The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VII

[Vixen]

Why did you type it wrong twice? Why did the two versions of that sentence differ in "...layered effect [as in 'laminated')" and mismatch the bracketing differently? Are you having trouble copypasting text from pictures?

What pictures? I had to copy the said text - provided by YOU - onto a word doc to formulate my thoughts. I then did typo corrections before posting which I didn't transfer to my doc. Is that okay?

 

[Vixen]

No, "pearlite" and "perlite" are both correctly spelled English words, but they refer to different things. What is "perlite?"

Perlite is glassy substance usually connected with volcanoes. It is obviously a mistranslation form the original German. Why do people spend so much time staring at obvious typos.

 

[JayUtah]

Perlite is glassy substance usually connected with volcanoes. It is obviously a mistranslation form the original German. Why do people spend so much time staring at obvious typos.

So you agree that "perlite" has absolutely nothing to do with metallurgy? And no, it's not a "typo." It's a completely different word with a different meaning. Why don't you go have a nice long hot sauna and think hard about this mistake.

 

[Vixen]

I get it now, no-one's interested in the Brandenburg Report, people just want to make a big gotcha out of Anér's (or Brandenburg's) English translation from German of 'pearlite'. Given one's a Swede and the other's a German, surely this really isn't worth pages upon pages of an AH-HAH! moment?

 

[JayUtah]

What pictures? I had to copy the said text - provided by YOU...

No, nothing I provided to you contains either the word "lamina" or "laminia." Last time you had problems with spelling and punctuation like this, you were copypasting from a raster PDF.

 

[Vixen]

So you agree that "perlite" has absolutely nothing to do with metallurgy? And no, it's not a "typo." It's a completely different word with a different meaning. Why don't you go have a nice long hot sauna and think hard about this mistake.

For goodness sake, typos happen, even with publishing houses with teams of proofreaders. I spot them all the time. She-eesh!

 

[Vixen]

No, nothing I provided to you contains either the word "lamina" or "laminia." Last time you had problems with spelling and punctuation like this, you were copypasting from a raster PDF.

I have higher things to think about than poxy spelling mistakes.

 

[junkshop]

For what it's worth, my opinion is that Jay's point is very much proven.

Insert your gif of choice from the following selection:

Deadhorse Lol GIF - Deadhorse Lol - Discover & Share GIFs

Click to view the GIF

tenor.com

The Simpsons Stop GIF - The Simpsons Stop Hes Already Dead - Discover & Share GIFs

Click to view the GIF

tenor.com

 

[Steve]

For what it's worth, my opinion is that Jay's point is very much proven.

Insert your gif of choice from the following selection:

Deadhorse Lol GIF - Deadhorse Lol - Discover & Share GIFs

Click to view the GIF

tenor.com

The Simpsons Stop GIF - The Simpsons Stop Hes Already Dead - Discover & Share GIFs

Click to view the GIF

tenor.com

Of course it is proven. Vixen has no understanding of the paragraph in question and she has proven this with her non-answers and poorly attempted misdirections. Just as she has shown with her lack of understanding of so many aspects of the Estonia sinking.

 

[JayUtah]

I get it now, no-one's interested in the Brandenburg Report, people just want to make a big gotcha out of Anér's (or Brandenburg's) English translation from German of 'pearlite'.

We're very interested in the Brandeburg report—so much so that we're willing to discuss it in detail. As you noted, scientific reports contain words that often have precise meanings, and often very particular off-brand meanings that must be carefully preserved.

I'm fortunate enough that one of my principal engineers was born, raised, and educated in Köln. He has lived in the U.S. for about twenty years, so he also speaks excellent English. Although he deals mostly in plastics, he is quite acquainted with metallurgy as it is practiced and written about in Germany. The German word Perlit means both pearlite and perlite. Just as you have to know how an EPIRB works in order to know how to correctly translate viritys as "arm" and not "tune," you have to know from context which way to translate Perlit. Luckily, perlite is utterly irrelevant to metallurgy, so if you're translating a metallurgy report you know that pearlite is always the right word.

