• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire IV

Do we really have to use words more appropriate to a children's playground?

"Is the Bedfordshire Fire and Rescue Service lying when they state, quite clearly and unequivocally, that the fire started in diesel-powered car?" is a yes/no question.

The only words appropriate for YOU to answer this simple questions are either "yes" or "no". Or, possibly, "I don't the **** know, how could I, I do not understand a bloody thing about any aspect of this bloody mess"

So try again, answer with word(s) appropriate for such a straight and honest question:

Is the Bedfordshire Fire and Rescue Service lying when they state, quite clearly and unequivocally, that the fire started in diesel-powered car?
 
It is literally EVERYONE's opinion that JayUtah's authority on matters discussed here VASTLY exceeds yours - as does literally EVERYONE's authority here in this thread.

That may be true, and gracious of you to say, but I should clarify that the operative scope as regards my most recent authoritative judgment claim is limited to my ability to assess whether candidates for STEM degrees have met the requirements are are therefore entitled to the degree. In that respect my professional, informed opinion is (or rather, has been) deemed sufficient by the state of Utah to put the force of its authority behind my endorsement of candidates for scientific qualification.

If Vixen claims to have a STEM degree, and I am able to independently assess whether she can demonstrate proficiency and knowledge commensurate to such a degree, my judgment on that matter is not merely personal whim or idle speculation. It is, in fact, the only means by which such accolades are granted by schools. The teachers get to decide which students have achieved proficiency. That decision is informed, binding, and authoritative.

Separately, and in many other threads at this forum, I have represented that my professional qualifications are relevant to the non-personalized claims made. They are, and I still maintain that they are. But those are slightly separate applications of expertise and authority. As a licensed professional, I have knowledge appropriate to that role. I have authority, but it is mostly limited to binding myself as liable for what I have issued under my official credentials, regardless of what anyone else says or does. At times that role has included judging the work of others, and making recommendations, but only by special mandate. My role as a professor and my role as a professional engineer both apply to this particular thread, but they are not the same thing or applicable to the same questions in the same ways.
 
Last edited:
Is the Bedfordshire Fire and Rescue Service lying when they state, quite clearly and unequivocally, that the fire started in diesel-powered car?

Do we really have to use words more appropriate to a children's playground?

Can you sense how weird your evasive reply appears? Yet again you seems to be running away from answering this perfectly simple question.

BF&RS made a clear declaration of a fact, based on information which they say is in their possession. Do you think their declaration is truthful or do you think it is false?

And of course the real mystery: why are you so scared of answering that question?
 
Didn't answer the question

Indeed. Not only has the past page or so of the thread demonstrated that Vixen lacks the high ethical principles she claims, it has provided ample evidence that she cannot demonstrate ordinary ethical principles even when pressed.

Vixen, several of your critics have pointed out some places where your claims in regard to the Luton fire seem to be in contradiction with each other, and other places where other such claims contradict independently verifiable fact. You continue to evade those demonstrations. Please provide an explanation for them that does not reduce to a dismissive, "I have high ethical standards."

1. You do not.
2. Whether you have them or not is irrelevant to whether you can reconcile the demonstrated contradictions with evidence and argument.
 
Bjorkman claims those things. His work was as a loss adjuster in maritime insurance. His 'Coulombi egg' oil tanker design was blacklisted by the US coastguard even before one had been built (which has never happened and never will).

Added: His 'European Agency for Safety at Sea' is not recognised by the EU but uses the EU flag without the permission of the EU. It runs from a one-bedroom apartment in the south of France (I forget the city).


It seems that lying about (and/or embellishing) one's credentials and qualifications is rather common among certain sections of the population.......
 
Are you having problems with reading comprehension, again?

It's a straightforward question, with no childish language. Do you think you could answer it?

They have not 'lied', they have presented what they consider to be a true and fair view of what Mr. Hopkinson said on 11 October 2023.
 
You're not finished, Vixen.

You wrongly claimed I had sneered at a fellow engineer's engineering credentials. That is not true. You were asked to account for that statement. After waiting for a day, you tried to sidestep and claim you had made some other accusation instead. That transforms your behavior from putatively erroneous to willfully dishonest. You are still evading responsibility for your initial accusation, which was flagrantly false.

You have claimed as a part of your rejoinder to a rebuttal that you follow "high ethical principles." You are not being at all forthcoming about your role in making a serious false accusation. You are not ethical. You continue to be evasive and dishonest.

When you retract your claim I do not know what a trust is, then I will do the same re Carool Vorderman.
 
I don’t need to.
MarkCorrigan was talking about press releases, while you were saying that he was talking about multiple press conferences.

That is the lie.

In my opinion, each so-called press release is simply a reiteration of what was said at the sole press conference 11 Oct 2023. MarkCorrigan believes there has been more than one genuine press release, i.e., one that is not simply a clarification of a previous press release for avoidance of doubt.

How is that a lie?
 
When you retract your claim I do not know what a trust is, then I will do the same re Carool Vorderman.

No. I have supplied ample evidence to support my claim that you do not know what a blind trust is. You may litigate that at your leisure, but so far you have chosen not to except to beg the question. At any rate, the two propositions are not connected.

You straight-up lied when you said I had questioned Vorderman's engineering credentials. There is no spin of the facts that makes your accusation a true statement. You then went on—and continue—to pretend you not in any way at fault. I am not in any way ethically obliged to jump through your contrived hoops in order to hold you accountable for what at this point is an ongoing program of deliberate deception.
 
They have not 'lied', they have presented what they consider to be a true and fair view of what Mr. Hopkinson said on 11 October 2023.


Nope, they said that their conclusions about the vehicle were the results of a investigation that finished in mid-March. Here's what they said:
Following the fire, a multi-agency investigation took place between Bedfordshire Police and Bedfordshire Fire and Rescue Service, which finished this week.

As a result of the investigation, all evidence points to the most probable cause being an electrical fault or component failure, which started in the engine bay of the vehicle whilst it was in motion.

The developing fire spread to other components, and whilst the owner of the vehicle attempted to fight the fire, the vehicle became overrun with flames and spread to other parked vehicles.

The vehicle involved was diesel-powered – it was not a mild hybrid, plug-in hybrid or electric vehicle.

https://www.bedsfire.gov.uk/news/fire-airport-car-park-started-accidentally
 
In my opinion, each so-called press release is simply a reiteration of what was said at the sole press conference 11 Oct 2023. MarkCorrigan believes there has been more than one genuine press release, i.e., one that is not simply a clarification of a previous press release for avoidance of doubt.

How is that a lie?

Well it might not be a lie I suppose, you might be stupid.
 
In my opinion, each so-called press release is simply a reiteration of what was said at the sole press conference 11 Oct 2023.


The March 21st press release included information that was not available on 11th October. Either you are lying about the press conference, or you are lying about the press release.
 
In my opinion, each so-called press release is simply a reiteration of what was said at the sole press conference 11 Oct 2023. MarkCorrigan believes there has been more than one genuine press release, i.e., one that is not simply a clarification of a previous press release for avoidance of doubt.

How is that a lie?

It's a lie because no one is buying your claim that you are genuinely so obtuse as to be incapable of discerning the difference between saying we think it was a diesel at this point and we are now certain it was a diesel.

Is it also your opinion that diesel fuel requires high pressure to be ignited, or that the floor in the second video was sloped the wrong way? Making a false claim isn't magically rectified by declaring that your opinion is that it's true.
 
The March 21st press release included information that was not available on 11th October. Either you are lying about the press conference, or you are lying about the press release.

Now be fair, as I've said she might not be lying.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom