Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire IV

[JayUtah]

Running an enterprise is both a science and an art.

Equivocation. You are not a scientist.

The AICPA calls accountancy 'a science'. This is factual.

Good for them. Scientists do not agree. Accounting is a business pursuit, not a scientific pursuit. You can demonstrate no proficiency in science.

To be honest, I am not sure why people think this has anything whatsoever to do with discussing a current affairs topic.

You paused that discussion to insist that we provide you with examples of your unethical behavior, pursuant to your claims to moral superiority. One such example is that you claim credentials and expertise you do not have. Another such example is that you have accused people falsely of serious breaches of professional behavior.

Now that that line of argument has gone badly for you, you want to bail out of it and blame everyone else for starting it.

 

[JayUtah]

...exemption, and which is also 'not in the public interest' to challenge.

Your disagreement with the provisions of the law is irrelevant.

Yet what about the two videos? Does that mean they are unable to confirm or deny the videos show the vehicle concerned?

No one is obliged any further than has already been done to address your ignorant question-begging regarding the videos.

 

[theprestige]

Running an enterprise is both a science and an art.

Carl Von Clausewitz identifies a third domain of human activity, distinct from the other two: Commerce. And running an enterprise is quite clearly commerce, not science or art. ("This is factual.")

ETA: Though I must admit that I'm intrigued by the notion of accountants formulating hypotheses, and conducting experiments to falsify those hypotheses. You'd think most accountants stick to the tried and true generally accepted accounting principles. But apparently in Vixen's world accountants spend their efforts inventing and testing new methods of recording financial transactions. Every one an Enron, I guess.

ETAA: Though I suppose GAAP has to come from somewhere. If someone told me they had a Ph.D. in Accounting, and were doing fundamental research on better ways to record complex or opaque financial transactions, I'd provisionally concede that they were doing something like science.

 

[LondonJohn]

Carl Von Clausewitz identifies a third domain of human activity, distinct from the other two: Commerce. And running an enterprise is quite clearly commerce, not science or art. ("This is factual.")

ETA: Though I must admit that I'm intrigued by the notion of accountants formulating hypotheses, and conducting experiments to falsify those hypotheses. You'd think most accountants stick to the tried and true generally accepted accounting principles. But apparently in Vixen's world accountants spend their efforts inventing and testing new methods of recording financial transactions. Every one an Enron, I guess.

ETAA: Though I suppose GAAP has to come from somewhere. If someone told me they had a Ph.D. in Accounting, and were doing fundamental research on better ways to record complex or opaque financial transactions, I'd provisionally concede that they were doing something like science.

Quite.

But if, on the other hand, a ********** accountant were (pretending to be) an expert on fluid dynamics, accelerant fires, photography, vehicle engineering and construction, corporate communications by a public body, and obligations of a public body under UK FOI legislation....

...you'd quite correctly concede that these areas were far, far outside any scientific competencies one might ascribe to a ********** accountant, and that they would require either a decent education in those areas or by extra-vocational training/experience in those areas (plus, of course, a scientific mind). None of which is possessed by the ********** accountant in question.

 

[welshdean]

I am content to await the report but from the wording it would appear that the model, make and year of the vehicle concerned will be withheld information for reasons of exemption, and which is also 'not in the public interest' to challenge. Yet what about the two videos? Does that mean they are unable to confirm or deny the videos show the vehicle concerned?

Your initial post, you remember, the one that started this farce, didn't query the make/model etc but suggested it was a 2014 Range Rover. Your only query was, was it an ICE or Li-Ion powered. As you've had confirmed to you that it was "a diesel-powered vehicle. To further clarify it was neither a fully electric vehicle (EV), a mild hybrid electric vehicle (MHEV) nor a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV)".

1st post in thread by Vixen
Luton Airport Car Park Fire

Luton Airport Car Park No.2 was destroyed a few days ago when a Range Rover suddenly caught fire as it was driving in. Miraculously the driver managed to escape despite the rapid spread of the fire across the floors and ceiling up to the next level. Thankfully only five people were injured, mostly with smoke inhalation.

It is thought the fire started with a diesel-powered vehicle "and then that fire has quickly and rapidly spread", said Andrew Hopkinson, Bedfordshire's chief fire officer.
While the exact number of cars damaged or destroyed is not yet known, Mr Hopkinson said: "There is a substantial number [of cars] that are not damaged."
There is no suggestion the blaze happened intentionally.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-...herts-67077996

Whilst the police confirm the vehicle in question was a diesel car, there has been much speculation and arguing on social media that the car ‘must have been an EV or Hybrid’ as ‘only a lithium battery would explode like that’.

Someone else has identified the car from its number plates as being a diesel 2014 Land Rover sports model. The issue is that people do not believe that diesel is particularly combustible. Plus the flames seem to spread out from underneath the passenger side ‘indicating an EV battery issue’.

Some seem to believe that police are playing down the EV angle because they do not want to ruin the EV-car market.

For example:

“I can remember car parks exploding and bursting into flames long before electric vehicles were invented…NOT #LutonAirport” https://x.com/Iromg/status/1712093115148882169?s=20

Why are you not satisfied that your initial post's query has been answered?
Why do you insist on moving the goal posts each and every time your foolish musings have been shown to you to be pathetically uninformed?
Why is this thread still alive?

 

[phiwum]

She's made it part of this thread.

Not really. She claimed to have high moral standards. That does not make everything she's ever said relevant to a thread about a car park fire.

Indeed, an extended argument over whether she has high moral standards is probably not relevant to this thread, even if it didn't involve a long listing of various things she's said in other contexts.

 

[Vixen]

Not really. She claimed to have high moral standards. That does not make everything she's ever said relevant to a thread about a car park fire.

Indeed, an extended argument over whether she has high moral standards is probably not relevant to this thread, even if it didn't involve a long listing of various things she's said in other contexts.

For the record I did not say I had high moral standards, I said I have a set of ethical principles.

 

[LondonJohn]

For the record I did not say I had high moral standards, I said I have a set of ethical principles.

Yes. And you've had that claim - just like almost all of your other claims - shot to pieces by way of plenty of evidence solely within this thread.

 

[JayUtah]

For the record I did not say I had high moral standards, I said I have a set of ethical principles.

A distinction without a difference. That was your only answer to the question of how to reconcile the contradiction in your Luton Fire argument. Rather than allow the discussion to continue otherwise, you demanded examples of your unethical behavior, which were provided. And now you’re all performatively butthurt that people don’t agree with your self-delusional evasions.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

A poster asked me a direct question and I politely gave him a straight answer.

Going to deal with the fact this claim of yours is a lie Vixen?

 

[JayUtah]

The responsible agency has confirmed in multiple ways, via multiple channels, multiple times that the car that started the Luton fire was diesel-powered. They have commensurately confirmed that no lithium-ion battery powerplant of any kind was the cause. They have represented all this to be the findings of a proper investigation carried out by them, and intended to be a final, factual statement. Further, by saying as much in response to an official legal request, they have made it subject to the truth in disclosure requirements for freedom of information. This means that if they are deliberately lying, it is not a benign offense.

Vixen insinuates that they are lying.

Her evidence amounts to an ill-informed fantasy regarding how government officials manage their finances. It amounts to her because-I-say so claims regarding how various things work, having previously and subsequently demonstrated no competent understanding of it. It amounts to her play-scientist ability to see things in videos that no one else can.

All this notwithstanding, Vixen remains unable to admit the basic premise of her performance in this thread: that all this is meant to support a claim that the fire services are to some extent lying.

 

[Wudang]

For the record I did not say I had high moral standards, I said I have a set of ethical principles.

Do you remember where you left them?

 

[phiwum]

For the record I did not say I had high moral standards, I said I have a set of ethical principles.

I certainly won't quibble on the difference between high moral standards and high ethical principles. Indeed, I see no real difference and were there a difference, it would not be particularly relevant to my post.

 

[LondonJohn]

Your initial post, you remember, the one that started this farce, didn't query the make/model etc but suggested it was a 2014 Range Rover. Your only query was, was it an ICE or Li-Ion powered. As you've had confirmed to you that it was "a diesel-powered vehicle. To further clarify it was neither a fully electric vehicle (EV), a mild hybrid electric vehicle (MHEV) nor a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV)".




Why are you not satisfied that your initial post's query has been answered?
Why do you insist on moving the goal posts each and every time your foolish musings have been shown to you to be pathetically uninformed?
Why is this thread still alive?

Ah that opening post of Vixen's, yes.

I seem to remember that when I posted shortly thereafter that Vixen was (IMO) clearly playing the CT-ists' game of "some people are saying that...." and "some have suggested that..." etc, and that it was in effect a thinly-disguised way of her saying that those CT opinions were actually her own...

...some others said I was being harsh on Vixen, and that her post should in no way indicate that she was supporting CTs or questioning the official line on the matter.

And now, here we are................

 

[LondonJohn]

Do you remember where you left them?

 

[theprestige]

For the record I did not say I had high moral standards, I said I have a set of ethical principles.

For the record, "I did not say I had high moral standards" is not the flex you think it is.

 

[SpitfireIX]

Running an enterprise is both a science and an art.

That's "science" in the figurative sense.

The AICPA calls accountancy 'a science'. This is factual.

That doesn't make it a STEM subject, any more than the social "science" of anthropology is a STEM subject. Further, I renew a question to which you've failed to give a satisfactory answer in the past. If accounting is a real science, as you claim, then why can't people with accounting degrees become Registered Scientists or Chartered Scientists?

Further, in terms of actions, what the AICPA is trying to do is to get emerging accounting programs with heavy emphasis on information technology recognized as STEM programs. But that doesn't automatically make your 30+year-old education a technology degree, and it certainly doesn't make it a science degree.

To be honest, I am not sure why people think this has anything whatsoever to do with discussing a current affairs topic.

It has to do with your repeated attempts to Vixensplain (h/t Jay) STEM subjects to others in this thread who have actual STEM credentials and experience.

 

[LondonJohn]

It has to do with your repeated attempts to Vixensplain (h/t Jay) STEM subjects to others in this thread who have actual STEM credentials and experience.

At least it means this is one of those threads which is the gift that keeps on giving....

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Ah that opening post of Vixen's, yes.

I seem to remember that when I posted shortly thereafter that Vixen was (IMO) clearly playing the CT-ists' game of "some people are saying that...." and "some have suggested that..." etc, and that it was in effect a thinly-disguised way of her saying that those CT opinions were actually her own...

...some others said I was being harsh on Vixen, and that her post should in no way indicate that she was supporting CTs or questioning the official line on the matter.

And now, here we are................

Yes, I have to admit I was one of those naive voices, noting that Vixen had given no indication that she agreed with the conspiracy theorists. Which was, to be fair, true at the time.

And yet here we are, with Vixen insisting the fire brigade are not lying but carelessly mis-stating the facts, except it's not careless, it's deliberate, because they were ordered to do it by the Prime Minister, but it's still not lying because, umm, something something. A position no reasonable person could hold. She is of course simply messing with us, as has been fairly obvious for a long time.

 

[Andy_Ross]

I certainly won't quibble on the difference between high moral standards and high ethical principles. Indeed, I see no real difference and were there a difference, it would not be particularly relevant to my post.

These are my principles, if you don't like them I have others, as a great man once said.