Re: [Swprograms] Re: The cutting of radio beforewhenwemayactuallyneed it the most

[jfiglio1@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

Carrier pigeon and "duck"ing?????  What is that?  Killing two birds with one joke?????

(Sorry....so sorry...)

John Figliozzi

----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Cuff <richard@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wednesday, January 5, 2005 4:47 pm
Subject: Re: [Swprograms] Re: The cutting of radio beforewhenwemayactuallyneed it the most

> It would be impossible to QSL a carrier pigeon on SSB.
> 
> Why?
> 
> Simple -- with an SSB transmission you have no carrier.
> 
> (ducking for cover)
> 
> Richard Cuff / Allentown, PA  USA
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Scott Royall" <royall@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "'Shortwave programming discussion'" <swprograms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 3:00 PM
> Subject: RE: [Swprograms] Re: The cutting of radio
> beforewhenwemayactuallyneed it the most
> 
> 
> > LOL!
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: swprograms-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [swprograms-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bill
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 1:19 PM
> > To: Shortwave programming discussion
> > Subject: Re: [Swprograms] Re: The cutting of radio before
> > whenwemayactuallyneed it the most
> >
> > I bet John made sure to be DROPPING that qsl into his collection 
> rightaway!
> >
> > Bill
> > KA2EMZ
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Scott Royall" <royall@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: "'Shortwave programming discussion'" <swprograms@hard-core-
> dx.com>> Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 9:17 PM
> > Subject: RE: [Swprograms] Re: The cutting of radio before when
> > wemayactuallyneed it the most
> >
> >
> > >I shudder to think of the QSL the pigeon sent.
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: swprograms-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > [swprograms-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Figliozzi
> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 10:07 PM
> > > To: Shortwave programming discussion
> > > Subject: Re: [Swprograms] Re: The cutting of radio before when we
> > > mayactuallyneed it the most
> > >
> > > I QSLed a carrier pigeon once.....    but it's a long story.
> > >
> > > :-)))
> > >
> > > John Figliozzi
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, January 4, 2005, at 10:46  PM, Scott Royall wrote:
> > >
> > >> We are getting dangerously off-topic, but let me say this. I just
> > >> re-watched
> > >> "Three Days of the Condor", and it's the same tired mantra 
> now being
> > >> chanted. Even if your scenario came to past, shortwave would 
> be just
> > >> as dead
> > >> as the wire telegraph. It is a technology that, in its 
> current form
> > >> anyway,
> > >> has no future. Satellites are just too easy to lob up, and 
> they don't
> > >> want
> > >> constant TLC. Transmitter farms do. Shortwave exists today 
> because> >> tubes had
> > >> to come before LNAs on chips. Now, LNAs are kid stuff. Sirius 
> and XM
> > >> are
> > >> just baby steps compared to what's coming. If I were a 
> government and I
> > >> wanted to get my word to a specific region, shortwave would 
> rank just
> > >> above
> > >> carrier pigeons on my list of choices.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: swprograms-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >> [swprograms-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kevin
> > >> Anderson
> > >> Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 7:57 PM
> > >> To: SWPrograms list
> > >> Subject: [Swprograms] Re: The cutting of radio before when we may
> > >> actuallyneed it the most
> > >>
> > >> Richard, Joe, and Scott:
> > >>
> > >> Thanks for reading and commenting on my post, even though I'm
> > >> sure you all think I'm off my rocker (a fourth person told me as
> > >> such in a direct reply).  Maybe I am, but only time will tell.
> > >> <grin>
> > >>
> > >> Let me provide a few more comments, starting with those more on
> > >> topic.
> > >>
> > >> I would agree with Joe, should economics go the negative way I
> > >> suggest, that thousands of local AM (MW) and FM (VHF) radio
> > >> stations don't make sense.  The combined used of electricity for
> > >> transmitters alone, as you point out, plus all the energy use
> > >> for programming, just doesn't seem sustainable.  Satellite
> > >> distribution (which Richard also acknowledged) does certainly
> > >> make sense (I may someday indeed get Sirius so I can get BBC,
> > >> WRN, and CBC from one source), although I don't believe the
> > >> private or corporate use of satellites will likely continue.  (I
> > >> think space will once again become the domain of only
> > >> governments trying to protect their interests.)
> > >>
> > >> And while I will hope that the Internet (or its future
> > >> replacement) might remain viable (providing all the news and
> > >> "radio" we need), and indeed the governments may step in to do
> > >> so for their own security, I am doubtful that individuals in
> > >> great numbers will remain computer users.  If electricity
> > >> becomes unreliable, or the availability of computers becomes
> > >> more scarce, I doubt they/we will have the time or priority to
> > >> use computers.
> > >>
> > >> So I come back to the idea of shortwave being a viable
> > >> broadcasting means for most people.  And if it remains analog,
> > >> then all the more who can receive it, including with simple
> > >> solar-powered or wind-up radios.  To me, any further "erosion"
> > >> now of international broadcasters and open sources of
> > >> information will mean much less available to us later when times
> > >> get tough.
> > >>
> > >> Now onto the oil future (stop reading now for those who don't
> > >> want to go off topic):
> > >>
