Cont: The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VI

[Andy_Ross]

[Wind gusts, in addition, tend to have circular movement if you have ever noticed trees swaying back and forth.[/QUOTE]

You just made that up

 

[Andy_Ross]

Can we drop the cockney king lear?

It's a distraction

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Can we drop the cockney king lear?

It's a distraction

I disagree. It goes to Vixen's credibility on the bigger topics. If she refuses to admit she was wrong about such irrelevant things why would anyone have any confidence that she could learn anything?

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Can we drop the cockney king lear?

It's a distraction

Yes, but it's a distraction from rehashing the same long debunked rubbish yet again, the utter rediculousness of these discussions speaks directly to why.

 

[Steve]

I am utterly unable to determine if this post is serious or is being made in jest.

Vixen does not jest. Everything Vixen posts is properly sourced and referenced. Unless, of course Vixen precedes a post with "IMO". This is a fact because Vixen has told us that it is.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Deleted

 

[Andy_Ross]

I disagree. It goes to Vixen's credibility on the bigger topics. If she refuses to admit she was wrong about such irrelevant things why would anyone have any confidence that she could learn anything?

Bollocks. We already know she has no credibility on anything

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Bollocks. We already know she has no credibility on anything

Well yes, but this clearly illustrates the lie she has told about how she's willing to admit mistakes.

 

[Steve]

I disagree. It goes to Vixen's credibility on the bigger topics. If she refuses to admit she was wrong about such irrelevant things why would anyone have any confidence that she could learn anything?

Vixen's lack of credibility has been long established and is recognized by everyone here (except, perhaps, one. And I am not completely sure about that one). Carrying on with trivialities to reiterate that fact is nothing so much as

 

[Mojo]

The JAIC never dealt with the eye witness reports of a collision of some sort.

Can you quote (with a source) an eye witness report of a collision, please?

 

[phiwum]

The point isn't that the mistake is important though, it's that Vixen is absolutely unable to ever admit to making a mistake about anything.



Sure, making a mistake about Shakespeare or cockney slang isn't really important in the scheme of this thread, but the fact that Vixen absolutely will not admit to making any mistakes over anything IS important.

I think we all know that Vixen doesn't admit mistakes. No further evidence is needed.

But this is a thread about Estonia, not Vixen or quotations or Cockney slang. Correct her errors and move on whether she admits mistake or not -- excepting those words relevant to the topic.

For God's sake, didn't we do the damn Cockney crap to death a long time ago? We know how this ends.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

 

[Andy_Ross]

.

For God's sake, didn't we do the damn Cockney crap to death a long time ago? We know how this ends.

Yes, go down the cockney geezer film rabbit hole and you end up here

 

[Vixen]

It's been explained too many times to count. You are not able to distinguish between what a witness observed and what that witness inferred. We properly take their observation as evidence, but not their inference.

So why did Arikas, leader of the current expedition say at the press conference that 'We are going to listen to what the witnesses say this time'?

The only job of the police as of the time of the disaster (all survivors having been put on separate wards and isolated from each other, and usually interrogated by a couple of police and interpreters within a week or so, even the same day and often many times [for example, Sillaste was questions on numerous occasions, with the Finnish SUPO turning up at his door unannounced].

If someone says they saw a pink elephant flying through the air, you just write that down. You do not ignore it because you disbelieve it.

A person with delirium tremens will see things that non-alcoholics do not see. It doesn't mean that is not their lived experience.


Just gather the prima facie facts and leave the judgemental stuff for the analysis.

 

[Vixen]

Nope, I've stated that you're wrong about Kemo sabi being cockney slang. You have repeatedly stated it is, yours is the positive claim. Provide evidence that kemo sabi(/e) is cockney slang.

Except that isn't what I stated. Ever. I stated that they absolutely heard sounds. All I have stated is that they were mistaken as to the cause of them. If they said they heard a loud banging noise, then I absolutely believe them. If they then surmise that this was an explosion, then I will state that they are incorrect in their assessment of what caused the noise. It's that simple.

The irony, it burns.

This is where you err.

How can you possibly know they were mistaken. Several witnesses said they were thrown out of their beds or slammed against a wall or their belongings went flying across the room. All this is perfectly consistent with a collision of some sort or a sudden stop not dissimilar to same.

But someone on the internet knows these people are all mistaken.

 

[Vixen]

Do winds swirl around like this in an attempt to avoid answering questions?

The ship was travelling west northwest and the wind was blowing from the west southwest. The wind was not, as you repeatedly claimed, helping the ship along. Quite the opposite.

I calculated on the back of an envelope that if the vessel reached a certain point of its journey after X time of travel, then its average speed appeared to be 20.91 knots and I pointed out - did you not see it - that as its reasonable maximum speed was no more than 20 knots realistically, then it 'must have been helped along by the wind'. As you know waves are driven by the wind.

 

[Vixen]

Indeed. I'm still waiting for Vixen to tell us where in King Lear the quote (in either form) is located.

There are literally hundreds of words and phrases attributed to Shakespeare. Virtually none of them in their pure original context.

“There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so” ~ Shakespeare, Hamlet

 

[Andy_Ross]

This is where you err.

How can you possibly know they were mistaken. Several witnesses said they were thrown out of their beds or slammed against a wall or their belongings went flying across the room. All this is perfectly consistent with a collision of some sort or a sudden stop not dissimilar to same.

But someone on the internet knows these people are all mistaken.

It's consistent with a ship pitching or rolling suddenly. A small sum bouncing off the side would not throw people out of bed. It would not cause the ship to stop, or even slow it down.

I have been on ships in winter storms in the Atlantic, people were thrown around and injured quite regularly. I was, as a young cadet in the 70s on a minesweeper that collided with a dock head on. That did stop, nobody was thrown anywhere, but the captain marched off up the quey in 'number ones' to explain why it happened.

 

[Andy_Ross]

I calculated on the back of an envelope that if the vessel reached a certain point of its journey after X time of travel, then its average speed appeared to be 20.91 knots and I pointed out - did you not see it - that as its reasonable maximum speed was no more than 20 knots realistically, then it 'must have been helped along by the wind'. As you know waves are driven by the wind.

Don't you think there's more to it than your basic 'back of an envelope '?

What is your experience with navigation problems?

 

[Vixen]

No, you are claiming what is an obvious clerical error as fact.

It has become a cruel and pathetic lie, told by the small band of Estonia CT loons.

And please keep your conspiracies straight. Either the Russians sank it, the Swedes sank it, or the CIA sank it. You drift haphazardly from one to the other, mixing fantasies on a whim.

And tell me the name one person the CIA renditioned between 1990 and 2001. I'll wait.

On the issue of CIA renditioning, as you know, Sweden is one of just three countries globally that has refused to offer its database on this issue. It can't be transparent like other countries because the stuff about the missing nine Estonian remains classified information, or we can infer it is hiding something.

I hope the new investigators will now just come clean about the whole thing for the sake of the families of the victims (from dozens of countries across the world) and survivors and in the Public Interest. Just say what really happened that night.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

I calculated on the back of an envelope that if the vessel reached a certain point of its journey after X time of travel, then its average speed appeared to be 20.91 knots and I pointed out - did you not see it - that as its reasonable maximum speed was no more than 20 knots realistically, then it 'must have been helped along by the wind'. As you know waves are driven by the wind.

How could you now imagine I did not see it?

You performed your calculation and I questioned you about it:

My first question was where you got your starting figure of 193 km from, and you gave me the runaround, posting in reply a different calculation using different distances.

You said the 193km distance meant an average speed of 18 knots.

You then converted that 193km to miles and then to nautical miles but you got your sums wrong and your units wrong, saying it was '137 knots' instead of 104 nautical miles.

You then used that wrong figure to recalculate the speed as 20.91 knots, which you wrongly called 'knots per hour'. This should obviously have been the same 18 knots you calculated before, but instead of realising this was an indication you had messed up, you decided the vessel really had made almost 21 knots ('per hour') so must have been assisted by the wind and waves.

When it was pointed out your calculations were simply wrong and that the wind and waves were not helping but rather hindering the ship, you did your ususal "Oh! Squirrel!" distraction act instead of doing the impossible which is admitting you were wrong.

You were wrong. It was painfully obvious you were wrong. But it appears to be nothing compared to the pain of admitting how wrong you were.