Jump to content
 

jonny777

Members
  • Posts

    5,425
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by jonny777

  1. 11 minutes ago, simontaylor484 said:

    I believe the original source of the duff info was Reuters 

     

    How can the info be duff, when it actually happened? - except 24 minutes after the broadcast saying it had already happened. 

     

    Do you not find it suspicious that the BBC has 'lost' that recording? From one of the most newsworthy events of the century?

     

    Do you also not find it suspicious that hundreds of people recorded that broadcast, and every time it was uploaded to Youtube it was deleted within an hour or so? 

     

    In the end, the video was continually re-uploaded so frequently that Youtube had to admit defeat. 

     

     

     

    • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
  2. On 13/09/2021 at 22:40, AY Mod said:

     

    I'm very supportive towards your experiences. I too have private and personal reasons too to recall the immediate aftermath of the event. I find the extreme theories disrespectful, at best, to those lost , injured and affected by the events. The creation and cultivation of these theories, in my book, are an abomination and I don't want to see any further repetition of them on here. Any more of it will lead to the closure of the discussion.

     

     

     

    I could tell you a true personal story, but I can't because I'm too scared. 

     

    The story would blow everyone's socks off; and is more sinister because all I did was recount my innocent observations on a web page. What happened next would make me realise that everything which is mentioned on a bog standard hobby website is being monitored by someone - and this was 20 years ago. 

     

    Heaven knows what is going on now.  All I know is that we are far from being told the truth by those in power. 

    • Like 1
    • Agree 1
  3. 19 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

    It's a bit pointless to worry about "it could have been me" disasters that didn't kill or injure you.  

     

    For example I was nearly caught up in the 1987 fire at Kings Cross Underground.  My task at the time was installing a new computer system in a bank at Liverpool Street and had planned to work a little later on data conversion.  But the client had decided not to take call out cover after office hours, and a minor fault forced me to call it a day and I sent the team home.  I turned on the telly for the 9 o'clock News, and was in utter disbelief at what I was seeing - I found it hard to believe they had time to get cameras to the scene since I had come though there.

     

    Or "I could have been killed" in the 1992 Baltic Exchange bombing.  At the time my job was located in the cashier's cage of a bank at Liverpool Street.  After the bombing I was only allowed to go back to that desk briefly to collect my personal stuff, and it was 6" deep on broken glass.   I had gone home at the normal time that Friday night, so I wasn't there when the bomb exploded a couple of hours later.  We were lucky in that our only casualty was a night security guard slightly hurt when blown off his feet by the blast.  Whilst tragic for those who did suffer of course, the IRA campaign in London caused relatively few deaths and injuries, compared to the general inconvenience and anxiety caused to the whole population, with transport services suspended more often than not by false alarms.

     

    The simple fact is that in both cases I was somewhere else at the time - as was almost everybody else who were in these places daily.  There is a greater risk of "I could have been killed" every time you cross the street - 5 seconds earlier or 5 seconds later and you would have been knocked down!    

     

     

     

    Exactly. 

     

    I remember going to an Angus Steak House in London, and eating one of the most tasty steaks I can remember. I was with a work colleague and we had only really gone to look around the record shops and have a few beers. 

     

    We finished our meal about 6pm and walked to Piccadilly Circus underground where we caught the tube to Marylebone and home (as it was then). After a decent nights sleep I remember switching on the radio at breakfast to hear the news that the IRA had bombed the area near Piccadilly Circus and there were a number of dead people. My first thought was that this must be wrong because I had been there and heard no explosion. 

     

    Maybe my watch was wrong, or the precise time of the explosion? I don't know, and most likely never will. 

  4. 49 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

    Didn't a chap called Occam point out hundreds of years ago the folly of accepting explanations based on multiple assumptions, when an explanation based on few or none is available?

     

     

    Ok, I'll bite (which is what this thread seems to have been started for - to pour scorn on folk who trust no one in power and don't believe everything the media tell them to believe). 

     

    Tell Occam to cut these down to a conclusion based on no assumptions....

     

    The Twin Towers' destruction exhibited all of the characteristics of controlled demolition.

     

    Destruction proceeds through the path of greatest resistance at nearly free-fall acceleration

     

    Improbable symmetry of debris distribution

     

    Extremely rapid onset of destruction

     

    Over 100 first responders reported explosions and flashes

     

    Multi-ton steel sections ejected laterally

     

    Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds

     

    1200-foot-diameter debris field: no "pancaked" floors found

     

    Isolated explosive ejections 20–40 stories below demolition front

     

    Total building destruction: dismemberment of steel frame

     

    Several tons of molten metal found under all 3 high-rises

     

    Evidence of thermite incendiaries found by FEMA in steel samples

     

    Evidence of explosives found in dust samples

     

    WTC 7 also exhibited characteristics of controlled demolition.

     

    Rapid onset of collapse

     

    Sounds of explosions

     

    Symmetrical structural failure

     

    Free-fall acceleration through the path of what was greatest resistance

     

    Imploded, collapsing completely, landing almost in its own footprint

     

    Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds

     

    Corroboration from Danny Jowenko, a European controlled demolition professional

    Foreknowledge of "collapse" by media, NYPD, FDNY

     

    The three high-rises exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire:

     

    Slow onset with large visible deformations

     

    Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, intact, from the point of plane impact, to the side most damaged by the fires)

     

    Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel

     

    High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer-lasting fires have never collapsed

     

     

     

    And all that is before we get to the fact that  live BBC TV rolling news announced the collapse of WTC7 24 minutes before it happened. 

     

     

     

    • Like 2
    • Agree 1
    • Funny 1
  5. 38 minutes ago, Andy Kirkham said:

     

     

    e.g. how many operatives would it have taken to engineer the collapse of the Twin Towers?