> > >> Joe, I've heard of that research by Gold as well.  It has been
> > >> commented on by lots of people in regard to Peak Oil
> > >> discussions.  While I don't discount that oil can be made this
> > >> way, my reading of the research suggests the rate of production
> > >> is no where sufficient to generate enough, or to have created
> > >> the volume of oil in the earth except over a long period of
> > >> time.  That is the crux of the matter - no matter how oil is
> > >> first produced (by compression of organic matter or by other
> > >> methods), we are pumping too much of it.
> > >>
> > >> Richard and Scott, I don't doubt that more alternative energy
> > >> sources are here and coming, and higher oil and transportation
> > >> prices will certainly help in making them happen.  The more the
> > >> better - alternatives, as well as more conservation of energy
> > >> use, will soften the blow and postpone the worst times.  But my
> > >> reading is that there isn't enough time left, nor are the
> > >> replacements as viable as oil, for meeting all the
> > >> transportation, energy, and production needs that are currently
> > >> met by oil.  Plus the population of the earth is just too large.
> > >>  (The carrying capacity of the earth, which is long term,
> > >> sustainable use, suggests that between 1 and 2 billion can be
> > >> comfortably supported globally.  At 6 billion on the Earth, this
> > >> suggests we are 4 to 5 billion too populated.  We passed 2
> > >> billion people just before 1930, which is also when the
> > >> oil-based economy of today really took off, suggesting that the
> > >> extra population is only here because oil had provided the
> > >> means.  Some would say that the gains we experienced in our
> > >> lifestyle weren't supportable to begin.  And our dependence on
> > >> oil to produce food means all the more problems for people to
> > >> get food later, so things go as I interpret will happen.)
> > >>
> > >> I hope you take the time to actually read the books and webpages
> > >> that are mentioned in the blog articles I referenced.  I used to
> > >> be optimistic and positive thinking as you folks are.  But I
> > >> guess all the reading I've bein doing in earnest since 1990, and
> > >> particularly in the last two years, has convinced me otherwise.
> > >> I can certainly respect where each of you are coming from (as I
> > >> was there once too), and all others wanting to ignore what I
> > >> say.  It is hard to accept this kind of news.
> > >>
> > >> Now I apologize to the group as this took things too far astray,
> > >> and return you to our regular programming.  I'll gladly talk
> > >> with folks offline.  And I will be on topic the next time I
> > >> might post again.
> > >>
> > >> Cheers/73,
> > >> Kevin
> > >> Dubuque, IA
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> =====
> > >> -- 
> > >> -------------------------------------
> > >> Kevin Anderson, Dubuque IA USA, K9IUA
> > >> k9iua (at) yahoo (dot) com
> > >> -------------------------------------
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> __________________________________
> > >> Do you Yahoo!?
> > >> Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
> > >> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> Swprograms mailing list
> > >> Swprograms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >> http://dallas.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms
> > >>
> > >> To unsubscribe:  Send an E-mail to
> > >> swprograms-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe, or 
> visit the
> > >> URL
> > >> shown above.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> Swprograms mailing list
> > >> Swprograms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >> http://dallas.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms
> > >>
> > >> To unsubscribe:  Send an E-mail to
> > >> swprograms-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe, or 
> visit the
> > >> URL shown above.
> > >>
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Swprograms mailing list
> > > Swprograms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > http://dallas.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe:  Send an E-mail to
> > > swprograms-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe, or 
> visit the
> URL
> > > shown above.
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Swprograms mailing list
> > > Swprograms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > http://dallas.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe:  Send an E-mail to
> > > swprograms-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe, or 
> visit the
> URL
> > > shown above.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Swprograms mailing list
> > Swprograms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://dallas.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms
> >
> > To unsubscribe:  Send an E-mail to
> > swprograms-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe, or 
> visit the URL
> > shown above.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Swprograms mailing list
> > Swprograms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://dallas.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms
> >
> > To unsubscribe:  Send an E-mail to
> swprograms-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe, or visit 
> the URL
> shown above.
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Swprograms mailing list
> Swprograms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dallas.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms
> 
> To unsubscribe:  Send an E-mail to  swprograms-request@hard-core-
> dx.com?subject=unsubscribe, or visit the URL shown above.
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Swprograms mailing list
Swprograms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://dallas.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms

To unsubscribe:  Send an E-mail to  swprograms-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe, or visit the URL shown above.