Cont: The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-opened Part IV

[Vixen]

Regarding Hoffmeister, you gave me your opinion on him, to be sure. And we can debate further whether what you think about him is accurate according to the facts. But the question at hand was whether the specific claims you made in the linked post were drawn by Hoffmeister and substantiated in his report, or whether they were conclusions you drew yourself based on your reading of his report. The question is not what you think about Hoffmeister, but whether you have accurately represented his claims. As other posters have noted, you have a serious problem doing that. Therefore I require you to reproduce the portions of the report that discuss the specific points you raised and attributed to him.

Regarding Björkman, you have attempted to disavow him. But you have not stopped using him as a source. Your quotations from Aftonbladet are exactly as he represents them, and you are unable to demonstrate knowledge of what that source says aside from what Björkman says it says. So there is now a disparity between what you say about Björkman and how you invoke him as a source. You need to reconcile those.



You're clearly a conspiracy theorist, and you clearly rely upon other conspiracy theorists as authorities for your claims here.



An interest you can demonstrate by answering the questions posed to you.

As much as you might despise someone, sometimes they are intellectually correct. For example, Patrick Moore was a notorious far right extremist, but that doesn't cancel out his expertise on astronomy.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

A quote from Aftonbladet is a quote from Aftonbladet, whether it comes from the Sultan of Siam or the internet.

Except you're not quoting Aftonbladet, you're quoting Bjorkman quoting Aftonbladet and including his interpretation of it.

 

[JayUtah]

A quote from Aftonbladet is a quote from Aftonbladet, whether it comes from the Sultan of Siam or the internet.

Your edited quotes don't come from "the Internet." They come from a guy known not to be honest. The important point is that you can't supply what was edited away by others, hence you aren't quoting Aftonbladet. You're quoting what someone else wants you to believe the source says. The less important, but very disappointing, point is that you're lying about your sources. When you lie habitually and deliberately, you aren't a serious researcher seizing the moral high ground and trying to get to the bottom of something; you're a hack trying to push your beliefs at all costs.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

As much as you might despise someone, sometimes they are intellectually correct. For example, Norris McWhirter was a notorious far right extremist, but that doesn't cancel out his expertise on astronomy.

Except that Bjorkman's lunacy directly impacts on his claimed expertise.

That's what you don't seem to want to understand here. We aren't dismissing Bjorkman because he has unsavory political views a la McWhirter, we're dismissing him because of his incompetence.

 

[Vixen]

Cute. Let's see if the magic words work.

They didn't.

Try adding "Simasalabim" to them next time, that might work.

And the rest of this post is spoilerized so that those not interested in this tangent can skip it more easily.

I'm wondering what exactly I'm wrong about. Am I wrong in claiming that I didn't find the article that you mentioned? I'm pretty certain I didn't.

Am I wrong in claiming that I knew about the road before you told me that it was a road several posts after I had said so?

Am I wrong in claiming that Härkätie was never the official name of the road? If I'm in wrong with that, please tell who called it that and when? The oldest description of the road calls it "Public road from Hämeenlinna to Turku" (well, "Allmänna weg ifrå Taffwestehuss till Åbo" to be precise since Jaakko Teitti wrote his "Klagemåhls Register emot Adelen 1556 uthi Finland" in Swedish, you can find a transcription of it at https://urn.fi/urn:nbn:fi:sks-dor-000415)

Am I wrong when I say that the name "Härkätie" was not in common use in the 19th century? If you search for the term from digitaaliarkisto, youll notice that almost all old references are to the nursery rhyme. A couple of them are about a story happening during the Finnish War, meaning that they are not speaking about the contemporary usage but things that happened in the past. The contemporary terms that are used are: "Hämeentie", "Suuri Hämeentie" and "Iso Hämeentie". (see, for example, "Sanomia Turusta" 31.10.1862 page 4 that uses "iso Hämeentie"). The name Härkätie was resurrected later when systematic road naming started.

I definitely am not wrong when I say that Route 10 does not follow the route of Härkätie. You can confirm this by looking at the text that you posted on the message and then deleted. You should be able to find it again in the same place you originally found it. If you don't want to search for it, you can check the Finnish wikipedia that states that Härkätie followed the modern roads 2230, 2250, 12307, 2264, 2810, 2802, 2824, 2831 and 2855. You can then check from Google maps whether those roads are actually Route 10 (Hint: they aren't).

