The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VII

[MarkCorrigan]

No, I have never claimed to possess a world-class intelligence. I was challenging your claim I was a moron. You further claimed I was a 'coward'. But my favourite line from a hymn during schooldays was 'but for strength that we may ever, live our lives courageously' (L Whitcomb 1859) a value I have always strived to emulate. So when you call me stupid and a 'coward' I feel comforted that I am the opposite and in addition, it really has zero to do with debating the topic at hand, so yes, I would say it was ad hom, because I have never attacked yourself on a personal level. I don't need to ask anyone's permission to hold a view.

You claimed to be a triple niner, that you're 6 steps ahead, and that people disagreeing with you was due to a simonton gap, which means you think one party is so far ahead of the other in intelligence communication is difficult. I'm assuming you weren't claiming communication was difficult because you were that much stupider than us, so yes. Yes you did claim that. You claimed very explicitly that you are way smarter than everyone else here.

So stop lying about it.

ETA: Also that's still not ad hominem. You still don't understand what that term means.

 

[Vixen]

Was it though? I mean, you claim to have knowledge of how intelligence operations work and you made two utterly stupid factual errors in one sentence. Not only that, but you didn't just make that statement apropos of nothing, you were attempting to weave Putin into the pulp spy novel you were writing your claims about the Estonia and what happened to her. Your argument at the time partially rested on the "fact" that Putin was head of the KGB in 1994 despite the fact the KGB didn't exist then, he was never the head of it, and he had left the security services 3 years earlier.

Putin was Lieutenant Colonel IIRC. As of the fall of the USSR he was working as a disgruntled cab driver. Nobody in the military was getting paid so they had to take up day jobs. Putin as of the time of the MS Estonia accident was Mayor of St. Petersburg and twinned with Turku, where he exchanged visits and even had a plaque in the shape of a foot placed in the pavement outside the Maritime Museum (since removed thanks to the Ukraine aggression).

 

[Vixen]

You claimed to be a triple niner, that you're 6 steps ahead, and that people disagreeing with you was due to a simonton gap, which means you think one party is so far ahead of the other in intelligence communication is difficult. I'm assuming you weren't claiming communication was difficult because you were that much stupider than us, so yes. Yes you did claim that. You claimed very explicitly that you are way smarter than everyone else here.

So stop lying about it.

ETA: Also that's still not ad hominem. You still don't understand what that term means.

I am a triple niner.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Putin was Lieutenant Colonel IIRC. As of the fall of the USSR he was working as a disgruntled cab driver. Nobody in the military was getting paid so they had to take up day jobs. Putin as of the time of the MS Estonia accident was Mayor of St. Petersburg and twinned with Turku, where he exchanged visits and even had a plaque in the shape of a foot placed in the pavement outside the Maritime Museum (since removed thanks to the Ukraine aggression).

Meaningless slop. You've entirely sidestepped the point being made and just spouted a bunch of irrelevancies.

Deal with the point of the post, don't just spam wallpaper words in an attempt to deflect, frankly you're pathetic at it.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

I am a triple niner.

1. How is that not attempting to claim a world class intelligence?

2. I do not believe you.

3. Even if you are, why do you assume no one else could be?

4. You do realise IQ isn't really an accurate measure of anything?

5. But even so, go on. What is your IQ, and where did you find it/who verified it?

ETA: Oh and 6. Why did you not deal with the post properly? Are you incapable of having even a basic back and forth conversation? Deal with the points people raise, stop running away and trying to deflect.

 

[Vixen]

Meaningless slop. You've entirely sidestepped the point being made and just spouted a bunch of irrelevancies.

Deal with the point of the post, don't just spam wallpaper words in an attempt to deflect, frankly you're pathetic at it.

The issue was addressed at the time. My faux-pas in referring to Putin in passing as head of the KGB was soon corrected so what is the point in bringing it up over and over again as (a) no-one is disputing it was an error and (b) it was corrected straight away. Sheeesh! We'll never hear the end of it.

 

[Vixen]

1. How is that not attempting to claim a world class intelligence?

2. I do not believe you.

3. Even if you are, why do you assume no one else could be?

4. You do realise IQ isn't really an accurate measure of anything?

5. But even so, go on. What is your IQ, and where did you find it/who verified it?

ETA: Oh and 6. Why did you not deal with the post properly? Are you incapable of having even a basic back and forth conversation? Deal with the points people raise, stop running away and trying to deflect.

To answer point 3: people seem to constantly think I have picked up an opinion from 'down the pub' as if I haven't carefully considered it. The argument runs aong the lines, who do you think you are showing any interest in the sinking of the Estonia? A poster even announced they are just here 'to take the piss' out of one. I am at a loss to understand why anyone would express this view, hence there would appear to be a Simonton gap. You are welcome to start a thread on the other points.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

To answer point 3: people seem to constantly think I have picked up an opinion from 'down the pub' as if I haven't carefully considered it. The argument runs aong the lines, who do you think you are showing any interest in the sinking of the Estonia? A poster even announced they are just here 'to take the piss' out of one. I am at a loss to understand why anyone would express this view, hence there would appear to be a Simonton gap. You are welcome to start a thread on the other points.

Well done, that doesn't even remotely attempt to answer the question that you're claiming it does, it ignores everything else in the post and it lies.

No one has claimed that you should not show interest in the Estonia. No one. Quote someone, anyone saying anything close to "who do you think you are showing any interest in the sinking of the Estonia". Go on.

Oh and "I am at a loss to understand why anyone would express this view, hence there would appear to be a Simonton gap" That isn't what a Simonton gap is. You've explicitly claimed that you believe yourself to be smarter than everyone else here. Explicitly.

 

[Steve]

Well done, that doesn't even remotely attempt to answer the question that you're claiming it does, it ignores everything else in the post and it lies.

No one has claimed that you should not show interest in the Estonia. No one. Quote someone, anyone saying anything close to "who do you think you are showing any interest in the sinking of the Estonia". Go on.
Oh and "I am at a loss to understand why anyone would express this view, hence there would appear to be a Simonton gap" That isn't what a Simonton gap is. You've explicitly claimed that you believe yourself to be smarter than everyone else here. Explicitly.

In fact Vixen is the only poster in this thread accusing other posters, myself included, of having no interest in the sinking.

 

[zooterkin]

The issue was addressed at the time. My faux-pas in referring to Putin in passing as head of the KGB was soon corrected so what is the point in bringing it up over and over again as (a) no-one is disputing it was an error and (b) it was corrected straight away. Sheeesh! We'll never hear the end of it.

It's worth bringing up because it's yet another example of your blatant disregard for facts, and willingness to build a conspiracy theory on verifiable untruths.

If you're prepared to make such statements, without a shred of evidence to support them, why should we pay attention to anything you post?

Do you recall posting the following? Do you not feel any shame at posting baseless nonsense?

I never make anything up. All of my comments are sourced, unless I state 'IMV'.


...

 

[Vixen]

It's worth bringing up because it's yet another example of your blatant disregard for facts, and willingness to build a conspiracy theory on verifiable untruths.

If you're prepared to make such statements, without a shred of evidence to support them, why should we pay attention to anything you post?

Do you recall posting the following? Do you not feel any shame at posting baseless nonsense?

It wasn't made up it was a straight forward error. Or are you going to claim you never err ever.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

It wasn't made up it was a straight forward error. Or are you going to claim you never err ever.

How was it a simple error? There were 3 things wrong in the same sentence.

If you had said "Putin was in the security services at the time of the Estonia" that would be an error, he left 3 years earlier.

If you had said that the KGB was investigating the Estonia sinking, that would be an error, you could even claim that you forgot that the Russian security services wasn't called the KGB anymore.

You instead made 3 erroneous claims in one sentence, which was meant to shore up one of your conspiratorial arguments about the Estonia, and that it was only one in a repeated pattern of you making things up out of whole cloth and stating them as if they were facts.

This is the problem Vixen, it isn't that you made a mistake. It isn't even that you made 3 mistakes in one sentence. It isn't even that you tried to pass off your nonsense sentence as true that one time.

It's that you repeatedly simply declare things that are not true to be fact and usually double down on them when your "error" is pointed out.


There's an entire thread based around your lies regarding the prime notation of time, wherein you not only repeat your original "error" as if it were true, you even attempt to gaslight everyone else by making up the lie that the people who corrected your wrongheaded idea of prime notions had never heard of the concept of prime notations for time.

You routinely say things that aren't true and then attempt to gaslight, weasel and grift a way for you to have not been catastrophically wrong in the first place.

Worse, you then continue to attempt to make claims based on the supposed knowledge you have in these areas directly after and sometimes in the middle of you making critical errors of fact.

The problem is not that you said something that it turned out wasn't true, it's that this is so frequent and egregious with you that you even attempt to lie about what was said in the first place.

ETA: In the last couple of pages alone, you claimed Cheney was the owner of Haliburton at the time of the sinking, then attempted to handwave past the fact this wasn't true, then attempted to insinuate...something about the timing of him becoming the CEO after the fact.

 

[Vixen]

Well done, that doesn't even remotely attempt to answer the question that you're claiming it does, it ignores everything else in the post and it lies.

No one has claimed that you should not show interest in the Estonia. No one. Quote someone, anyone saying anything close to "who do you think you are showing any interest in the sinking of the Estonia". Go on.

Oh and "I am at a loss to understand why anyone would express this view, hence there would appear to be a Simonton gap" That isn't what a Simonton gap is. You've explicitly claimed that you believe yourself to be smarter than everyone else here. Explicitly.

Well, for a start the people claiming you have to be a licensed engineer to comment on the accident. But AFIAC it is a news item and one doesn't have to have special knowledge to follow it.

 

[Vixen]

How was it a simple error? There were 3 things wrong in the same sentence.

If you had said "Putin was in the security services at the time of the Estonia" that would be an error, he left 3 years earlier.

If you had said that the KGB was investigating the Estonia sinking, that would be an error, you could even claim that you forgot that the Russian security services wasn't called the KGB anymore.

You instead made 3 erroneous claims in one sentence, which was meant to shore up one of your conspiratorial arguments about the Estonia, and that it was only one in a repeated pattern of you making things up out of whole cloth and stating them as if they were facts.

This is the problem Vixen, it isn't that you made a mistake. It isn't even that you made 3 mistakes in one sentence. It isn't even that you tried to pass off your nonsense sentence as true that one time.

It's that you repeatedly simply declare things that are not true to be fact and usually double down on them when your "error" is pointed out.


There's an entire thread based around your lies regarding the prime notation of time, wherein you not only repeat your original "error" as if it were true, you even attempt to gaslight everyone else by making up the lie that the people who corrected your wrongheaded idea of prime notions had never heard of the concept of prime notations for time.

You routinely say things that aren't true and then attempt to gaslight, weasel and grift a way for you to have not been catastrophically wrong in the first place.

Worse, you then continue to attempt to make claims based on the supposed knowledge you have in these areas directly after and sometimes in the middle of you making critical errors of fact.

The problem is not that you said something that it turned out wasn't true, it's that this is so frequent and egregious with you that you even attempt to lie about what was said in the first place.

ETA: In the last couple of pages alone, you claimed Cheney was the owner of Haliburton at the time of the sinking, then attempted to handwave past the fact this wasn't true, then attempted to insinuate...something about the timing of him becoming the CEO after the fact.

Not being funny, but I have never been interested in this 'small stuff'.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Well, for a start the people claiming you have to be a licensed engineer to comment on the accident.

Quote anyone saying this.

Go on, do it. Finally put your money where your mouth is and stop running away from your own claims.

Quote anyone saying that.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Not being funny, but I have never been interested in this 'small stuff'.

It isn't small stuff. Stop attempting to weasel out of the fact that you're a habitual liar.

ETA: Actually what are you attempting to handwave away as "small stuff"?

 

[Vixen]

It isn't small stuff. Stop attempting to weasel out of the fact that you're a habitual liar.

ETA: Actually what are you attempting to handwave away as "small stuff"?

You keep falsely accusing me of wrongdoing. AFAIAC any errors are simply errors in good faith of the type everybody makes now and then. It's like claiming a typo is a sign of terrible wrongdoing. I haven't committed any wrongdoing whatsoever.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

You keep falsely accusing me of wrongdoing. AFAIAC any errors are simply errors in good faith of the type everybody makes now and then. It's like claiming a typo is a sign of terrible wrongdoing. I haven't committed any wrongdoing whatsoever.

So why do you keep lying about what other people have said?

For example you claimed that

Well, for a start the people claiming you have to be a licensed engineer to comment on the accident. But AFIAC it is a news item and one doesn't have to have special knowledge to follow it.

Which is a lie. No one has said that.

Why are you lying about what other people have said? Wouldn't you consider that "wrongdoing"?

Also attempting to claim your errors are simply good faith errors falls flat on it's face when you double down on the errors, then attempt (poorly) to gaslight everyone into thinking no error was committed.


You are a habitual liar.

You have routinely attempted to dishonestly portray arguments people have made. For example, when we discovered that the source for some of your inane twaddle was noted crank, fellow habitual liar and con artist Anders Bjorkman, you first attempted to claim he was an expert. When we correctly pointed out his claims of expertise were self aggrandizing lies he tells to gull people into thinking he's an expert, you tried, repeatedly, to claim that our disagreement with your using him as a source was some kind of personality conflict. This was as obvious an attempt at gaslighting as I've ever seen, and yet you continued to claim that it was "a personality thing" when we pointed out that his lack of physics knowledge, the thing you were relying on him for, led him to claim that nuclear weapons were impossible.

No Vixen, it isn't a "personality thing" to point out that the person you're relying on for your argument is so delusional about the thing you're claiming he is an expert in that he denies basic reality.

 

[SpitfireIX]

The problem with the JAIC report is the number of unanswered questions.

You can count the number of accident inquiries that answered all the questions on one hand.

As I observed in the Amanda Knox thread, Vixen practices the Yes, Minister strategy for discrediting unwelcome reports.

Humphrey: Say it leaves important questions unanswered, the evidence is inconclusive, the figures are open to other interpretations, that certain findings are contradictory, and that some of the main conclusions have been questioned.​

​

Hacker: Suppose they haven't?​

​

Humphrey: Then question them! Then they have!​

​

Hacker: But you'd have to go through it with a fine-toothed comb.​

​

Humphrey: No, no. no. You'd say all those things without reading it. There's always some questions unanswered.​

​

Hacker: Such as?​

​

Humphrey: The ones that weren't asked.​

​

 

[JayUtah]

No, I have never claimed to possess a world-class intelligence.

You claim to be a triple-niner, a claim you have lately renewed. You also claimed your critics had "low comprehension" or similar words to that effect.

I do admit I have trouble comprehending your posts in dark mode when you change the color to something very near black.

I was challenging your claim I was a moron.

I made no such claim. You're not smart enough to conduct a forensic engineering examination or to comment knowledgeably on those completed by others. That's something I'm competent to judge. It's nothing you should feel ashamed of, as quite a number of good people in the world similarly fail to qualify. However, you should understand that if you attempt to do something you're evidently not qualified to so, someone will properly object.

You further claimed I was a 'coward'.

And I explained exactly what behavior on you part leads me to that conclusion. You refuse to allow others to apply the same standard of proof to your claims as you do to those of others. You avoid that standard of proof by denying that you're making any sort of claim, when in fact you've spent hundreds of pages making them.

But my favourite line from a hymn during schooldays...

I don't care about your days at school, except perhaps insofar as to determine how they failed to prepare you for what you're now trying to do.

I would say it was ad hom,

Then report the post for moderation. Do not keep using it as a rhetorical diversion.

because I have never attacked yourself on a personal level.

You accused me out of the blue of being sexist toward you on at least two occasions. There are other examples.

I don't need to ask anyone's permission to hold a view.

And we don't need yours or anyone else's permission to show your view to be ignorant.