The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VII

Vixen said:
Because EHocking said he was a coastguard and seemed to know a lot about shipping and shipping conditions, I assumed he would understand that S=14 doesn't mean it never did S=18. He made a big issue out of it because I believe he was being obtuse and knew perfectly well what I meant by wind speed 24/25m/s and 18 knots, max. He didn't want to admit that I did not convert the m/s into knots (for Andy Ross who doesn't need an explanation) because he was either too timid to conform the poster who claimed I converted it was wrong or he thought it would be fun to cause a huge uproar that he couldn't see a figure that said S=18.
Click to expand...
No, you're lying again. You very explicitly said that the figure of 15-18 knots was on the diagram. Are you now claiming you never said that?
 
Vixen said:
I concurred the JAIC diagram only showed one speed as of the point the bow visor fell off.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant. You were asked for your source for the claim of 18 knots as in the range 15-18 knots. You said it was on the diagram. It is not. You said it could be derived from data on the diagram. It cannot. The rest is just ham-fisted gaslighting.

Vixen said:
Now I don't care if people think I am stupid, that is their prerogative but I do object to being falsely accused of having done something I did not do, just to save the face of another poster.
Click to expand...
You seem to have a gripe with another member. I cannot help you with that.

You have no source for your 18 knots claim or your 15-18 knots statement. Just say, “Oops my mistake, it’s not in the diagram” and apologize to all the people who were correct in telling you that. When you insist upon these increasingly desperate and increasingly comical ploys to prove you were still somehow right, you invite continued criticism.
 
MarkCorrigan said:
So explain it again or point to the exact post in which you explained it. You made a very specific claim that certain numbers appeared on a document. Are you now claiming you did no such thing?
Click to expand...
That has been explained. For example, suppose I write 2 + 2 = 5. I then explain it was an error. End of. Right? So why is the fact the JAIC diagram didn't have S=18 but did show S =14 the major issue instead of the blatant lie by another poster who falsely claimed I converted m/s into knots. People daren't tell him he was wrong so they have to pretend the fault is all mine because EHocking 'couldn't see S=18 on a diagram'.
 
JayUtah said:
Irrelevant. You were asked for your source for the claim of 18 knots as in the range 15-18 knots. You said it was on the diagram. It is not. You said it could be derived from data on the diagram. It cannot. The rest is just ham-fisted gaslighting.


You seem to have a gripe with another member. I cannot help you with that.

You have no source for your 18 knots claim or your 15-18 knots statement. Just say, “Oops my mistake, it’s not in the diagram” and apologize to all the people who were correct in telling you that. When you insist upon these increasingly desperate and increasingly comical ploys to prove you were still somehow right, you invite continued criticism.
Click to expand...

The 15 - 18 knots claim is right. I am right.


Between 2215 and 2245 hrs (approximate) the ESTONIA was plotted by a meeting vessel, the AMBER and according to Amber's plot, the speed was then about 18.5 knots. The speed of the SILJA EUROPA was at this point 18.8 knots and further decreased to 17.6 knots between Russarö lighthouse and the Apollo buoy. After passing Osmussaar lighthouse the ESTONIA lost her land shelter and the sea conditions deteriorated. Based on experience it is believed that the sea conditions were slightly worse in the area where the SILJA EUROPA was sailing. At about 2255 hrs the Apollo buoy was abeam and the ESTONIA's speed is estimated to have been close to 17 knots. The ESTONIA passed the Glotov buoy at about 2355 hrs and, by comparing with the SILJA EUROPA, it can be assumed that her speed was now about 15 knots. This estimate is also confirmed by the trainee second officer, who has stated that the speed was between 14 and 15 knots, as well as by the third engineer who has stated that the speed was 15 knots when he started his watch in the engine control room at midnight. During the first thirty minutes after midnight the average speed of the SILJA EUROPA dropped by about one knot. When the ESTONIA reached the waypoint at 59° 20 N, 22° 00 E between 0025 and 0030 hrs, her true course was changed from 262 to 287 and the stabilisers were extended. Her average speed was between 14 and 15 knots."

Bahnhof Fact Group
 
Vixen said:
That has been explained. For example, suppose I write 2 + 2 = 5. I then explain it was an error. End of. Right? So why is the fact the JAIC diagram didn't have S=18 but did show S =14 the major issue instead of the blatant lie by another poster who falsely claimed I converted m/s into knots. People daren't tell him he was wrong so they have to pretend the fault is all mine because EHocking 'couldn't see S=18 on a diagram'.
Click to expand...
No no, I told you I don't care about the claim you wrongly converted something. Stop attempting to deflect.

Did you or did you not say that the 15-18 knots figure was on the diagram, yes or no?
 
MarkCorrigan said:
You're lying again Vixen. At no point did Junkshop claim you had any reprehensible characteristics, or are you going to attempt to imply he was being racist again?
Click to expand...
To be fair, at this point I'm pretty sure I have criticised and/or called out stuff Vixen has done that could be considered reprehensible characteristics. The lying, for instance. There is a lot of lying. More than enough for me to be comfortable with saying that Vixen is a liar. That is something that could be considered a 'reprehensible characteristic'. It is also a thing that is demonstrably true.
 
Vixen said:
That is not my position at all. My position is that people are using the fact the JAIC didn't show that figure on their diagram to falsely claim I converted m/s into knots when I did nothing of the kind.
Click to expand...
One person hypothesized that. You’ll have to take that up with him.

Everyone else noticed that you said your source said something it patently does not. You won’t back down, so they’re properly holding your feet to the fire. All you can manage there is a whole bunch of frantic numerology.
 
Last edited:
MarkCorrigan said:
Even if we take as read that you did not do such a conversion, you still explicitly claimed that the diagram showed 15-18 knots. It's there in black and white, your own words.

So explain the fact that you stated it and yet it does not show any such thing. No, I don't want you bleating about the "conversion" because I've taken as read that you are right on that matter. I do not care for the purposes of this argument what enyone claimed you did nor am I entertaining any such claims as accurate. I am only interested in two things.

Does that diagram show 15-18 knots, and did you claim it did so.
Click to expand...
I assumed the poster would use his powers of deduction. He initially tried to claim the 18 m/s meant something else so he wasn't acting in good faith IMV.
 
Vixen said:
I have never said he was racist. I was pointing out that certain adjectives have connotations best avoided..
Click to expand...
Do you understand the word imply? Why do you always seem to ignore that word?

You have implied that he was racist by asking if his use of the word, which was clearing describing your argument and not you by the way, was some accusation of being foreign.

You have indeed never SAID he was racist, but I have never claimed that you did say he was racist. I claim, correctly, that you implied it.
 
Vixen said:
I assumed the poster would use his powers of deduction. He initially tried to claim the 18 m/s meant something else so he wasn't acting in good faith IMV.
Click to expand...
Again, does not address my questions and explicitly attempts to deflect into something I said in the post you quoted I am not asking about nor do I care about.

Did you or did you not claim that the diagram says 15-18 knots? It's a yes or no question Vixen. If your next response is not either Yes or No, or alternatively a quote of a post you made with a yes or no, I will simply ask the question again and again until you answer the simple yes or no question I am asking.
 
JayUtah said:
One person hypothesized that.

Everyone else noticed that you said your source said something it patently does not. You won’t back down, so they’re properly holding your feet to the fire. All you can manage there is a whole bunch of frantic numerology.
Click to expand...
Ihave said several dozen times now the JIAC diagram doesn't show the figure S=18 but it clearly did have a table shoing what the various legends meant including wind speed, direction and Speed. I believe the poster was being disingenuous when he started his campaign about being outraged JAIC didn't include that in their diagram because he was determined to claim I converted m/s into knots rather than accept the other poster was wrong about my being 'out be a factor of 2', when I was nothing of the sort.
 
MarkCorrigan said:
Again, does not address my questions and explicitly attempts to deflect into something I said in the post you quoted I am not asking about nor do I care about.

Did you or did you not claim that the diagram says 15-18 knots? It's a yes or no question Vixen. If your next response is not either Yes or No, or alternatively a quote of a post you made with a yes or no, I will simply ask the question again and again until you answer the simple yes or no question I am asking.
Click to expand...
That is not the issue here. The issue here is the blatant lie I converted m/s into knots, proving I am a moron. It is a complete red herring that JAIC didn't show 24/25 m/s and 18 knots. He wasn't confused, he's a coastguard.
 
JayUtah said:
It was not on the diagram as you claimed.
Click to expand...
That was all accepted a long time ago. The issue here is the false narrative that I converted m/s into knots, yet the person who made that false claim hasn't once been called out for it and today we had catsmate claiming I was 'out by a factor of 2'. This is what I am referring to. The JAIC diagram -which I kindly provided - doesn't cancel out the false claim by the original poster. As long as it is clear I did not convert m/s into knots and that poster is the person who is in the wrong and not me.
 
Vixen said:
I assumed the poster would use his powers of deduction.
Click to expand...
He did. You just don’t like what he deduced, and you can take it up with him.

None of that is connected to the increasingly shrill, “typo”-filled rants to the effect that your 18 knot figure is somehow still indicated in the diagram if only you were to squint properly at what’s actually there.
 
MarkCorrigan said:
Again, does not address my questions and explicitly attempts to deflect into something I said in the post you quoted I am not asking about nor do I care about.

Did you or did you not claim that the diagram says 15-18 knots? It's a yes or no question Vixen. If your next response is not either Yes or No, or alternatively a quote of a post you made with a yes or no, I will simply ask the question again and again until you answer the simple yes or no question I am asking.
Click to expand...
I said the diagram clearly shows the speed the vessel was progressing. Your statement above sounds like the school bully saying 'You ripped my shirt when I beat you up so you are the person in the wrong. Did you or did you not rip my shirt? Yes or no?'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom