what happened in Court today WRT accuracy of Gatso's ??
16 January 2005, 11:17 PM
#91
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: From Kent to Gloucestershire to Berkshire
Posts: 2,905
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Much as I hate to side with PSL for a few words, Brunel is one of the better universities around for numerous Engineering degrees. However:
which makes it extremely unlikely that there would be a 26% average error accidently occuring.
The Gatso cameras use Radar to trigger the event. The pictures are used to re-calculate the actual speed and are used to secure any prosecution. This was told to me by a policeman and then the national police speeding helpline, when I enquired after a GATSO had flashed at me when I was doing 30 in a 40 limit (no subsequent prosecution)
Pete, if you really have a degree, would you mind telling me exactly how long it takes light to travel the distance a car can travel in 500ms? I'll give you a clue, the speed of light = 3*10^8 m/s. A car setting of a Gatso in an urban area will be travelling at ~2*10^7 times slower than that. So we're talking small fractions of microseconds. Same applies for your comments about time taken for flash to travel to measuring machine say about 0.01 milliseconds even at 3.3km away (rough calculation off the top of my head)
. So is the issue the sub microsecond errors introduced as I pointed out above? Or is it relativistic effects? Perhaps you'd care to use your long list of qualifications to demonstrate how large those relativistic effects would be, without working it out, I know the answer will be comfortably sub pico-second levels.
The time to process might actually be relevant. However, electrons don't normally hold opinions, and so would process each flash in the same time. Therefore, the time between the flashes as measured will be the same. If you understood science, you could consider it as adding an "offset" to each measurement.
Bearing in mind the massive scientific holes in your arguments, e.g. the three I pointed out, have to wonder if you're lying or you're a "boffin with no idea about the broader picture". If I could be bothered, I'd be quite happy to test out your "senior specialism" too, but from slips you've made in the past, I already know the answer.
Happy trolling.
Originally Posted by PSLewis
Every camera is checked to ensure it is properly calibrated and working every single time it is placed inside its yellow housing. Twenty-four hours or so later, when the camera and film are removed, the camera is checked again to ensure that it has been working properly.
Originally Posted by PSLewis
The white line markings on the road surface provide a secondary back-up check, verified by an operative who examines the film taken by the camera
Originally Posted by PSlewis
Mr Elgas machine didn't fire a flash back to the gatso - which is the time it takes the image to be reflected from the vehicle (and thats whats measured!)
Originally Posted by PSLewis
his machine wasn't moving like a vehicle - it was fixed
Originally Posted by PSLewis
for example, the time the flash takes to travel to the measuring machine and the time to process that information within the device.
Originally Posted by PSLewis
BSc Engineering Brunel, Senior Specialist Nuclear Physics, PHd Loughbrough
Happy trolling.
Last edited by hades; 16 January 2005 at 11:34 PM.
16 January 2005, 11:49 PM
#92
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: From Kent to Gloucestershire to Berkshire
Posts: 2,905
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All gone silent from PSL, whilst he's posting elsewhere. A cynical person might think that the highly qualified Mr Lewis is incapable of holding his own in a scientific discussion?
17 January 2005, 01:11 AM
#93
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Stafford
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To me, the argument is simple. And I'm a simple soul who likes cars and has a fair degree of logic and common sense. I've not been caught speeding in all the time I've been driving, so I've nothing to gain by the case going to court.
Speeding offences need 2 forms of evidence, as far as I know. In a camera, the initial measurement is made with the radar, then the photographs are taken as the second form of evidence. If there is only one piece of reliable evidence, the case won't succeed in court - it would be like having a witness go walkies.
Isn't it true that a policeman can't do you for speeding without having a second officer in the car, despite having a calibrated speedometer?
I know I've not been here for long, but I'm glad the majority of people on here aren't like pslewis. No offence intended here, but you really do see, to have a few issues
.
