Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire III

[ferd burfle]

See here re fighting car fires:


[qimg]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53686854295_03f8e4f343.jpg[/qimg]Antifreeze car fires from https://www.cafsti.org/wp-content/uploads/Vehicle-Fires-a-Practical-Approach.pdf by Username Vixen, on Flickr

Cited as a possible cause for a car fire igniting surprising intensely, as in the Newark Airport fire. The whole document can be read here:

https://www.cafsti.org/wp-content/uploads/Vehicle-Fires-a-Practical-Approach.pdf

So, if the Luton Airport car park fire was caused by a fully diesel car then something like this might have caused the super-rapid spread to other cars.

So antifreeze can under the right conditions be flammable. That does not make it an accelerant. An accelerant accelerates ignition and the spread of a fire, for example, gasoline used by an arsonist. But you knew this.

 

[JayUtah]

Fiddlesticks. The press release of 11 October 2023 can only have been based on speculation.

Because you say so?

Do I need to remind you which of us actually has professional experience here and which of us is just pretending?

 

[JayUtah]

Really? I used to be an amateur photographer with a couple of SLR's and a whole range of different lenses, flashes, film, manual adjustments, etc. etc. What do I know about calculating depth of field or light quality.

Yes, really. I'm describing photogrammetry, which has absolutely nothing to do with what you're talking about here.

But since you're suggesting that you're competent, let's test your knowledge. I mentioned in the post you quoted that the projective transformation was noninvertible. Explain why.

 

[JayUtah]

So antifreeze can under the right conditions be flammable. That does not make it an accelerant. An accelerant accelerates ignition and the spread of a fire, for example, gasoline used by an arsonist. But you knew this.

The energy density of ethylene glycol (undiluted) is around 20 MJ / kg. Dilution gives a roughly linear reduction according to the dilution ratio. So it will support combustion, but no it is not an accelerant.

 

[JayUtah]

I am at a loss to understand why people are so happy about an already very rich guy using press embargo to protect the financial interests of he and his wife.

Because there's no evidence this is what is happening. Does that help you understand?

 

[JayUtah]

What does Anders Björkman have to do with anything?

It shows the desperate lengths you go to in order to prop up utterly unreliable testimony, including your own.

Just because I support people's right to take an interest in whatever they wish, it doesn't follow I endorse them.

Straw man. You cite people as experts—including yourself—who patently are not. You go far beyond "taking an interest." You pretend like you're the only one able to see the truth of some matter and that everyone else's knowledge and experience must bow to your intuition. This is what you're being criticized for, not mere interest. As for the person mentioned: you do endorse him; you just stopped citing to him.

Some people are more curious about the world than others.

You display none of the characteristic behavior of curiosity. On the contrary, you proceed almost habitually from the premise that you already know it all and that everyone should listen to you. There is no virtue in what you do. Armchair detectives are worse than useless.

 

[Andy_Ross]

The press release was on 11 October 2023, whilst the fire was still smouldering behind Andrew Hopkinson and he very clearly said, 'we believe'...'at this stage'...subject to further investigation'"


There has not been any further press release because we are all awaiting the report.

The 'update' in March was simply a reiteration of what was said 11 Oct 2023.

You might be content with the initial supposition being a final verdict but I will wait for the proper report, if that is OK with you?

The 'update' was an official press release, you can read it on the official website of the fire service.

It says that the fire was started by a diesel and not an EV of any kind.

No longer any 'we believe' about it. There has been further investigation.

 

[whoanellie]

As a matter of interest, WHY hasn't the owner come forward?

Maybe he doesn't want to attract the attention of ill-informed conspiracy theorists... like you!!

I promise you, if it was my car that started that fire, and I had a bunch of conspiratards running around spouting misinformation, disinformation and lies like you have been doing here, I would be keeping my head well below the parapet!!

Exactly. Vixen, you are a prime example of the conspiracy kooks who would deter me from coming forward if I owned the car in question.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Indeed. I'm a semi-professional photographer with over 10 years experience, and I'm currently studying photography to degree level, and nothing I've done so far would prepare me, except in the most basic way, to analyse video footage in the required way. I think I have the basic capacity to go off to learn what was needed, if required, but it's not knowledge the average amateur tog would have.

I agree, I have a diploma in photography and worked professionally running a darkroom and studio for a while in the late 80s, first thing I did after the Navy.

I know nothing of photogrammetry and wouldn't try to comment on it.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Really? I used to be an amateur photographer with a couple of SLR's and a whole range of different lenses, flashes, film, manual adjustments, etc. etc. What do I know about calculating depth of field or light quality.

LOL!

Vixen, what do depth of field or light quality have to do with establishing the precise orientation of the camera in order to determine the orientation of the floor in the images being discussed?

Once more, let's say someone shoots a photograph looking down a hallway. The camera is centered down the hallway laterally, but is tilted upward by 5° relative to the floor. What can you determine about the actual slope of the floor relative to true level from that image? The answer is "nothing". The hall could be perfectly level with the camera tilted upward by 5° relative to true level. The hallway could be sloping upward (away from the camera lens) at 5°, with the camera at 10° from true level. The hallway could be sloping downward at 30° with the camera aimed down by 25°. Hell, the hallway could even be a vertical shaft with the camera aimed down by 85°. In any of those scenarios the images shot by the camera would look exactly the same, because there's no reference point to tell you where true level is.

Yet you're looking at the second photo and assuming the floor is sloping down away from the camera because you make the unwarranted assumption that the camera is aligned with true level. The very fact that you've attempted to defend this erroneous assumption with irrelevant appeals to artistic perspective, depth of field setting and lighting conditions proves that you don't know what you're talking about, or at the very least, that you'll never admit to being wrong about this. Your attempts to establish empirical evidence to back up your "deep fake" claims regarding those images have completely failed.

 

[Foster Zygote]

As a matter of interest, WHY hasn't the owner come forward?

This thread should answer your question.

Even if this wasn't growing into a new conspiracy theory, the potential for harassment from run-of-the-mill ********* angry about losing their cars and unable to accept that it was an accident would be enough reason to maintain one's privacy. But now we're talking about self-deluded "truth crusaders" looking to expose a "deep state plot" by the nefarious Them. Just look what happened to the parents of the children killed at Sandy Hook. Look what happened to a pizzeria with no basement. It would only take the chronic harassment of a few self-righteous idiots to make that poor person's life considerably less enjoyable.

 

[Steve]

So antifreeze can under the right conditions be flammable. That does not make it an accelerant. An accelerant accelerates ignition and the spread of a fire, for example, gasoline used by an arsonist. But you knew this.

Assumes facts not in evidence.

 

[JayUtah]

As a matter of interest, WHY hasn't the owner come forward?

Why would you want to know that? Would you consent to sending him or her your details?

 

[SpitfireIX]

He is a petrol head, not a Putin shill.

First, he clearly is a Putin shill; see my previous post. Additionally, here's another video where he claims that buying EVs is funding Russia's war effort because China controls the lion's share of EV raw materials and component production (true, unfortunately) and China is sending lethal military aid to Russia (substantially false; Xi is afraid of being sanctioned by the West).

He has a healthy scepticism which is useful for others who want to understand the latest EV developments.

You have repeatedly demonstrated that you have no understanding whatsoever of the concept of healthy skepticism. Rather, you clearly practice pathological skepticism.

Some people are early adopters, others want to 'wait and see' how the early adopters get on. I cannot see anything sinister about that. It is a well known phenomenon in the technological industry.

If the government does not provide information then people will turn to perceived knowledgeable persons within their community.

And Geoff Buys Cars is clearly not one of those people, at least when it comes to EVs.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

I agree, I have a diploma in photography and worked professionally running a darkroom and studio for a while in the late 80s, first thing I did after the Navy.

I know nothing of photogrammetry and wouldn't try to comment on it.

Several years semi pro, mostly corporate work, but I was in galleries, exhibitions & had a double page spread in a magazine on one notable occasion. Just another nod of agreement with the above & the post to which Andy is responding to.

 

[Mojo]

I suspect Sunak is 'protecting the Tata JLR brand' and that would be more to do with ethics and why people accept that level of self-interest.

So who is it that you think produced the 'deep fake' video of a JLR vehicle on fire?

 

[Mojo]

It is quite obvious BF&RS are constrained in what they are allowed to say.

Why is it "quite obvious"?

 

[JayUtah]

Indeed. I'm a semi-professional photographer with over 10 years experience, and I'm currently studying photography to degree level, and nothing I've done so far would prepare me, except in the most basic way, to analyse video footage in the required way. I think I have the basic capacity to go off to learn what was needed, if required, but it's not knowledge the average amateur tog would have.

I agree, I have a diploma in photography and worked professionally running a darkroom and studio for a while in the late 80s, first thing I did after the Navy.

I know nothing of photogrammetry and wouldn't try to comment on it.

Several years semi pro, mostly corporate work, but I was in galleries, exhibitions & had a double page spread in a magazine on one notable occasion. Just another nod of agreement with the above & the post to which Andy is responding to.

Indeed, photogrammetry (specifically, the rectification technique I described above) is almost purely a geometric pursuit. It requires a competent understanding of linear algebra, which is not something commonly taught as a general study, and nothing you need to know in order to be a top-notch photographer. We know Vixen has no facility with linear algebra from her attempt to explain in her own words the roll stability of a ship hull.

While I lack the credentials and experience of you fine folk in the art, pursuit, and profession of photography, I did apprentice with a wedding photographer in my youth. I have owned a few fine cameras over the years, including those that require manual settings for exposure and focus, including understanding the effect of depth of field. I have sold a few prints, and have served as a photographer for the local ballet academy. I have worked in various film formats and with digital SLRs. I may also have appeared in a 2006 issue of the journal Science for my work in photographic interpretation and photogrammetry. I feel this gives me enough understanding to assert confidently—in agreement with the expert opinions you've expressed above—that the expertise Vixen is claiming is utterly irrelevant to the problem Foster Zygote has correctly identified in Vixen's argument. In any case, she can't solve the problem or even acknowledge that there is one.

Let's give Vixen maybe one or two days to answer my little test of her proficiency, and then we'll pick up the discussion again on the mathematics of the inverse projection.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Why is it "quite obvious"?

A cornerstone of conspiracy theorists I've seen is that everything is evidence for their pet delusion.

The lack of evidence that the BFRS lied because there's no special interest to protect is instead evidence they must have lied to protect the special interest in EVs. Because the conspiracy theorist works backwards from the desired conclusion nothing can refute that conclusion, and anything that appears to do so will be dismissed as a lie to cover up the conspiracy.

I think I answer that quite adequately.

 

[phiwum]

As a matter of interest, WHY hasn't the owner come forward?

Surely, the only possible answer is "I don't know." Only a fool would speculate.