The wikipedia page mentions Jaakko Masonen's theory that the road goes back to the 9th century. His theory is not universally accepted. Since the road originally ended not at the Häme Castle but where the railway bridge nowadays crosses the lake, most people believe that the road predates the castle. But beyond that we don't have actual real data on when exactly it was built.

Do look up this wikipedia page.

 

[JayUtah]

As much as you might despise someone, sometimes they are intellectually correct. For example, Norris McWhirter was a notorious far right extremist, but that doesn't cancel out his expertise on astronomy.

Second time not answering the question.

Regarding Hoffmeister, you attributed certain conclusions to him and cited his report vaguely as the source of them. I require you to reproduce the portions of his report that explicitly substantiate the claims you attribute to him.

Regarding Björkman, I see it hasn't taken you very long after your disavowal to try to rehabilitate him again, using the same broken arguments we've already debunked a dozen times. The point is not that Björkman is morally or politically despicable. The point is that he blatantly misrepresents science and engineering. On the point you're trying to claim he has expertise, he demonstrably does not.

But the question was whether you are now trying to get everyone -- once again -- to accept Anders Björkman as a reliable expert. Is that what you're trying to do?

 

[zooterkin]

As much as you might despise someone, sometimes they are intellectually correct. For example, Norris McWhirter was a notorious far right extremist, but that doesn't cancel out his expertise on astronomy.

What expertise on astronomy? Are you confusing him with his chum, Sir Patrick Moore?

 

[Andy_Ross]

Exactly. The two Egyptians were bundled away extrajudicially. No trial, no right to let their lawyers, friends or family know.

But they weren't 'disappeared' and you Wiki source does not say they were

 

[Andy_Ross]

As much as you might despise someone, sometimes they are intellectually correct. For example, Norris McWhirter was a notorious far right extremist, but that doesn't cancel out his expertise on astronomy.

What expertise in astronomy?

When was he a 'far right extremist?

 

[Vixen]

Guess what Helsingin Sanomat reported on October 4 that happened on October 3?

Check the article https://www.hs.fi/kotimaa/art-2000003371732.html .

That article tells that on Sunday 3rd a robot camera videoed the wreck of Estonia and found that the visor was missing, the gate was partially open and that the locks of the visor had been torn off.

So I don't find it particularly surprising that after looking at the videos the commission came to the preliminary conclusion that the ship was sunk because it's visor was torn off and the waterproof gate had opened to let the water in.

The full investigation then looked at details.

Just to reiterate:

There was video evidence from the wreck available when the commission gave the preliminary statement.

I have seen that report. The fact the bow visor came off does not mean anything until it has been investigated. The question is how would Bildt/Lehtola know before the ship was found and at that stage, Sillaste's story was that he saw the car ramp shut and water coming in at the sides.

It is only later he claims he saw it missing from his life raft. If that was true, he didn't say so at the time. In addition, if the ramp was completely off, how did those two Estonian guys climb down it.

There are a hundred and one possible reasons the visor could have come off before stating it fell off of its own accord.

An international commission investigating the Estonia accident released video images taken by the diving robot on Monday in Turku. They do not show a visor at all. Instead, the pictures show that the visor brackets are broken and most of the rubber seals are missing. Only one piece is left. When detached, the visor has also torn open the hull of the ship.

ibid

 

[junkshop]

...For example, Norris McWhirter was a notorious far right extremist, but that doesn't cancel out his expertise on astronomy.

That would be a good point, if only McWhirter had any expertise in astronomy.

Vixen, do you even know who Norris McWhirter was? Here's a link to his wikipedia entry. You may find it enlightening.


ETA: Drat, ninja'd by the Zooterkin!

 

[Vixen]

What expertise on astronomy? Are you confusing him with his chum, Sir Patrick Moore?

Corrected.

 

[JayUtah]

The fact the bow visor came off does not mean anything until it has been investigated.

Really? How many forensic investigations have you participated in again? I forget the number.

 

[Marras]

Do look up this wikipedia page.

I have read it. It is a poor quality page with absolutely no historical details. The Finnish page is a bit better but still quite poor.