--Rich
Speeding offences need 2 forms of evidence, as far as I know. In a camera, the initial measurement is made with the radar, then the photographs are taken as the second form of evidence. If there is only one piece of reliable evidence, the case won't succeed in court - it would be like having a witness go walkies.
Isn't it true that a policeman can't do you for speeding without having a second officer in the car, despite having a calibrated speedometer?
I know I've not been here for long, but I'm glad the majority of people on here aren't like pslewis. No offence intended here, but you really do see, to have a few issues
.--Rich
17 January 2005, 02:20 AM
#94
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: a very nice man :-) with one Fairy Token
Posts: 2,203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, just read the whole post. Am I missing something?
The guy is being done for 41 in a 30.
80% of cameras are reading by an average of 26%.
But 41 in a 30 is an error of 36.6%.
So he would have to have been 22MPH past this particular camera to be within the "limit" according to this camera? OK, nowhere does it say what this particular camera's error was nor the maximum he found but surely an error of that size....? A speedo has to, by law read between 0% and 10% on the plus side of what the true speed is (I can remember a % min overread though I wont quote it as I can't remember what or where).
So surely that means he was in fact speeding (unless of course you accept the error for this camera and that he really was doing 22MPH). Even at his average error he would only have been doing 32.5MPH? And his speedo would have probably read over 35MPH?
Of course, if the errors are that bad and that widespread then this really is criminal but how times do you hear of drivers saying they got prosecuted for a lower speed than they were really doing?
Just doesn't add up IMHO
The guy is being done for 41 in a 30.
80% of cameras are reading by an average of 26%.
But 41 in a 30 is an error of 36.6%.
So he would have to have been 22MPH past this particular camera to be within the "limit" according to this camera? OK, nowhere does it say what this particular camera's error was nor the maximum he found but surely an error of that size....? A speedo has to, by law read between 0% and 10% on the plus side of what the true speed is (I can remember a % min overread though I wont quote it as I can't remember what or where).
So surely that means he was in fact speeding (unless of course you accept the error for this camera and that he really was doing 22MPH). Even at his average error he would only have been doing 32.5MPH? And his speedo would have probably read over 35MPH?
Of course, if the errors are that bad and that widespread then this really is criminal but how times do you hear of drivers saying they got prosecuted for a lower speed than they were really doing?
Just doesn't add up IMHO
17 January 2005, 04:38 AM
#95
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: No longer Japan !
Posts: 1,742
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the point is that if GATSO's provide the evidence that someone is speeding, it must be shown that they are a reliable and accurate indicator of speed.
If Mr Edgar can prove that GATSO's are
a) inaccurate (always reading high)
b) not reliable (different degrees of accuracy with different camera units)
then I think it is fair enough that he be allowed to challenge the evidence against him and show that there is reasonable doubt that he committed the offence.
All measurement systems are inaccurate to some degree (even if we are only talking picoseconds) so it will be interesting to see if he can establish reasonable doubt in this instance.
If Mr Edgar can prove that GATSO's are
a) inaccurate (always reading high)
b) not reliable (different degrees of accuracy with different camera units)
then I think it is fair enough that he be allowed to challenge the evidence against him and show that there is reasonable doubt that he committed the offence.
All measurement systems are inaccurate to some degree (even if we are only talking picoseconds) so it will be interesting to see if he can establish reasonable doubt in this instance.
17 January 2005, 08:56 AM
#96
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 2,354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by hedgehog
Mr. Edgar has been refused the right to present his evidence on the timing of GATSOs in court because:
“The Crown Prosecution Service has consequently ruled that the Gatso evidence is not relevant…”
“The Crown Prosecution Service has consequently ruled that the Gatso evidence is not relevant…”
17 January 2005, 09:20 AM
#98
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I doubt that matters in the long term - now that evidence exists that Gatsos are unreliable (or possibly deliberately misleading), someone will undoubtedly be along soon to use that evidence in their own speeding case.
17 January 2005, 11:02 AM
#99
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it's proved correct that Gatso's are unreliable at best or set to over-read at worst then the ramifications will be enormous. I would assume that every person ever prosecuted using evidence from a Gatso will have to be compensated, not just for the fine but for any costs incurred from higher insurance premiums.
This could be the best thing to ever happen
OTOH nothing will probably come of it because, as we've managed to show over the decades, motorists are the most apathetic of complainants.
This could be the best thing to ever happen
OTOH nothing will probably come of it because, as we've managed to show over the decades, motorists are the most apathetic of complainants.
17 January 2005, 02:06 PM
#100
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 1,428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just so i understand this right.
ths defendant Mr Edgar, went to all this trouble to establish gatso unreliabilty and to try and challenge this at the crown court, yet he didnt even supply his details and is actually being done for this as opposed to speeding, but if he goes to court for the failure to supply details dont they normally do you for speeding as well ?. And if he wants to he could actually ask for the charges to be brought forward so he could defend on gatso reliability.
ths defendant Mr Edgar, went to all this trouble to establish gatso unreliabilty and to try and challenge this at the crown court, yet he didnt even supply his details and is actually being done for this as opposed to speeding, but if he goes to court for the failure to supply details dont they normally do you for speeding as well ?. And if he wants to he could actually ask for the charges to be brought forward so he could defend on gatso reliability.
Last edited by pbee; 21 January 2005 at 10:32 AM.
17 January 2005, 02:54 PM
#101
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting how easy it is to spot when PSL is getting rattled. The first thing he does is to revert to name calling and insults. Thats the best way to really weaken your argument PSL!
I still don't think he has really grasped the basic points of this discussion. Why bother with the double flash and lines in the road if it is not necessary? That has been mentioned already but you ignored it as it suited you best to do.
Radar is notoriously unreliable in measurements for all sorts of reasons which you must surely realise with all those qualifications that you are throwing about! In fact it may just be that when the radar measures the speed with the Doppler effect and it is then used as a trigger for the flash and the camera, the visual measurement for all we know may be the most important proof of the speed of the car. It is certainly vital corroboration in any case.
It was shown in court some years ago that the cooling fan on a car can act as a "doppler wheel" and cause the radar to give a completely erroneous reading and that is why they had to make an additional method to measure the speed of the car. An approaching car could easily trigger the radar in this way causing the car in the trap to be photographed with a false speed reading.
If those flashes are incorrectly timed, as they appear to be in this case, then they will appear to make the car seem to have been travelling faster. That is wrong and the case should then be thrown out. No one should be convicted on faulty evidence. I don't believe that even you PSL can deny that. Regardless of the fact that it is pulling in even more money for your hero!
Finally PSL, you gave us the schoolboy "O" level science explanation of the effects of the Doppler effect, it always used to be a train whistle of course.
Can you however tell us all just why that effect happens and how that is used with respect to a radar speed measuring device? You should know this already of course but you have got lots of time to look it up anyway.
Les
I still don't think he has really grasped the basic points of this discussion. Why bother with the double flash and lines in the road if it is not necessary? That has been mentioned already but you ignored it as it suited you best to do.
Radar is notoriously unreliable in measurements for all sorts of reasons which you must surely realise with all those qualifications that you are throwing about! In fact it may just be that when the radar measures the speed with the Doppler effect and it is then used as a trigger for the flash and the camera, the visual measurement for all we know may be the most important proof of the speed of the car. It is certainly vital corroboration in any case.
It was shown in court some years ago that the cooling fan on a car can act as a "doppler wheel" and cause the radar to give a completely erroneous reading and that is why they had to make an additional method to measure the speed of the car. An approaching car could easily trigger the radar in this way causing the car in the trap to be photographed with a false speed reading.
If those flashes are incorrectly timed, as they appear to be in this case, then they will appear to make the car seem to have been travelling faster. That is wrong and the case should then be thrown out. No one should be convicted on faulty evidence. I don't believe that even you PSL can deny that. Regardless of the fact that it is pulling in even more money for your hero!
