Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire III

[MarkCorrigan]

No-one believes you.

You have declared with great confidence that Luton car park fire has resulted in a wide ranging cover-up that involves everyone from Bedfordshire fire department to junior ministers to the Prime Minister himself and you've provided no evidence that a junior minister wrote the press release (you refuse to take at face value) with the help of government lawyers in order to prevent the PM's investments in the company from losing value. Random speculation about shoddy car park construction and cheap flights from Luton airport have something to do with the cover-up, but no-one knows what (I'm not sure you do).

If you don't think that's a conspiracy theory, then you don't know what a conspiracy theory is.

Vixen seems to have a weird kind of magical thinking in that she thinks if she doesn't say something explicitly then it means that it isn't the thing even if it meets every criteria for it.

She has never said that she believes in a conspiracy and that means she didn't even though she repeatedly states that people involved conspired to hide something from the public.

She's never said she's an expert in anything so she has never claimed expertise despite making claims that implicitly include the expertise built in.

It's bizarre.

 

[JayUtah]

She's never said she's an expert in anything so she has never claimed expertise despite making claims that implicitly include the expertise built in.

I wrote about this thoroughly here:
https://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=14288885#post14288885

 

[Mojo]

Sunak is the first Prime Minister to declare his interests as blind. Not even Boris Johnson or David Cameron did that whilst PM, even though we all know both ministers took the proverbial (cf, wallpapergate, donorgate, Greensill).

You tried that one in the previous iteration of the thread. It was rapidly revealed to be false, and you acknowledged that. Your repetition of the claim is therefore a lie.

And somehow you still fail to understand that the purpose of a blind trust to prevent knowledge of their investments influencing the beneficiary's decisions. Sunak couldn't reveal the contents of his blind trust if he wanted to, because he doesn't know what they are.

 

[Myriad]

In general, pumps can blow much harder than they can suck. And all pumps are limited to a certain quantity by which they can raise the pressure from inlet to discharge. In rockets, we often rely on tank ullage pressure, and then on two stages of impeller-type pumps. In airplanes we often employ fuel boost pumps.

In automotive design, especially for high-performance vehicles, the industry is switching to injecting fuel directly into the combustion chamber rather than into the intake tract. This requires much higher injector pressure (i.e., > 10 MPa), since the injector must now fully atomize the fuel and cannot rely on natural atomization during flow down the manifold. Practically this requires a two-stage pump system. The low-pressure side still operates at 300-500 kPa, which is around what we used for manifold injectors at the rail.

There simply is no such thing as a non-pressurized fuel system anymore in a modern hydrocarbon-fueled passenger vehicle. You either have injector inlet pressure being created in the tank with the pump we've been using for decades, or inlet pressure created by boosting fuel delivery pressure in the engine compartment from the standard tank pump to the very high injector pressure.

If a vehicle's ICE engine is running, the notion that it cannot produce jets of flame is absurd.

I've seen several vehicle fires in person (usually as roadside incidents causing traffic tie-ups) and jets of flame are a usual feature. The engine doesn't have to be running. Consider how many different closed or mostly-closed volumes a car contains, that all have combustible gases, liquids and/or solids in them, that will vaporize and heat up in a fire, creating pressure (in those spaces that aren't already pressurized), that can then jet flame out of any already-existing aperture or eventually vent through a leak or rupture and jet flame that way. There's the fuel tank and fuel lines, the cylinders and exhaust system, the oil reservoir, the hydraulic system, the transmission case, cargo spaces, the passenger compartment, the tires, and probably a few more that aren't coming to mind.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

How does your old copy help you understand the nuance of phrases it doesn't contain?

Brewer or Oxford Press, how dare they contradict Vixen?

 

[Mojo]

It was nothing to do with nuance, you managed to get it back-to-front, and implied that it meant that money leads to corruption, which is not a meaning it has ever had.

Oh, and you said it was a religious commentary on scripture, or possibly some sort of moralizing lecture.

What? Citation please.

Here:

There is a Yorkshire homily which states, 'Where there's brass there's muck'.

 

[Agatha]

What? Citation please.

You claimed that the phrase (that you had misquoted) was a homily.

homily
in British English
(ˈhɒmɪlɪ IPA Pronunciation Guide)
NOUN
Word forms: plural -lies
1. a sermon or discourse on a moral or religious topic
2. moralizing talk or writing

 

[JayUtah]

Consider how many different closed or mostly-closed volumes a car contains, that all have combustible gases, liquids and/or solids in them, that will vaporize and heat up in a fire, creating pressure...

