• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part V

Status
Not open for further replies.
JesseCuster said:
What's your evidence for that?

Bonus points for actually answering the question and providing actual evidence for the Atlantic lock being added as "an accessory".

Points taken away for a thought experiment involving rubber ducks or pieces of paper or the likes.
Click to expand...

Her evidence is that when you pin a piece of paper on wall, you can remove the lowermost pin and the paper doesn't fall.

That's it.

And I'm not joking.
 
Marras said:
You have the level of physics that you think that suspending a piece of paper on wall is an accurate simulation of physics of a ferry's bow visor.
Click to expand...
And her argument is that because you can stick pins in a piece of paper on a wall and it behaves a certain way, she can conclude the reasons for the use of the Atlantic lock was that it was just an accessory to make people feel safe, absent any actual evidence of the hows and whys of the actual design and implementation of the actual lock used on the Estonia. (edit: already mentioned in post above) (edit2: how is the Atlantic lock meant to make passengers feel safe when no-one actually on a passenger ship knows about the existence of Atlantic locks or anything about the locks used on bow doors?)

This is the level of argument we're dealing with here.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
You don't know what level of physics I have.
Click to expand...


But we can get a pretty good idea from what you’ve posted in this thread.

Just because you are dependent on what you learnt as a kid, it doesn't mean others do not carry on learning throughout life.
Click to expand...


Again, the evidence presented in this thread gives us a reasonable idea of your capacity to carry on learning.
 
Mojo said:
Is this an attempt at the 20 points for item 23?
Click to expand...

You are the one claiming that disappearances and sabotage do not happen and must be a 'conspiracy theory'.

The Estonia disaster did happen. It was not caused by a 'strong wave'.

An estimated 852 people lost their lives - including young adults, little children and babies - many of whom will have suffered extreme psychological distress, pain and suffering, broken bones and suffocation from drowning.

Writing it all off as 'a conspiracy theory' to even point out established facts surrounding the incident is your fiction.
 
Vixen said:
You are the one claiming that disappearances and sabotage do not happen and must be a 'conspiracy theory'.

The Estonia disaster did happen. It was not caused by a 'strong wave'.

An estimated 852 people lost their lives - including young adults, little children and babies - many of whom will have suffered extreme psychological distress, pain and suffering, broken bones and suffocation from drowning.

Writing it all off as 'a conspiracy theory' to even point out established facts surrounding the incident is your fiction.
Click to expand...

We know the ship sank. There were many things that contributed to the sinking.
Your claims of sabotage and forced disappearances of the crew make it a conspiracy theory.
 
Last edited:
Captain_Swoop said:
We know the ship sank. There were many things that contributed to the sinking.
Your claims of sabotage and forced disappearances of the crew make it a conspiracy theory.
Click to expand...

So by that criterion, you believe people who disputed the Hillsborough Report were 'conspiracy theorists'?

'Do you really think you'll go to hell for having loved thought?' ~ Rufus Wainwright [with apologies]
 
Vixen said:
So by that criterion, you believe people who disputed the Hillsborough Report were 'conspiracy theorists'?

'Do you really think you'll go to hell for having loved thought?' ~ Rufus Wainwright [with apologies]
Click to expand...

No, those that disputed the Hillsborough report did so with evidence and facts.
 
Vixen said:
2. You don't know what level of physics I have.
Click to expand...

Yes, we do.

Vixen said:
I had to do five years of it.
Click to expand...

Vixen said:
From the start of the First Form to the end of the Fifth Form. Can't remember about the calculus in Physics but we certainly had to do it for Maths.
Click to expand...

Plus what you've said in this thread, which suggests that you've forgotten much of whatever you did learn in those five years.
 
Vixen said:
Here you go:

https://www.bauhaus.fi/halkaisusementti-rakennuskemia-5-kg.html
Click to expand...

:dl:

Ethanadynamite. A safe material for breaking and excavating rock and concrete structures. Suitable for breaking stones and rock, splitting concrete and reinforced concrete structures such as piers and plinth structures. Swells in a slowly drilled hole.
Click to expand...

Is that what you think dynamite does?


(I assume the automatic translation should have been "Swells slowly in a drilled hole")
 
Last edited:
Captain_Swoop said:
Is this a joke?

Rock Splitting Mortar is not an explosive. it is cement, it expands as it cures.
Click to expand...

zooterkin said:
:dl:



Is that what you think dynamite does?


(I assume the automatic translation should have been "Swells slowly in a drilled hole")
Click to expand...

Works equally well on steel ferry doors! The trick is timing it so it completes the expansion at midnight in stormy seas. And the sound of it working can easily be confused with an explosion.
 
Vixen said:
It is best to explain complex things in simple language, no?
Click to expand...

That you still think that hanging a paper on a wall is accurate-enough simulation of physics of a ferry's bow visor tells us exactly what your level of physics is.
 
Marras said:
That you still think that hanging a paper on a wall is accurate-enough simulation of physics of a ferry's bow visor tells us exactly what your level of physics is.
Click to expand...

I was trying to show that the main tension in the bow visor is borne by the side locks, not the Atlantic lock, and indeed, Dr-Ing Hans Hoffmeister found that the weakest link would have been the starboard side lock, then the port, with the Atlantic lock last of all.

As the JAIC has the latter first causing the other two to simultaneously detach also, then one has to wonder whether the theory that the bow visor was raising and falling and banging the forepeak deck has to be questioned.
 
Vixen said:
I was trying to show that the main tension in the bow visor is borne by the side locks, not the Atlantic lock, and indeed, Dr-Ing Hans Hoffmeister found that the weakest link would have been the starboard side lock, then the port, with the Atlantic lock last of all..
Click to expand...

Have you still not realized that the visor was not hanging from the side locks?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom