb NOW on HF and VHF the
sound in many areas is all but silence

On 11 Aug 2006 15:21:54 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

you are rude and abusive

No, I'm just biblical - I don't suffer fools gladly.

Al Klein wrote:
On 11 Aug 2006 15:21:54 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

you are rude and abusive

No, I'm just biblical - I don't suffer fools gladly.
you are just rude and abusivise and as for biblical you are not
following the injunction to not bear false witness against your
neighboor either

On 11 Aug 2006 18:54:53 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:
On 11 Aug 2006 15:21:54 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

you are rude and abusive

No, I'm just biblical - I don't suffer fools gladly.

you are just rude and abusivise and as for biblical you are not
following the injunction to not bear false witness against your
neighboor either

That the truth hurts doesn't make it a lie.

Al Klein wrote:
On 11 Aug 2006 18:54:53 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:
On 11 Aug 2006 15:21:54 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

you are rude and abusive

No, I'm just biblical - I don't suffer fools gladly.

you are just rude and abusivise and as for biblical you are not
following the injunction to not bear false witness against your
neighboor either

That the truth hurts doesn't make it a lie.
that only applies if you tell the truth

you don't it is just that simple

it is not a sign sign of any superior knowledge to know that is a
particular circut is Collpitts or hartley ocilator no can that
difference by learned in any way other than memorization

On 12 Aug 2006 09:57:19 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

it is not a sign sign of any superior knowledge to know that is a
particular circut is Collpitts or hartley ocilator

It's a sign of having learned it.

no can that
difference by learned in any way other than memorization

You still don't understand the difference between memorizing facts and
memorizing answers.

Al Klein wrote:
On 12 Aug 2006 09:57:19 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

it is not a sign sign of any superior knowledge to know that is a
particular circut is Collpitts or hartley ocilator

It's a sign of having learned it.
a sign of havigng learned something of NO value

no can that
difference by learned in any way other than memorization

You still don't understand the difference between memorizing facts and
memorizing answers.
at pesent their is no different when I learn the text of the right
answer to a given I leraned the answer to that question

there is no difference, none at all,

for some of the materail the only rational way of approuching it is
memorization, for other section you can learn some part of the
underlying theroy and use it but short of the Full course of Eltromatic
Theroy I hadin colledge you don't learn much

can you describe and USE Maxwell's equation? I can I found the
knowledge very helpfull on the rf safety question in the pools,
butstill useless without memorizing certain facts that have set as
arbitary level in the regs

the fact I need to an rf eval at at 51 watts on 2m is not something I
can know from guasses equation although guass' law allow me to easily
undertsand theprocess of doing the eval