That is, if you know anything about metallurgy.

It's not just "poxy spelling." The translator doesn't know which word to use because the translator is unfamiliar with the subject matter. And so are you, which is why you think it's just a typo. What about words like "panel-shaped" and "in volume?" What about the awkward English constructions like, "These processes show in surface-near areas comparable effects?" What about the sentence that says we have to exclude explosive effects and then goes on to try to draw that very comparison?

I picked that paragraph because it's exemplary of the errors and gibberish you have to walk through in order to read the report. No, "panel-shaped" doesn't mean anything in metallurgy. Nor does "in volume." Because I know metallurgy, I can confidently identify the gibberish. But because you don't, you can't—you have to coyly pretend that it might mean something just in case.

So who translated the report, Vixen? Was it Rabe? Was it Anér? It's clearly someone with a poor grasp of English and an even poorer grasp of metallurgy. Tell us why we should trust that this report was accurately translated?

 

[Vixen]

Update from the German Group of Experts:

The Estonia sank after a collision. That is the conclusion of a nearly 200-page scientific investigation from the Baltic Marine Technical Investigation Group (BMTIG) released today.​

The conclusions are based on energy calculations of forces, moments and stopping distances, but also on so-called ROV inspections, i.e. investigations with a remotely operated underwater camera, which in 2021 were led by Margus Kurm, former state prosecutor in Estonia and chairman of the Estonian government's investigation into the disaster during the years 2005–2009. These films have not previously been available to the Swedish public.

The conclusions are presented in ten technical sub-studies of Estonia's movements, damage and energy absorption from the time the ship capsized until she reached the bottom. https://www.varldenidag.se/nyheter/...ollision-orsakade-estonias-foerlisning/896200

<snip>

– No matter how much rock there is in the area, the energy is not enough to cause the damage at the holes, says Johan Ridderstolpe, lead author of the report and former head of the navy's construction department and technical manager at Muskö naval shipyard, to Världen idag.

– The injuries must have resulted from a collision, which is also supported by the majority of testimonies from survivors, he adds.

 

[JayUtah]

Update from the German Group of Experts:

Oh, look! A squirrel!

 

[Vixen]

We're very interested in the Brandeburg report—so much so that we're willing to discuss it in detail. As you noted, scientific reports contain words that often have precise meanings, and often very particular off-brand meanings that must be carefully preserved.

I'm fortunate enough that one of my principal engineers was born, raised, and educated in Köln. He has lived in the U.S. for about twenty years, so he also speaks excellent English. Although he deals mostly in plastics, he is quite acquainted with metallurgy as it is practiced and written about in Germany. The German word Perlit means both pearlite and perlite. Just as you have to know how an EPIRB works in order to know how to correctly translate viritys as "arm" and not "tune," you have to know from context which way to translate Perlit. Luckily, perlite is utterly irrelevant to metallurgy, so if you're translating a metallurgy report you know that pearlite is always the right word.

That is, if you know anything about metallurgy.

It's not just "poxy spelling." The translator doesn't know which word to use because the translator is unfamiliar with the subject matter. And so are you, which is why you think it's just a typo. What about words like "panel-shaped" and "in volume?" What about the awkward English constructions like, "These processes show in surface-near areas comparable effects?" What about the sentence that says we have to exclude explosive effects and then goes on to try to draw that very comparison?

I picked that paragraph because it's exemplary of the errors and gibberish you have to walk through in order to read the report. No, "panel-shaped" doesn't mean anything in metallurgy. Nor does "in volume." Because I know metallurgy, I can confidently identify the gibberish. But because you don't, you can't—you have to coyly pretend that it might mean something just in case.

So who translated the report, Vixen? Was it Rabe? Was it Anér? It's clearly someone with a poor grasp of English and an even poorer grasp of metallurgy. Tell us why we should trust that this report was accurately translated?

This happens. I dare say someone was trying hard to translate it into layman's terms and simply didn't spot the technical error. A friend who has a PhD in Chemistry worked as a proofreader for a scientific publisher of reports. They are only human and make mistakes.

 

[Vixen]

Oh, look! A squirrel!

This is Magnus Kurm's report from his 2021 expedition. You can scoff but this is a party with a direct interest in the matter,

 

[Vixen]

So this is how the ship sank, according to the Germans/Estonians:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1998801453146882223

 

[W.D.Clinger]

Perlite is glassy substance usually connected with volcanoes. It is obviously a mistranslation form the original German. Why do people spend so much time staring at obvious typos.

So you agree that "perlite" has absolutely nothing to do with metallurgy? And no, it's not a "typo." It's a completely different word with a different meaning. Why don't you go have a nice long hot sauna and think hard about this mistake.

For goodness sake, typos happen, even with publishing houses with teams of proofreaders. I spot them all the time. She-eesh!

I have higher things to think about than poxy spelling mistakes.

With the above, @Vixen has proved beyond all doubt that she does not understand the difference between perlite and pearlite. She thinks the report's references to perlite were typos or mistranslations, and that the report's original German must have been talking about pearlite.

This happens. I dare say someone was trying hard to translate it into layman's terms and simply didn't spot the technical error. A friend who has a PhD in Chemistry worked as a proofreader for a scientific publisher of reports. They are only human and make mistakes.

Some humans make more mistakes than other humans. A few humans are really, really good at making mistakes.

That is what's going on here.

 

[Vixen]

With the above, @Vixen has proved beyond all doubt that she does not understand the difference between perlite and pearlite. She thinks the report's references to perlite were typos or mistranslations, and that the report's original German must have been talking about pearlite.


Some humans make more mistakes than other humans. A few humans are really, really good at making mistakes.

That is what's going on here.

We really are going to have nine pages about perlite now, aren't we?

 

[JayUtah]

This happens. I dare say someone was trying hard to translate it into layman's terms and simply didn't spot the technical error.

No.

"Perlite" is not a layman's terms translation of Perlit meaning pearlite. It's the wrong word. And why would a layman's translation of a highly technical report have any evidentiary value? You told us your knowledge of the precise details gave you the advantage.

Who translated the report, Vixen? Do you know?

This is Magnus Kurm's report from his 2021 expedition. You can scoff but this is a party with a direct interest in the matter,

I'm scoffing at you, not Kurm. We'll deal with him when we're finished with the Brandenburg report. I just noticed that you brought up EPIRBs again when you were looking for something to distract from your failure to understand the SwRI report. And now that you are failing to understand the Brandenburg report, just like clockwork you bring up some new subject.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

We really are going to have nine pages about perlite now, aren't we?

On 3 December 2025, @Vixen herself used the word "perlite", which she attributed to "Brandenburg and Clausthal -Zellerfeld".

She must have forgotten about that. Just as she has forgotten about her 13 12 subsequent references to perlite before I remarked upon her confusion between perlite and pearlite.

That's one of the problems with having a very poor memory. You forget about things like that.

I will be editing this message to quote from @Vixen's 14 13 (ETA: sorry, I miscounted) posts that referenced perlite before I remarked upon her confusion.

3 Dec 2025:

As you know, the. Brandenburg and Clausthal -Zellerfeld, from calculating hardness values (HV), found those samples nearer the damaged areas had higher HVs, plus the appearance of 'twinning and perlite carmelisations compatible with an explosion.

Earlier today, @Vixen quoted @JayUtah quoting the Brandenburg report's reference to perlite, as it appears on page 195 of Sven Anér's book:

The in volume panel-shaped iron carbide parts of the perlite are unable to resist the strong micro processes.

@Vixen then quoted the same reference to perlite, but added asterisks that direct readers to her own definition of perlite, which she spelled as pearlite :

The in volume panel-shaped iron carbide* parts of the perlite ** are unable to resist the strong micro processes.

**Pearlite is a two-phased, lamellar (or layered) structure composed of alternating layers of ferrite (87.5 wt%) and cementite (12.5 wt%) that occurs in some steels and cast irons.

That is a correct definition of pearlite . It is not a correct definition of perlite. It is obvious that @Vixen was confusing perlite with pearlite.

