In article m, "Dee D. Flint"
writes:

It depends on whether you consider colleges and universities as institutions
of higher learning or as job training schools. If the former then the
various non-degreee specific classes are appropriate. If the latter, then
they are not.

Why do you keep on with this academic thing?

US amateur radio is NOT an academic institution. The FCC is NOT an
academic agency. Any federal radio operator's license is NOT a degree
or certificate of learning. Geez.

LHA

(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article m, "Dee D. Flint"
writes:

It depends on whether you consider colleges and universities as institutions
of higher learning or as job training schools. If the former then the
various non-degreee specific classes are appropriate. If the latter, then
they are not.

Why do you keep on with this academic thing?

YOU, of ALL PEOPLE, have the temerity to ask a so blatantly
rhetorical question in light of your incessant bomabarding of this NG
with YOUR repetitive lying and spiteful bile?

Putz.

US amateur radio is NOT an academic institution. The FCC is NOT an
academic agency. Any federal radio operator's license is NOT a degree
or certificate of learning. Geez.

Whatever it is, it is without you, and that's a GOOD thing.

Steve, K4YZ

(Brian Kelly) wrote in message . com...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message ...
"Brian Kelly" wrote in message
om...

You haven't even started, the list of engineering feats pulled off by
engineers who are hams is endless. In every case I know about however
including those you cite they did what they did as professionals
working for money outside the ham bands, not as amateurs. The topic
on the table here is technical innovations which have advanced the
state of the art in the field of RF comms made by engineers working
within their roles as hams. Let's see your list of those. I'd be
particularly interested in your list of ham engineers who wouldn't
have made those contributions if they had to take any code tests.

What about the fact that many of us engineers who have advanced the
state of the art in the field of RF comms (while working for money
outside the ham bands) BECAME engineers because we were first
interested in radio/electronics by being introduced to ham radio?

No argument from me, ham radio has historically and obviously been an
EE hatchery going back to Marconi's days, 'snot even a discussion. But
I ask "Who have accrued the benefits of this phenomenon?" My
contention in this respect is that it's been by an overwhelming
majority the kids themselves who got into ham radio then became EEs as
a result who have benefitted most ($$$). A classic example of the
Amateur Service doing exactly what it's supposed to do to justify it's
existence. For once.

You say it has been so since Marconi, now you say "for once."

Which is it?

In my own case, having been a radio nerd back when radio was the about
the only high-tech game in town I had to decide between EE and ME
since in that timeframe I was also a gear and motorhead in addition to
being a beepist.

You might want to run the term "beepist" past Ed and Jim. They don't
take kindly to street names given to radio-telegraph operators.

I quite consiously opted *against* EE because I
didn't want to put myself into a situation where my job followed me
home into my hobby thus it was that I became an ME. Absolute fact and
it wasn't any more complicated than that. But my hobby has quite often
held me in good stead on le yob because I've quite often found myself
doing EE work on ME projects. I've nailed several gigs over the years
by virtue of being considered "multidiscipinary" by employers, thankew
ham radio for the contributons to my career.

Hmmm. Then there was the discussion about not putting "ham radio" in
a resume. Speak to Jim.

Whatever . . .

Has *nothing* to do with engineers who did not come up this way and
are already engineers when they belatedly "discover" ham radio. And
will allegedly come up with "advances in the state of the art" once
they enter the hobby without having to suffer any code tests. Like you
claim will happen.

State your accomplishments in advancing the state of the art in
amateur radio, other than trying to get me to put up an antenna in
your back yard.

It's all bull****. The last time any ham engineer or not actually
advanced the state of the art in RF comms to any noticeble extent
beyond that which the commercials and/or the gummint hadn't already
done was probably done in the 1915 timeframe. If not spank me with an
example.

So the ARRL history books are lying to us? Speak to Jim.

Drive a stake in it and move on.

w3rv

Too much Buffy, I see.

73, bb

In article ,
(Brian) writes:

(Brian Kelly) wrote in message
.com...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...
"Brian Kelly" wrote in message
om...

You haven't even started, the list of engineering feats pulled off by
engineers who are hams is endless. In every case I know about however
including those you cite they did what they did as professionals
working for money outside the ham bands, not as amateurs. The topic
on the table here is technical innovations which have advanced the
state of the art in the field of RF comms made by engineers working
within their roles as hams. Let's see your list of those. I'd be
particularly interested in your list of ham engineers who wouldn't
have made those contributions if they had to take any code tests.

What about the fact that many of us engineers who have advanced the
state of the art in the field of RF comms (while working for money
outside the ham bands) BECAME engineers because we were first
interested in radio/electronics by being introduced to ham radio?

No argument from me, ham radio has historically and obviously been an
EE hatchery going back to Marconi's days, 'snot even a discussion. But
I ask "Who have accrued the benefits of this phenomenon?" My
contention in this respect is that it's been by an overwhelming
majority the kids themselves who got into ham radio then became EEs as
a result who have benefitted most ($$$). A classic example of the
Amateur Service doing exactly what it's supposed to do to justify it's
existence. For once.

You say it has been so since Marconi, now you say "for once."

Which is it?

The world radio-electronics community recognizes Marconi and Popov
as the first to prove radio as a communications medium. That was in
1896. The first actual installation of the Morse-Vail Telegraph System
for wired landline communications was done in 1844.

Marconi was a shrewd and aggressive entrepreneur back two turns of
the century ago. Not one who, as amateurs are supposed to be, would
not hesitate to ask for pecuniary interest for his efforts. Gugie did a
LOT of asking and made several such bundles of money.

In my own case, having been a radio nerd back when radio was the about
the only high-tech game in town I had to decide between EE and ME
since in that timeframe I was also a gear and motorhead in addition to
being a beepist.

You might want to run the term "beepist" past Ed and Jim. They don't
take kindly to street names given to radio-telegraph operators.

Ya, dose got dere own 'hoods!' :-)

I quite consiously opted *against* EE because I
didn't want to put myself into a situation where my job followed me
home into my hobby thus it was that I became an ME. Absolute fact and
it wasn't any more complicated than that. But my hobby has quite often
held me in good stead on le yob because I've quite often found myself
doing EE work on ME projects. I've nailed several gigs over the years
by virtue of being considered "multidiscipinary" by employers, thankew
ham radio for the contributons to my career.

Hmmm. Then there was the discussion about not putting "ham radio" in
a resume. Speak to Jim.

Reverend Jim has yet to say where his resume landed. :-)

Has *nothing* to do with engineers who did not come up this way and
are already engineers when they belatedly "discover" ham radio. And
will allegedly come up with "advances in the state of the art" once
they enter the hobby without having to suffer any code tests. Like you
claim will happen.

State your accomplishments in advancing the state of the art in
amateur radio, other than trying to get me to put up an antenna in
your back yard.

Kellie is getting on in years, may need physical help to put up his
antennas.

Now, if he laid that antenna on his many claims for "26 patents" he
might get a few feet above ground level. :-)

It's all bull****. The last time any ham engineer or not actually
advanced the state of the art in RF comms to any noticeble extent
beyond that which the commercials and/or the gummint hadn't already
done was probably done in the 1915 timeframe. If not spank me with an
example.

So the ARRL history books are lying to us? Speak to Jim.

Dan Tayloe should spank Kellie. Tayloe did damn good with that
innovation of a CMOS switch as a direct-conversion receiver mixer.
He has a patent application on it.


Drive a stake in it and move on.

w3rv

Too much Buffy, I see.

"Buffy" got cancelled. :-)

(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Brian) writes:

(Brian Kelly) wrote in message
.com...

Drive a stake in it and move on.

w3rv

Too much Buffy, I see.

"Buffy" got cancelled. :-)

So did the Morse Code exam, which is why all the sour grapes. ;^)

Brian wrote:

Too much Buffy, I see.

Is that possible?


- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Alun Palmer
writes:

A very sick transit, Gloria Mundi. :-)

LHA

I must get around to learning Latin one of these days

"sic transit gloria mundi" = So goes the glory of the world.

It's a Latin phrase that has been used by many in word-play. :-)

LHA

In article ,
(Brian) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Brian) writes:

(Brian Kelly) wrote in message
.com...

Drive a stake in it and move on.

w3rv

Too much Buffy, I see.

"Buffy" got cancelled. :-)

So did the Morse Code exam, which is why all the sour grapes. ;^)

Heh heh heh, lots of whine from sour grapes amongst the morsemen.

While (fortunately) Sarah Michelle Gellar (who played the part of
"Buffy") is still with us, so is (unfortunately) test element 1. :-)

LHA

On 15 Jul 2003 02:30:09 GMT, Alun Palmer wrote:

You can't force people to become well-rounded.

Sure you can, whether they want it or not. To paraphrase the Dean
of the School of Engineering (a graduate of that school and a
top-notch guy whom I came to know and respect in the years that I
was there - may he rest in peace) at our orientation: "If you want
a degree from this instituition (one of the top three engineering
schools in the country) you will have to take the all courses that
we give when we give them. If you want to have "free choice" and
take or don't take only what you want or when you want it, you can
go to Basket-Weaving University and let someone who wants to be here
take your place." (Admissions were 100 per year out of a field of
2000 qualified applicants per year.)

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

In article m, "Dee D. Flint"
writes:

Piano is an
essential skill in music, and I firmly believe all musicians should start
on the piano and be tested in piano proficiency before being allowed to
move on to any other instrument -- which will be much easier as a result.

73 de Larry, K3LT

As a player of the clarinet, I agree completely.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Dee:

Do you still play? I still own a clarinet (a beautiful LeBlanc Noblet, all-
Grenadilla wood) but I haven't played it in over 25 years. It is presently
450 miles away from me in the care of a niece who also used it to
learn music the wrong way -- now she's involved in Drama! I keep saying
one of these days I'll take it with me after a home visit and try to once
again figure out which end to blow into. (Ooops-- something tells me I'm
going to be seeing that last sentence again!). I also want to get one of
those nice big Casio electronic keyboards and take actual lessons on it,
and perhaps become a Real Musicianâ„¢ someday!

73 de Larry, K3LT