Finally PSL, you gave us the schoolboy "O" level science explanation of the effects of the Doppler effect, it always used to be a train whistle of course.
Can you however tell us all just why that effect happens and how that is used with respect to a radar speed measuring device? You should know this already of course but you have got lots of time to look it up anyway.
Les
17 January 2005, 06:56 PM
#103
Scooby Regular
Originally Posted by StickyMicky
the doppler effect and the gatso link compleatly through me TBH
/homer
hmmmmmm doppppler
/homer
/homer
hmmmmmm doppppler
/homer
Or what you said?
Good God you can't even spell! 
What a plank
Pete
17 January 2005, 07:31 PM
#104
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 12,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by pslewis
Meridian - a bit of sense, at last
Pete
ps. They work on K band radar - the flash is, as you say, to back-up the evidence
Pete
ps. They work on K band radar - the flash is, as you say, to back-up the evidence
the flash is so the film is correctly exposed
otherwise the cams would be feckin useless at night.
erm pete how does the radar record your number plate?? crt and a midget writes it down???
the radar triggers the camera shutter, the flash is to ensure the exposure is legible
stick to nukes although based on the above statement i thinks there may be an element (sic) of porkalise!!!
could this be a classic Lewisism!!
17 January 2005, 07:43 PM
#105
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Zed Ess Won Hay Tee
Posts: 21,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by pslewis
Would that be COMPLETELY THREW?
Or what you said? Good God you can't even spell!
What a plank
Pete
Or what you said?
Good God you can't even spell! What a plank
Pete
17 January 2005, 07:55 PM
#106
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: From Kent to Gloucestershire to Berkshire
Posts: 2,905
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Leslie
You should know this already of course but you have got lots of time to look it up anyway
Trashman - I don't think you're necessarily missing anything. The 26% over-read is an average over-read, like all averages some individual readings will be higher, some lower. The point is, whether he was speeding or not, if GATSO readings are this unreliable / "fixed", how can anyone prove how fast he was going "beyond all reasonable doubt"? With GATSO evidence alone, you can't. You wouldn't convict someone of murder based purely on the evidence of one witness who has 4000 proven counts of perjury. Why should this offence be any different?
17 January 2005, 08:34 PM
#109
Scooby Regular
Originally Posted by GC8
"Pete Lewis, 'bit of a ****' SHOCK!"
I wont hear it said.....
I wont hear it said.....
Go figure
And how stupid you all look
Pete
17 January 2005, 09:58 PM
#112
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,985
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that Pete baiting may have distracted us from the fundamentals here:
A very well qualified bloke has established that there is a fundamental flaw with GATSO speed cameras and on average they estimate your speed as 26% faster than your actual speed. If he can get the opportunity to prove this in court, as he and we think the CPS believe he can do, then everyone who has been done by a GATSO will be able to claim their cash, points etc. back and many may also be in a position to launch claims for substantial compensation.
The administration, and Pete, are extremely worried about this and are thrashing about trying to take peoples eye off the ball and to prevent Mr. Edgar from presenting his evidence.
While messing about with Pete don't lose sight of the fundamental facts that what we are exposing here is an administration who are lying to promote their anti-car position and to try and hit their target of 3,000,000 speeding tickets this year.
A very well qualified bloke has established that there is a fundamental flaw with GATSO speed cameras and on average they estimate your speed as 26% faster than your actual speed. If he can get the opportunity to prove this in court, as he and we think the CPS believe he can do, then everyone who has been done by a GATSO will be able to claim their cash, points etc. back and many may also be in a position to launch claims for substantial compensation.
The administration, and Pete, are extremely worried about this and are thrashing about trying to take peoples eye off the ball and to prevent Mr. Edgar from presenting his evidence.
