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!
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
'Prosecutors said the defendants gave a falsely reassuring statement before the quake, while the defence maintained there was no way to predict major quakes'
I wonder if the next lot are going to be running through the streets shouting "You're all going to die!"
Or say nothing at all.
Besides, isn't an Earthquake an act of God? How about banging his representative on Earth up for a few years?
'Review' in this case meaning that process which generates favourable headlines in the Daily Mail for a couple of years after which we can safely get on with implementing the EU laws. Vote Conservative!!
Are the judges posters on cuk? I wish I had a post for every time 2 posters had looked at the same data and drawn opposing conclusions. Actually I probably do.
Or maybe we should just ban scientists? Half the time they say things like "in 50 years time London is going to be underwater unless we blah blah blah". Like anyone is going to be able to check if they are right or wrong in 50 years. I hear more sense spoken by my priest than alot of scientists.
Presumably when neither is talking about his professional subject.
they were charged with collective multiple manslaughter
'Prosecutors said the defendants gave a falsely reassuring statement before the quake, while the defence maintained there was no way to predict major quakes'
basically, they bungled a press conference and the non-scientist at that conference told the press and the public to go home and have a glass of wine. The scientists there tried to give the uncertainties, but the take home message was 'dont worry'
Leave a comment: