Originally posted by Troll
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
The NK Nuke that Wasn't - WTF?
Collapse
X
-
My wife and kids were down in The Lizard on holiday in August. I thought they came back looking a bit funny... -
I am the brains behind the operation. Although these lizard persons have their uses, they're not the most motivated of species. Cold blooded, don't you know?Comment
-
I blame the whole issue on the journalist who first broke the story, the headline had a typo; it should've read "Unclear Test".Comment
-
No, 3.0 is exactly half of 4.0. And don't get me started on how the media misuse and confuse the terms Epicentre and Hypocentre.Originally posted by wendigo1003.7 is about half the size of 4.0 on the Richter scale isn't it?
(Bob in did a Seismology module during his degree mode...)Comment
-
Surely in terms of what you are measuring (the amplitude recorded on the seismograph), 3.0 is exactly one tenth of 4.0?Originally posted by Cowboy BobNo, 3.0 is exactly half of 4.0. And don't get me started on how the media misuse and confuse the terms Epicentre and Hypocentre.
(Bob in did a Seismology module during his degree mode...)Comment
-
My bad, forgot that it uses log (base 10). Yes 3.0, is exactly 1/10th of 4.0.Originally posted by Lucifer BoxSurely in terms of what you are measuring (the amplitude recorded on the seismograph), 3.0 is exactly one tenth of 4.0?
Comment
-
Uncle Sam has been responding long before them chingalines got their hands slapped by their lapdogs.Originally posted by TrollWhats really going on...
China is using it's proxy agent North Korea to divert world attention, knowing the US must respond, it is hoping to provoke the US into direct military action.
Perhaps though China is starting to wake up to the fact that the regime it has been propping up for the last 50 years is a liability?
Except for a pretty powerful Taiwanese presence that is...not to mention the lack of heavy lifting capability to get everything needed for an invasion a hundred odd miles off the coast.The US cannot operate in more than 2 theatres of war at once,and that the current Iraqi & possibility of a future Iranian situation which may require a response will keep US forces occupied in the short term; all of which would leave China free to carry out it's long plan to seize Taiwan unopposed
MailmanComment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Why contractors keep putting off their pension (and why I'm one of them) Today 02:43
- HMRC loan charge settlement offer: 3 things to check before you sign Yesterday 07:41
- HMRC standstill agreements extended to 72 months: why the term's doubled, and what to check before signing Jul 31 05:53
- Who owns the loans? Inside the mystery of the loan charge recall scandal Jul 30 06:20
- Umbrella company winding-up petitions in 2026: the practical guide for contractors Jul 29 05:29
- Payments on Account deadline: what contractors must do before July 31st — maybe for the final few times Jul 28 08:01
- Andy Burnham's first 100 days: five things contractors need from the new PM Jul 27 00:53
- Starmer vs Burnham on housing: What their rival plans mean for your contractor mortgage Jul 22 00:59
- Burnham's housing vision vs. Starmer's home-buying reforms: what it means for your contractor mortgage Jul 22 00:59
- In Khalil v Innovate Transport, a limited company contractor wasn’t a worker and was on £2.30 — not £230 Jul 21 07:58

Comment