While messing about with Pete don't lose sight of the fundamental facts that what we are exposing here is an administration who are lying to promote their anti-car position and to try and hit their target of 3,000,000 speeding tickets this year.
17 January 2005, 10:09 PM
#113
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Zed Ess Won Hay Tee
Posts: 21,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=cac...+ree+mx5&hl=en
Driving along a country road, just been made a 40mph limit, when a car coming towards me flashes his lights and waves ......... I am too busy trying to work out who it was that I fail to see the 2 prize ***** coppas hiding in the bushes!!!!
Now, they are pointing something at me - looks like a radar gun but appears to have a camera on it?? It was hand-held, is there such a device??
I reckon I was doing 50mph - but when I realised what was happening I slammed my brakes on and dropped FAST to 30mph .... will I have been too late??
Why do they have to hide in the bushes??
Why do they have a smug look on their faces when you drive past??
Why are they at a non dangerous section of road thats had no accidents as far as I am aware??
Why did I want to stop, get out the car and shove their toy right up their 4rses??
Why aren't they out in the bushes when kids get abducted??
PI55ED OFF!!!
£60 and 3 points here I come!!
And the final straw???????????????? I was in the MX-5!!!
Pete
Driving along a country road, just been made a 40mph limit, when a car coming towards me flashes his lights and waves ......... I am too busy trying to work out who it was that I fail to see the 2 prize ***** coppas hiding in the bushes!!!!
Now, they are pointing something at me - looks like a radar gun but appears to have a camera on it?? It was hand-held, is there such a device??
I reckon I was doing 50mph - but when I realised what was happening I slammed my brakes on and dropped FAST to 30mph .... will I have been too late??
Why do they have to hide in the bushes??
Why do they have a smug look on their faces when you drive past??
Why are they at a non dangerous section of road thats had no accidents as far as I am aware??
Why did I want to stop, get out the car and shove their toy right up their 4rses??
Why aren't they out in the bushes when kids get abducted??
PI55ED OFF!!!
£60 and 3 points here I come!!
And the final straw???????????????? I was in the MX-5!!!
Pete
17 January 2005, 11:01 PM
#114
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by StickyMicky
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=cac...+ree+mx5&hl=en
Driving along a country road, just been made a 40mph limit, when a car coming towards me flashes his lights and waves ......... I am too busy trying to work out who it was that I fail to see the 2 prize ***** coppas hiding in the bushes!!!!
Now, they are pointing something at me - looks like a radar gun but appears to have a camera on it?? It was hand-held, is there such a device??
I reckon I was doing 50mph - but when I realised what was happening I slammed my brakes on and dropped FAST to 30mph .... will I have been too late??
Why do they have to hide in the bushes??
Why do they have a smug look on their faces when you drive past??
Why are they at a non dangerous section of road thats had no accidents as far as I am aware??
Why did I want to stop, get out the car and shove their toy right up their 4rses??
Why aren't they out in the bushes when kids get abducted??
PI55ED OFF!!!
£60 and 3 points here I come!!
And the final straw???????????????? I was in the MX-5!!!
Pete http://www.mx5oc.co.uk/mx5forum/icon_smile_dead.gif http://www.mx5oc.co.uk/mx5forum/icon_smile_angry.gif http://www.mx5oc.co.uk/mx5forum/icon...disapprove.gif http://www.mx5oc.co.uk/mx5forum/icon_smile_sad.gif
Driving along a country road, just been made a 40mph limit, when a car coming towards me flashes his lights and waves ......... I am too busy trying to work out who it was that I fail to see the 2 prize ***** coppas hiding in the bushes!!!!
Now, they are pointing something at me - looks like a radar gun but appears to have a camera on it?? It was hand-held, is there such a device??
I reckon I was doing 50mph - but when I realised what was happening I slammed my brakes on and dropped FAST to 30mph .... will I have been too late??
Why do they have to hide in the bushes??
Why do they have a smug look on their faces when you drive past??