When @JayUtah asked

What is "perlite?"

@Vixen quoted @JayUtah's question but ignored it, responding as follows:

It is NOT AI produced. Stop falsely accusing me of wrongdoing. See picture no. 21 (Bild 21) to see what these voluminous panel-shaped parts look like.

When @JayUtah repeated his question, @Vixen responded with the same definition of pearlite she had given previously:

Pearlite is a two-phased, lamellar (or layered) structure composed of alternating layers of ferrite (87.5 wt%) and cementite (12.5 wt%) that occurs in some steels and cast irons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearlite

@Vixen was asked yet again:

What is "perlite?"

Rather than answer that question, @Vixen pretended her definition of pearlite was consistent with (some unspecified) wiki definition of perlite :

No, I will not be making up my own scientific definitions. If there is anything you find unclear in the factual definitions given by wiki, please explain why.

Asked yet again to define perlite (@JayUtah can be a persistent cuss when the occasion calls for it), @Vixen yet again pretended her definition of pearlite was the "common definition" of perlite :

It is a scientific report. Therefore, before I commence, I will always provide terms of reference so people know what one is talking about. What is the point in talking about pearlites if we are not all clear as to its definition? You asked me what they were. So, before commencing I defined it as per common definition.

As @JayUtah began to appreciate the magnitude of the Simonton gap that was preventing @Vixen from understanding that she was being asked to define perlite , not pearlite , @JayUtah tried to dumb it down for her:

You gave the definition of pearlite. The report talks about perlite. What is perlite?

Quoting that clarification, @Vixen continued to pretend her definition of pearlite had been a correct definition of perlite :

Pearlite is as defined earlier.

@JayUtah tried again:

Your report talks about "perlite," not "pearlite." What is "perlite?"

@Vixen quoted that clarification, but could not overcome the Simonton gap:

Because in Chemistry, crystallized substances conform to defined shapes. That is how scientists can evaluate them.

@JayUtah repeated his clarification:

Your report talks about "perlite," not "pearlite." What is "perlite?"

Quoting that clarification yet again, @Vixen resorted to guessing:

I am guessing that in the translation from German that was the spelling given.

Not a bad guess, actually, but there was a problem with that guess.

@JayUtah rephrased his clarification:

No, "pearlite" and "perlite" are both correctly spelled English words, but they refer to different things. What is "perlite?"

Quoting that rephrased clarification, @Vixen gave a correct definition of perlite , trying to excuse the incorrectness of her earlier definitions of perlite by attributing her confusion to "obvious typos":

Perlite is glassy substance usually connected with volcanoes. It is obviously a mistranslation form the original German. Why do people spend so much time staring at obvious typos.

@JayUtah then sprang the trap:

So you agree that "perlite" has absolutely nothing to do with metallurgy? And no, it's not a "typo." It's a completely different word with a different meaning. Why don't you go have a nice long hot sauna and think hard about this mistake.

Rather than following his advice, @Vixen continued to attribute her confusion to typos:

For goodness sake, typos happen, even with publishing houses with teams of proofreaders. I spot them all the time. She-eesh!

@JayUtah then explained why some understanding of metallurgy is essential when translating a German discussion of metallurgy into English:

The German word Perlit means both pearlite and perlite. Just as you have to know how an EPIRB works in order to know how to correctly translate viritys as "arm" and not "tune," you have to know from context which way to translate Perlit. Luckily, perlite is utterly irrelevant to metallurgy, so if you're translating a metallurgy report you know that pearlite is always the right word.

That was when @Vixen reminded us that humans make mistakes:

This happens. I dare say someone was trying hard to translate it into layman's terms and simply didn't spot the technical error. A friend who has a PhD in Chemistry worked as a proofreader for a scientific publisher of reports. They are only human and make mistakes.

 

[JayUtah]

We really are going to have nine pages about perlite now, aren't we?

You made the details of the Brandeburg report relevant. One of the details appears to be that the translator doesn't know what he's talking about. Who translated the report, Vixen? Do you know? Based on these errors, why do you consider it trustworthy evidence?