• 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!
Collapse

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.

Previously on "Italian seismologists jailed..."

Collapse

  • bless 'em all
    replied
    Originally posted by EternalOptimist View Post
    what ?? arrest the pope. the shock waves would be enormous
    The Pope? I meant David Icke.

    Leave a comment:


  • EternalOptimist
    replied
    Originally posted by bless 'em all View Post

    Besides, isn't an Earthquake an act of God? How about banging his representative on Earth up for a few years?
    what ?? arrest the pope. the shock waves would be enormous




    Leave a comment:


  • bless 'em all
    replied
    Originally posted by EternalOptimist View Post
    '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?

    Leave a comment:


  • Flashman
    replied
    Originally posted by Doggy Styles View Post
    I read only yesterday that we have an opt-out on those.

    Along with 119 other interferences that are due for ratification in 2014.

    Or something like that.
    No opt out currently. EAW's are 'under review'

    Nick Clegg aide urges Lib Dems to attack EU justice opt-out 'open goal' | Politics | The Guardian

    '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!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Doggy Styles
    replied
    Originally posted by Flashman View Post
    Still think European Arrest Warrants are a good idea?
    I read only yesterday that we have an opt-out on those.

    Along with 119 other interferences that are due for ratification in 2014.

    Or something like that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Flashman
    replied
    Still think European Arrest Warrants are a good idea?

    Leave a comment:


  • original PM
    replied
    because no one is that ******* stupid

    Leave a comment:


  • darmstadt
    replied
    How come no-one took Michael Fish to court then?

    Leave a comment:


  • shaunbhoy
    replied
    Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
    If a judge understands nothing of science then you can have no faith whatsoever in allowing the use of DNA or forensic science in criminal trials
    That is why they ask for "Expert Witnesses". In this case they probably coaxed one of a raft of IPCC geniuses into proferring their opinion!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Ignis Fatuus
    replied
    Originally posted by BrilloPad View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • EternalOptimist
    replied
    Originally posted by Doggy Styles View Post
    What law did the scientists actually break?
    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:


  • darmstadt
    replied
    Originally posted by BrilloPad View Post
    Belusconi still managed to look like a clown despite that.
    Only to the rest of the world, the Italians still love him and he's even thinking of making a comeback!

    Leave a comment:


  • BrilloPad
    replied
    Originally posted by Uncle Albert View Post
    The well known Italian law of not making a politician look foolish.
    Belusconi still managed to look like a clown despite that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Uncle Albert
    replied
    Originally posted by Doggy Styles View Post
    What law did the scientists actually break?
    The well known Italian law of not making a politician look foolish.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doggy Styles
    replied
    What law did the scientists actually break?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X