• 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!

Last night BBC2; How safe are our skies?

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #21
    Originally posted by Paddy View Post
    The way carbon footprints are calculated are bollox.
    The facts are:-
    (new) Aircraft are in fact very efficient and per passenger mile more efficient than a single person in a most motorcars.

    A motorcar with a driver and a passenger is more efficient than a bus.

    A car with just a driver is more efficient than a train with only 25% full.
    So lets ban cars and trains as well. Sorted.
    While you're waiting, read the free novel we sent you. It's a Spanish story about a guy named 'Manual.'

    Comment


      #22
      Originally posted by BolshieBastard View Post
      One of these nutty, islamic jihad types only needs to get lucky once to blow 200 - 300 people out of the sky.
      Or 700+, if it's one of those new super gigantic jobs.
      While you're waiting, read the free novel we sent you. It's a Spanish story about a guy named 'Manual.'

      Comment


        #23
        Originally posted by BolshieBastard View Post
        One of these nutty, islamic jihad types only needs to get lucky once to blow 200 - 300 people out of the sky.
        Hmm, indeed, but I find the whole thing a little suspicious. The guy’s dad, who was well known and respected at the US Embassy in Lagos, warned the septics about his son. They had his name on lists of terror suspects but only did anything shortly before the plane arrived in Detroit.

        Abdulunderpants supposedly studied engineering for some time; he should therefore have had the skills to figure out that his firecracker wouldn’t have caused much damage.

        The news channels showed films of a supposed simulation of a similar device in aeroplanes; in those films a huge chunk of aeroplane was thrown into the nearby countryside and we were told that 80 grams of the explosive could have blown the plane out of the sky. In reality, 80 grams couldn’t cause much more damage than a flatulent Mexican.
        And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

        Comment


          #24
          Originally posted by zeitghost
          Er, they did pop some rivets.

          And that was more or less it.
          Well alright, but it wasn't exactly a huge explosion.
          And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

          Comment


            #25
            Originally posted by zeitghost
            I suppose it depends what it's 80gms of.
            Pentaerythritol tetranitrate PETN in this case. V powerful explosive, but such a small amount wasn't really very impressive.
            And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

            Comment


              #26
              Originally posted by BolshieBastard View Post
              One of these nutty, islamic jihad types only needs to get lucky once to blow 200 - 300 people out of the sky.

              CIA Started that trick

              and another one
              "A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices," George Orwell

              Comment

              Working...
              X