Do look at Jaakko Masonen's Hämeen Härkätie : synty ja varhaisvaiheet : varhainen maaliikenne arkeologisena sekä historiallisena tutkimuskohteena, 1989 if you want to find some actual information. (I do have that book somewhere but I have misplaced it and haven't been bothered enough to search for it).

But still. The name that (almost) everyone used in everyday contexts for the road in the 19th century was "Hämeentie", not "Härkätie".

 

[JayUtah]

Corrected.

Sir Patrick Moore's political views have nothing to do with his unquestioned expertise in astronomy. Anders Björkman is not considered an expert in physics because his physics claims are demonstrably false. Do you see the difference?

Are you asking us to accept Anders Björkman as an expert? Yes or no.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Corrected.

When was Sir Patrick Moore a 'far right extremist'?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

When was Sir Patrick Moore a 'far right extremist'?

Gotta say, I'm not sure that's too far a leap of hyperbole. Patrick Moore was a supporter of UKIP and chairman of the United Country Party. The United Country Party were pretty far right, particularly on immigration.

 

[Vixen]

I have read it. It is a poor quality page with absolutely no historical details. The Finnish page is a bit better but still quite poor.

Do look at Jaakko Masonen's Hämeen Härkätie : synty ja varhaisvaiheet : varhainen maaliikenne arkeologisena sekä historiallisena tutkimuskohteena, 1989 if you want to find some actual information. (I do have that book somewhere but I have misplaced it and haven't been bothered enough to search for it).

But still. The name that (almost) everyone used in everyday contexts for the road in the 19th century was "Hämeentie", not "Härkätie".

Thanks for the book reference, will look it up. I have never heard anyone calling it 'Hämeen Härkätie', not even Turun Sanomat. You are wrong about what people called it. The Huilu kestikievari was owned by my grandfather's side of the family until into the 20th century. It is in Härkätie

ja on ollut kestikievari todennäköisesti jo keskiajalla... Lisäksi kestikievareita Härkätien varrella mainitaan olleen ... jonkinlainen taverna.

or nowadays just 'kymppitie'.

 

[JesseCuster]

The Trident post is in response to a poster who claimed it was impossible for anyone to be located in the dark and I responded there actually commando teams of frogmen who can do exactly that sort of thing if required.

Nobody said it was impossible to locate anyone in the dark.

The question is how does it work that a search and rescue crew are sent out in the aftermath of the sinking of a ship where there a hundreds of survivors/bodies in the water, with a list of names of the the ship's officers to be rescued, because apparently those officers are to be flown to a different location than the rest of the survivors. That means that they rescue the officers and don't rescue the non-officers.

In this scenario, your blather about elite frogmen is irrelevant, because there was no elite frogman unit involved in the rescue. There were regular search and rescue crews and anti-submarine helicopters commandeered to work as search and rescue doing the rescuing.

You say it's easy because they just look for the posh lifeboat with the officers on it or just ask people their names and verify their identity by getting their birthdate.

That's just dumb.

How did the search and rescue crews get those lists of names immediately after the ship sank? How did they also get their corresponding birthdates?

How did anyone know that the officers were in a "posh lifeboat" (I'm guessing such a thing does not exist and Vixen made it up) all together to make the task of rescuing them and only the easier?

What happened when Svensson, supposedly tasked with rescuing the officers, picks up an unconscious survivor? Or a survivor who's in no fit mental or physical state to give their name and birthdate? Or a survivor who gives their name and they turn out not to be on the list?

Leave them where they are in their lifeboat, or worse, in the freezing water in the middle of the sea in the middle of the night? Even the unconscious ones the those suffering from hyperthermia or who were injured while escaping?

Did any of the survivors report being asked their names and birthdates while the SAR crews picked them up, only to be left stranded because they gave the wrong name? You know, is there any evidence that actually happened?

Nope, it's just idiotic, fantastical speculation completely detached from reality. Swivel-eyed lunacy as someone else put it. I'm stealing that phrase BTW, "swivel-eyed lunacy", it's great.

 

[JayUtah]

Exactly. The two Egyptians were bundled away extrajudicially. No trial, no right to let their lawyers, friends or family know.

But they didn't disappear. Being deprived of due process is not equivalent to being made to disappear. This is why one of the contemplated actions is legal as long as there is due process, and the other contemplated action is invariably illegal. They are different classes of behavior.