Luton Airport Car Park Fire

[Jack by the hedge]

A reputable newspaper will always check its sources. This means they do rely heavily on official press releases. A journalist seminar I attended revealed that something like two thirds ow hat you read in the papers are press releases. For example, celebrities agents feed the press with news stories to keep their clients visible in the public eye. A politician will often put out a press release of what he or she is going to say at an official time in advance, which is why you'll often see 'sources' being quoted in advance of the press conference. Any major incident will have a carefully worded press release from the police or other authority and few newspapers will diverge from the official line. As there has been no official confirmation of the make and model of the car involved, they are leaving it up to people like yourself to confirm it was a Range Rover when in fact, they never actually said that.

There'll be a hint, such as an official picture of the vehicle burning but even then whilst it is obviously a Range Rover, it hasn't been confirmed that it definitely was a diesel-only model with no lithium battery involved whatsoever.

You appear to be conflating the good journalist practice of always confirming info from more than one source with the lazy writing known as 'churnalism' which amounts to copy/pasting from press releases.

And, once again, it absolutely has been confirmed that the car was a diesel and not a hybrid.

 

[Vixen]

Which ones?

"They are all lying!!! LYING I tell you! Lyyyyyyyy-yyyyyy-ing, Lyyyyyyyy-yyyyyy-ing! That is your POV."

 

[Jack by the hedge]

The words are as quoted in various tabloids. GB News wrote 'it was thought to be a Range Rover' but my impression is that is their thought not an official one.

Why are you wasting time talking about your impression of secondary sources' impressions when you can look directly at the fire brigade's own website yourself?

 

[Vixen]

So, no evidence of a gag at all, then?

Point me to where the 'arrested man' has been quoted in any news outlet.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

"They are all lying!!! LYING I tell you! Lyyyyyyyy-yyyyyy-ing, Lyyyyyyyy-yyyyyy-ing! That is your POV."

Ah. You have looked at the fire brigade's webite. Take a breath. It'll be okay.

Seriously though, I wrote a facetious joke about how you would likely demand exactly the same fire officer had to speak at yet another press conference otherwise you would not believe the fire brigade's information was 'official'. And then you obliged by making exactly that silly demand.

 

[Vixen]

You've gone above and beyond any sane amount of skepticism to clutch at a vanished straw of possibility that people claiming this was a hybrid car fire might be right. You've rejected the Bedfordshire fire brigade's unambiguous statement based on some ******** about its not being worded in a way which panders to your irrelevant personal criteria.

As with any reputable journalist or newspaper, I will refer to the official press statement, not an FB- or Twitter/X abridged version for the average member of public with a reading age of twelve.

 

[Vixen]

Yes.

It's not a jibe, it's an informed critique of your observed epistemological idiom, and an evidence-based rejection of your claim to be a scientist.

<snip invective>

Self-praise is no recommendation.

 

[Vixen]

You appear to be conflating the good journalist practice of always confirming info from more than one source with the lazy writing known as 'churnalism' which amounts to copy/pasting from press releases.

And, once again, it absolutely has been confirmed that the car was a diesel and not a hybrid.

Oh yeah, a little box from an FB page written by the Fire Brigade-bod's clerk in charge of FB and Twitter posts. Jenny from Communications wrote that.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

It takes temperatures of over 1,600 ºC to burn through concrete. A diesel fire, even if whipped up to 1,000ºC by lit rags and a leafblower won't do more than cause spalling. Spalling affects a layer of the concrete, possibly several of them, but the concrete is generally otherwise fire resistant, with just superficial damage (spalling). Whilst EV's are heavy they are not that much heavier than ICE's, other than the recent trend towards bigger and 'butch'-er looking 'SUV's. A car park, one would have thought, would have been designed to withstand several hundred cars parked on any level.

You are not an expert in how steel and concrete structures behave in fires, despite now having added the word "spalling" to stuff you have Googled.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Oh yeah, a little box from an FB page written by the Fire Brigade-bod's clerk in charge of FB and Twitter posts. Jenny from Communications wrote that.

So the fire brigade are not merely liars, their official statements are just something they got the office temp to make up.

Can you sense how unhinged you sound?

 

[Matthew Best]

Drone footage shows Luton car park damage

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-67207591

 

[Jack by the hedge]

As with any reputable journalist or newspaper, I will refer to the official press statement, not an FB- or Twitter/X abridged version for the average member of public with a reading age of twelve.

What makes a statement on their own website official or unofficial in your view? Agreeing with your prejudices seems most likely. We all know perfectly well if it said the car was suspected of being a hybrid you would be mocking and attacking anyone who doubted it.

 

[phiwum]

Nothing to do with 'belief'. Facts based on evidence is all that is needed.

Yes, and if the final report says that it was a plain diesel engine, will that be sufficient evidence?

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

 

[phiwum]

The UK differs from the USA in that the UK has very strict Contempt of Court laws. A newspaper's lawyers in the UK will generally advise the newspapers not to publish anything that might be subjudice or would prejudice a court case. All the stuff in the press about Trump and his prehearing legal shenanigans likely wouldn't be reported on in the UK until the actual hearing, were it a UK court case. As an example, the was a recent serial killer, first arrested 2017 but wasn't charged until 2021. The case only came to court 2022 and that was the first time the public got to learn the details of her serial murders. So even if the 'arrested man' did approach the papers they wouldn't dare publish anything that might upset the Crown Prosecution Service or risk the case being a mistrial due to prejudice. They won't publish his name until he is actually charged.

Are newspapers not allowed to interview involved parties? I doubt it, but if that were the case, then there is no cover up at all. It's just business as usual.

Either the driver has chosen not to give an interview or he can't give one because of UK laws regarding potential defendants. In either case, nothing at all notable about the lack of an interview with the driver.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

 

[whoanellie]

Self-praise is no recommendation.

Words to live by.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

You mean the poster who thought this was the same as that and that the difference was just a tiny one, a case of a little mistake, whoops? That poster?

Still lying about me vixen?

 

[Mojo]

You mean the poster who thought this was the same as that and that the difference was just a tiny one, a case of a little mistake, whoops? That poster?

No, the poster you claimed had described the illegal deportation of two Egyptians from Sweden as 'just an ordinary deportation', despite his having actually referred to it as "against Sweden's own rules", "illegal", "reprehensible and illegal", and "a totally different crime, that of enforced deportation" in the very posts that you cited to support your claim.

I very much doubt that "the poster who thought this was the same as that" exists outside your imagination. The only poster having trouble telling the difference between an "ordinary" deportation and an illegal one seems to be you.

 

[catsmate]

It is 'thought' to be a Range Rover. Remember, these images haven't been authenticated. The one from the back is probably legitimate but the other, supposedly from the front of the car, with the number plate, only popped up on an unknown Twitter account some days after the fire. I don't know how much these things can be photoshopped but I would treat all unconfirmed reports with care.

Bollocks. The initial car fire was a diesel Range Rover. Your childish attempts at obfuscation of this simple fact are pathetic.

 

[JayUtah]

It takes...

Look who's trying to be an engineer again.

 

[GlennB]

It takes temperatures of over 1,600 ºC to burn through concrete. A diesel fire, even if whipped up to 1,000ºC by lit rags and a leafblower won't do more than cause spalling. Spalling affects a layer of the concrete, possibly several of them, but the concrete is generally otherwise fire resistant, with just superficial damage (spalling). Whilst EV's are heavy they are not that much heavier than ICE's, other than the recent trend towards bigger and 'butch'-er looking 'SUV's. A car park, one would have thought, would have been designed to withstand several hundred cars parked on any level.

Don't forget the rebar. I suggest you look up its purpose in reinforced concrete.