“You may also see white stools when a dog has been fed raw bones”
So perhaps it’s more tinned food and less fresh meat and bones from the friendly butcher…..:)
And the key point you omitted is whether the speculation is to WHAT happened as opposed to WHY it happened. Clearly at Duxford we could all see WHAT happened but we cannot know WHY it happened.
And it is the WHY that is the more important so that steps might be able to be taken to prevent the repeat of the incident.
Yes, I would agree with your last paragraph, but would identify it as a problem, not an issue.;)
Your analogy of the tool-box is an interesting one and I suppose I would argue that there is far more mallet work these days than perhaps a decade or two ago, although I have no evidence to support the feeling.
And I would disagree with your point about grammar school certainties. They were a plank on which we built the way we spoke and wrote. The result is sloppy speech and sloppy writing, both of which should be avoidable. And this has nothing to do with regional characteristics but simply the ability of everyone above the age of 14 to write and speak coherently.
The university admission boards have been highly critical of the quality of the texts they receive,m as have employers, so I have no doubt that standards have fallen.
This should really be in GD, shouldn’t it…..??
Theories and speculation in this context are virtually one and the same. Because no one not directly involved in an incident can possibly know enough to make an informed judgement it seems to me pointless to speculate on or establish theories as to the cause of the incident.
I suppose it might be seen as some sort of philosophical musing but to what end? If the subject is raised in the pub or at work I tend to say I’ve no idea, nor have you, so let’s talk about something else.
As to “seeing what happened” – we can only ever “see” a part of it. In any case we would not know the cause of what we can see.
Inside your house, out of the rain.:)
Inside your house, out of the rain.:)
“If put to the vote away from millitary style hobby forums i think you would find that no one wants more guns available “
Since neither you nor any of us has the remotest idea, your comment is probably wishful thinking as much as anything else.
In any case the likelihood of an objective response to the question, however that was phrased, is remote.
That is the problem with this whole debate. A distinct lack of objectivity.
“If put to the vote away from millitary style hobby forums i think you would find that no one wants more guns available “
Since neither you nor any of us has the remotest idea, your comment is probably wishful thinking as much as anything else.
In any case the likelihood of an objective response to the question, however that was phrased, is remote.
That is the problem with this whole debate. A distinct lack of objectivity.
:diablo::diablo:
:diablo::diablo:
JDK – you needn’t, because you have stated the case very clearly.
I have now read your reply to my post. I agree but the only point I would make is where the change in the language makes for less ease of understanding by changing the meaning of a word or words. English is rich in words which have many shades of meaning and circumstances for which there are different words with subtle differences in their meanings. I think that much of this richness of the language is becoming lost. I see it on a daily basis through my son and his family and friends and my grandson, who happily, rather enjoys learning words he seldom encounters, except when he is with us.
I do regret that the teaching of English language, as we knew it, its grammar and syntax, seems to be dying out. I wonder how many 15 year olds could parse a sentence.
In any case I cannot believe that the AAIB would make any statement at all ahead of an enquiry, would they?
I also tend to the view that a crininal will always aquire the weapon he/she needs by fair means or foul. And the laws of the land will always be circumvented if necessary. Hence my earlier criticism of the kneejerk reaction to events in Dunblane and then Hungerford, where, in any case, the guns used were licensed.
I still stand by my #71 in the Gun Hobby companion thread to this one.
I also tend to the view that a crininal will always aquire the weapon he/she needs by fair means or foul. And the laws of the land will always be circumvented if necessary. Hence my earlier criticism of the kneejerk reaction to events in Dunblane and then Hungerford, where, in any case, the guns used were licensed.
I still stand by my #71 in the Gun Hobby companion thread to this one.
I’ll re-phrase it – lack of builders, so none to whistle at me!!:(