Luton Airport Car Park Fire

[junkshop]

No, they haven't.

As you have been informed so many times: yes they have, and they did so on the same day you started this ridiculous thread.

 

[catsmate]

But the Liverpool car park fire was on 31 Dec 2018, which is hardly the Stone Age.

So why are you quoting a report from a half-century earlier?

 

[catsmate]

It is relevant, because if it was a lithium battery fire, that explains everything, the intensity, the floor giving way, the rapid spread from projectile jets of alighted debris from the vehicle. Likewise, as would a deliberate detonation.

It is all very well saying it is 'accidental' but it may not necessarily be so, given the Middle East conflict.

IMV it might be expedient to assume it is the same type of fire as the Liverpool Car Park one but that took two hours to become out of control.

Pathetic, conspiratorial drivel.

 

[catsmate]

No, they haven't.

You're lying again.

 

[Steve]

Well it could also be connected to the Ukrainian conflict! or a distraction from the conspiracy to sink the Estonia! Or........

 

[theprestige]

No, they haven't.

You created this thread on the premise that they have.

 

[Steve]

All these are suspicious only because you in your unbounded ignorance have declared them to be. The right answer in this case is that you and all the other armchair detectives don’t know what you’re talking about out.

"Paranoia strikes deep..." / Stephen Stills

 

[Thermal]

First, there was the sinky boat.

Then, the burny car.

Can't wait to see the next form of transportation subjected to this ****.

 

[Vixen]

If only, if only there was someone, someone from, say, Oldham who could definitively tell us what happened...If only...

...I am getting a name coming through...Jason...

 

[Vixen]

Well vixen?

See here:

Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a term that refers to several types of arguments, most of which are fallacious. Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion to some irrelevant but often highly charged issue.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

 

[Vixen]

So why are you quoting a report from a half-century earlier?

1968 were the safety standards still in force when the Merseyside Fire Brigade did its report into the Liverpool ECHO fire. It was part of its terms of reference. It looks at the rules and regulations in force at the time and weighs up whether they were adhered to.

 

[JayUtah]

See here:

Yes, we can all do web searches that lead us to Wikipedia. You seem to think you're the victim of ad hominem attacks. Instead people are just disagreeing with your conclusions and opinions. When they point out that your expectations are based on a paucity of understanding, this is not an ad hominem argument. It is properly noting that your opinions, expectations, and judgments lack a proper foundation. A claimant's knowledge of the principles and facts that pertain to her claims is not a forbidden attribute of the claimant's character; it is an important element of the substance of the argument.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

See here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Then please demonstrate where this has occurred, and no, telling you you're wrong doesn't count, and no, telling you you're a liar or stupid doesn't count when accompanied by evidence of such.

 

[theprestige]

First, there was the sinky boat.

Then, the burny car.

Can't wait to see the next form of transportation subjected to this ****.

The floaty train.

 

[Foster Zygote]

See here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

If you feel you've been personally attacked in such a fashion, then by all means report those posts to the moderators. Just don't be surprised when they also inform you that simply being told you are wrong about something is not an ad hominem attack, no matter how much it hurts your feelings.

 

[Foster Zygote]

First, there was the sinky boat.

Then, the burny car.

Can't wait to see the next form of transportation subjected to this ****.

The farty ice cream truck.

 

[GlennB]

First, there was the sinky boat.

Then, the burny car.

Can't wait to see the next form of transportation subjected to this ****.

The fizzy rocket.

 

[malbui]

The farty ice cream truck.

I’m sure that Viz once featured a spunk powered moped that was presumably dangerous on many fronts.

 

[JayUtah]

The fizzy rocket.

The farty towels.

 

[catsmate]

1968 were the safety standards still in force when the Merseyside Fire Brigade did its report into the Liverpool ECHO fire. It was part of its terms of reference. It looks at the rules and regulations in force at the time and weighs up whether they were adhered to.

It's been shown why this is nonsense.