I mentioned this too earlier. The fact that several people can provide testimony—with explanations—for how supposedly telltale occurrences are not as dispositive as others may claim thoroughly refutes the argument.

Vixen, do you still claim—on the basis of having watched a couple of YouTube videos from the comfort of your armchair—that you are competent to determine that a burning vehicle in some video is showing a lithium ion battery in thermal runaway?

 

[Mojo]

I have never said it was a conspiracy. As far as I am concerned it is current affairs news.

It is your contention that there is a conspiracy, involving the fire service and police, and going all the way up to the PM, to conceal information from the public.

 

[Mojo]

You claimed that the phrase (that you had misquoted) was a homily.

homily
in British English
(ˈhɒmɪlɪ IPA Pronunciation Guide)
NOUN
Word forms: plural -lies
1. a sermon or discourse on a moral or religious topic
2. moralizing talk or writing

Possibly she meant, "there's a nice knock-down argument for you."

 

[smartcooky]

I clearly said that Tata is the 100% owner of Jaguar Land Rover.

On his appointment, Sunak decided to declare his comapny's interests as blind. His company registered in the Cayman Island has long been established. The US arm that deals with Sunak's company's interests has shares in Moderna.

Do you now understand why declaring your interests as blind is not a good look for a lawmaker who makes the laws?

So, lets see if I understand this correctly

1. You clam Sunak has an "interest" in Tata, who owns Jaguar and Land Rover.

2. I'll accept that you didn't actually state that this interest was shares, but you strongly imply it was.

3. A fire happened in Luton Airport car park.

4. You, along with some anti-EV types, claim this fire was in fact started some sort of electrically powered vehicle (EV, Hybrid).

5. In order to cover up this supposed fact, the government/Sunak orders a media blackout on reporting the make, model and type of car, and orders the attending fire service to lie about the same (and there's the conspiracy - the government/Sunak, the media and the fire service all conspiring to hide the truth). But you're not claiming a conspiracy, right?

6. Someone in the government arranges for the faking of a video/photo of a burning car, both the front and rear views of which clearly show the car to be a 2014 Range Rover Sport, a vehicle that is not a EV, in order to deflect away from the idea that the fire was started by an EV

You are aware that Range Rovers are made by Jaguar Land Rover, right? So how do you reconcile items 1 and 6? Why would someone with an interest in Jaguar Land Rover, try to protect that interest by trying to make it look like the fire was started by a model of car manufactured by... Jaguar Land Rover? Surely, they would have faked that photo/video with a Ford, or Nissan, or Toyota, or Kia or Hyundai all of whom make similar diesel powered vehicles.

 

[Vixen]

You tried that one in the previous iteration of the thread. It was rapidly revealed to be false, and you acknowledged that. Your repetition of the claim is therefore a lie.

And somehow you still fail to understand that the purpose of a blind trust to prevent knowledge of their investments influencing the beneficiary's decisions. Sunak couldn't reveal the contents of his blind trust if he wanted to, because he doesn't know what they are.

Of for heaven's sake, it was his CHOICE, to make them blind. What was stopping him from declaring his interests? Of course people are going to think, he has a potential conflict of interest and he is hiding behind labelling it 'blind'. Why wouldn't he want people to know what his interests were otherwise? He never declared his green card until he had to. He never had any objection to his wife being non-dom, even though he Chancellor of the Exchequer and it was his JOB to round up taxes. She only gave up the green car because of people's protests. She said it was because she was Indian but she still had a choice and the choice was to not pay taxes in the UK until scandal forced her to give up the non-dom opt out. Sunak, never got round to declaring his wife's interest in the child care thing and once against was left to someone else to point out he should have. Let's not forget the Covid 19, Eat Out to Help Out and now it seems the steward of his company int he USA (blind to Sunak, of course! ) invested in Moderna for him. Ker-ching!!!

 

[Vixen]

You claimed that the phrase (that you had misquoted) was a homily.

homily
in British English
(ˈhɒmɪlɪ IPA Pronunciation Guide)
NOUN
Word forms: plural -lies
1. a sermon or discourse on a moral or religious topic
2. moralizing talk or writing

The earliest written usage Oxford English could find was J Ray in English Proverbs 1678 and I agree it is of a proverb type. IOW it was not a narrative exhorting people to work hard as in a modern day motivational tip.

 

[Vixen]

I mentioned this too earlier. The fact that several people can provide testimony—with explanations—for how supposedly telltale occurrences are not as dispositive as others may claim thoroughly refutes the argument.

Vixen, do you still claim—on the basis of having watched a couple of YouTube videos from the comfort of your armchair—that you are competent to determine that a burning vehicle in some video is showing a lithium ion battery in thermal runaway?

I saw many many people saying it looked like a lithium-ion fire and noticing that the make model and year has not been revealed, aroused my curiosity as to why not. Why it was so important to emphasize immediately that it was a diesel.

 

[Vixen]

So, lets see if I understand this correctly

1. You clam Sunak has an "interest" in Tata, who owns Jaguar and Land Rover.

2. I'll accept that you didn't actually state that this interest was shares, but you strongly imply it was.

3. A fire happened in Luton Airport car park.

4. You, along with some anti-EV types, claim this fire was in fact started some sort of electrically powered vehicle (EV, Hybrid).

5. In order to cover up this supposed fact, the government/Sunak orders a media blackout on reporting the make, model and type of car, and orders the attending fire service to lie about the same (and there's the conspiracy - the government/Sunak, the media and the fire service all conspiring to hide the truth). But you're not claiming a conspiracy, right?

6. Someone in the government arranges for the faking of a video/photo of a burning car, both the front and rear views of which clearly show the car to be a 2014 Range Rover Sport, a vehicle that is not a EV, in order to deflect away from the idea that the fire was started by an EV

You are aware that Range Rovers are made by Jaguar Land Rover, right? So how do you reconcile items 1 and 6? Why would someone with an interest in Jaguar Land Rover, try to protect that interest by trying to make it look like the fire was started by a model of car manufactured by... Jaguar Land Rover? Surely, they would have faked that photo/video with a Ford, or Nissan, or Toyota, or Kia or Hyundai all of whom make similar diesel powered vehicles.

What? AFAIAA the 2014 Range Rover Sport theory appeared on X-Twitter and none of the national press has been able to use it as authentic. I have no idea who took the video or created it, if fake. However, you can see someone hovering in the background of the Romanian lady's video, so there could have been someone at the front also filming it.

We haven't been given any confirmation of the car model (even though common consensus is that it is a Range Rover) so obviously there is a press embargo. Possibly connected to the ongoing investigation.

 

[JayUtah]

I saw many many people saying it looked like a lithium-ion fire...

You have at times said you think it looks like a lithium ion battery fire. What is that judgment based on, and do you still believe it?

 

[JayUtah]

What?

It's very simple. Your conspiracy theory contains a contradiction. You claim Sunak has interest in a company that makes Range Rovers. You also claim the video of a Range Rover purporting to be the initiating vehicle in the Luton fire has been faked, ostensibly at government orders, to draw attention from the fact that the real vehicle was an EV. This would tend against Sunak's purported interest.

You're being asked to reconcile these incompatible assertions. Do that, instead of waffling on about God knows what else.

 

[JayUtah]

Of for heaven's sake
* * *
Ker-ching!!!

None of that addresses the errors you've made that have been once again pointed out to you.

 

[Vixen]

It's very simple. Your conspiracy theory contains a contradiction. You claim Sunak has interest in a company that makes Range Rovers. You also claim the video of a Range Rover purporting to be the initiating vehicle in the Luton fire has been faked, ostensibly at government orders, to draw attention from the fact that the real vehicle was an EV. This would tend against Sunak's purported interest.

You're being asked to reconcile these incompatible assertions. Do that, instead of waffling on about God knows what else.

I did not say the video of 'a Range Rover purporting to be the initiating vehicle in the Luton fire has been faked, ostensibly at government orders'. My view is given that none of the press will touch it, the video has been edited in some way, in particular, the claim the numberplate can be revealed to show a 2014 Range Rover Sport. If that is the case the likelihood is that the creator is some clever dick from the pro-EV lobby wanting to wind up the perceived anti-EV lobby.

It is my view, given Sunak's close connections to Tata and his business instincts, the last thing he would want would be for the EV to have reputation damage. Brand reputation damage is one of the leading causes of business failure. Sunak knows this. He went to Stanford. He is a businessman.

 

[JayUtah]

I did not say the video of 'a Range Rover purporting to be the initiating vehicle in the Luton fire has been faked, ostensibly at government orders'.

You've gone on at length about how it is a deep fake.

It is my view, given Sunak's close connections to Tata and his business instincts, the last thing he would want would be for the EV to have reputation damage.

Or for Range Rover to have reputation damage.

You still haven't addressed the contradiction in your conspiracy theory.