     

     

     

     

    Would it have taken that many? 

     

    A number of people dressed as contract workers, and appearing at night and weekends for a few weeks would probably do the trick. 

     

    Would anyone worry about men in overalls carrying large boxes while appearing to work on lift shafts? Any vast lengths of cabling could be easily passed off as fibre optic upgrades to the internet system. 

     

    Once everything had been installed, I'm sure operating the remote control would take even less people. 

     

    I'm not saying that is what happened, just that it is possible over a period of time with not that many people. 

    • Like 1
  6. You're moving the goalposts. 

     

    Just because something may be lies or pure nonsense doesn't make it a conspiracy theory. 

     

    If you wish to go down the road of labelling everyone a conspiracy theorist, simply because they believe something which could be lies or pure nonsense, you may have a problem with church-goers on a Sunday. 

     

    Edit... And I should have added, even more of a problem with party political broadcasts; but that might be one too far for the mods. 

  7. 4 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:


    It already happens, and a blooming good thing too.

     

    If there’s a prime skill that people need these days, it’s critical thinking, and how to spot falsehoods at a hundred paces, so the younger they learn, the better.

     

    I understand your point, but how can you spot a falsehood in a well argued conspiracy theory? 

     

    Taking my previous example, Edward and Richard were condemned to the Tower Of London and subsequently vanished without a trace. Richard III declared himself king due their 'missing' status, and many people conclude Richard was the prime mover behind their disappearance. 

     

    There are no falsehoods here, just a lack of vital evidence; but it is still a conspiracy theory. 

     

    You have to be very careful when educating children to disbelieve what a majority consider to be falsehoods, because down that road lies brainwashing and indoctrination. 

    • Like 3
  8. What I find rather worrying, is that this subject seems to appear in a thread every few weeks; and the same people make the same attempts to use it for reinforcing their own personal opinions (using less than humorous cliches), rather than make any effort to explain why they feel the need to do this. 

     

    The current implication is that any hint of belief in a conspiracy theory makes someone a "whacko". 

     

    Maybe this applies to William Shakespeare, because he was one of the instigators behind the Richard III conspiracy to have the princes in the tower murdered? 

     

    Does this make Shakespeare a "whacko"?  

     

     

     

     

    • Funny 1
  9. On 29/08/2021 at 19:20, montyburns56 said:

    D6801 Nottingham Victoria 1964 by trainsandtravel

     

    BR Type 3 Co-Co diesel at Nottingham Victoria

     

     

     

    It was a great station, and very impressive to a schoolboy; and I went there a few times with my Dad, but I discovered the delights of Midland (far more 'cops', the Blue Pullman for a time in the middle of the day, and the GC on the bridge across the station) and I'm afraid to say that I used to lobby for an extended visit to the competitor of Victoria. 

    • Like 2
  10. 2 hours ago, Michael Edge said:

     

    It only replaced two O4s at Worsbrough, there would have still been two on the front of a double load (60 wagons) train - and there are plenty of photos of the Garratt and an O4 pushing. 

     

     

    Is that really surprising? 

     

    60 wagons, even older wooden bodied ones, are going to be quite a formidable load (something around 1100 tons fully loaded) to get up 3 miles at a minimum of 1 in 40, and even steeper in places with mining subsidence. 

     

    That the U1 did it's job for a quarter of a century, is the kind of unsung work which happened without ceremony in those days. 

    • Like 1
  11. Don't worry, because there is a campaign to have lessons on 'how to spot fake news' taught in schools over the next few years. 

     

    So, all we have to do is slap a label "Fake News" on anything we don't agree with, and no one will believe it any more. 

     

    For instance "Edward Thompson = destroyer of everything Gresley".... Fake News. 

     

    That is that argument sorted. 

    • Funny 1
  12. The Cliffe-Uddingston cement trains were about 1000t loaded when I saw them pass through Grantham, although I'm not sure if the 9Fs hauled many of the PCV trains which were 30 wagons plus a brake van. 

     

    I'm also not sure how many of the earlier Presflos made up the train before the new wagons were introduced. I suspect the details are in a Railway Observer/Trains Illustrated somewhere. 

     

    Might it be that the 9Fs could not accelerate the train from a standing start quickly enough to pick up water at troughs, and therefore had to stop more often to use the water columns at stations? 

     

     

  13. 9 hours ago, Iron Horse said:

    This is nothing like in the league of the recent pictures posted but I thought I would share it as you all now have a current reason to run a triple headed 50 in the modern era......that is of course if you have an up-to-date 50044 and maybe don't want to turn 50007 around!!!!! Hope you enjoy

     

     

     

     

    I can't do a triple header, but I can manage 50046 and 50012 passing Teignmouth circa 1984. I'm not sure if this was some form of railtour, but there does seem to be a fair amount of window hanging going on. 

     

     

    410857982_5004650012teignmouth1984.jpg.4beca6876c933c2af47362c37e205339.jpg

     

    • Like 15
  14. 23 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

     

    I gather that is, or perhaps at one time was, the situation in Liverpool, owing to an over-supply of taxis. Which just goes to show that you're not outlining immutable laws of transportation - the balance could be changed if there was the political will-power. For example, air travel could be very much reduced by taxing aviation fuel. 

     

    And road building/improvements could be charged an extra tax for the environmental destruction they cause or help accelerate; not just directly but indirectly due to increased amounts of SO2, NO and CO pumped out by exhausts. For decades everyone (including me) has simply ignored these gases because they are invisible; but our urban children and grandchildren are suffering for our insatiable appetite for the freedom to go anywhere we choose at a time we choose. 

     

    Sorry, I am drifting away from Beeching - but I doubt Marples-Ridgeway took any notice of the land they bulldozed, or the creatures living in/on it. 

    • Agree 2
×
×
  • Create New...