Why are they at a non dangerous section of road thats had no accidents as far as I am aware??
Why did I want to stop, get out the car and shove their toy right up their 4rses??
Why aren't they out in the bushes when kids get abducted??
PI55ED OFF!!!
£60 and 3 points here I come!!
And the final straw???????????????? I was in the MX-5!!!
Pete http://www.mx5oc.co.uk/mx5forum/icon_smile_dead.gif http://www.mx5oc.co.uk/mx5forum/icon_smile_angry.gif http://www.mx5oc.co.uk/mx5forum/icon...disapprove.gif http://www.mx5oc.co.uk/mx5forum/icon_smile_sad.gif
17 January 2005, 11:10 PM
#115
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: From Kent to Gloucestershire to Berkshire
Posts: 2,905
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IIRC, if they're hand held devices, they have to pull you there and then, only if they're in a mobile van or similar you can get a ticket in the post?
However, as hedgehog correctly points out, the point at the start of this post is that this (alleged) evidence could be taken as suggesting that "the present administration" are deliberately falsifying evidence on a national scale, in order to secure millions of convictions falsely, and trying extremely hard to cover it up. Prove the GATSO evidence to be unreliable (deliberately or otherwise), any every single GATSO based speeding ticket is an unsafe conviction as there are more than sufficient grounds for "reasonable doubt".
Note I say alleged as I have not personally seen the physical proof, although Mr Edgar does appear to have the credentials. There is no certain evidence of any deliberate act, although the statistical chances of this alleged innaccuracy occuring randmonly are somewhat astronomical. The evidence also does not directly suggest who is ultimately responsible, I'll leave people to draw their own conclusions there!
However, as hedgehog correctly points out, the point at the start of this post is that this (alleged) evidence could be taken as suggesting that "the present administration" are deliberately falsifying evidence on a national scale, in order to secure millions of convictions falsely, and trying extremely hard to cover it up. Prove the GATSO evidence to be unreliable (deliberately or otherwise), any every single GATSO based speeding ticket is an unsafe conviction as there are more than sufficient grounds for "reasonable doubt".
Note I say alleged as I have not personally seen the physical proof, although Mr Edgar does appear to have the credentials. There is no certain evidence of any deliberate act, although the statistical chances of this alleged innaccuracy occuring randmonly are somewhat astronomical. The evidence also does not directly suggest who is ultimately responsible, I'll leave people to draw their own conclusions there!
17 January 2005, 11:33 PM
#116
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by pslewis -MXOC
Driving along a country road, just been made a 40mph limit, when a car coming towards me flashes his lights and waves ......... I am too busy trying to work out who it was that I fail to see the 2 prize ***** coppas hiding in the bushes!!!!
Now, they are pointing something at me - looks like a radar gun but appears to have a camera on it?? It was hand-held, is there such a device??
I reckon I was doing 50mph - but when I realised what was happening I slammed my brakes on and dropped FAST to 30mph .... will I have been too late??
Why do they have to hide in the bushes??
Why do they have a smug look on their faces when you drive past??
Why are they at a non dangerous section of road thats had no accidents as far as I am aware??
Why did I want to stop, get out the car and shove their toy right up their 4rses??
Why aren't they out in the bushes when kids get abducted??
PI55ED OFF!!!
£60 and 3 points here I come!!
And the final straw???????????????? I was in the MX-5!!!
Pete
Now, they are pointing something at me - looks like a radar gun but appears to have a camera on it?? It was hand-held, is there such a device??
I reckon I was doing 50mph - but when I realised what was happening I slammed my brakes on and dropped FAST to 30mph .... will I have been too late??
Why do they have to hide in the bushes??
Why do they have a smug look on their faces when you drive past??
Why are they at a non dangerous section of road thats had no accidents as far as I am aware??
Why did I want to stop, get out the car and shove their toy right up their 4rses??
Why aren't they out in the bushes when kids get abducted??
PI55ED OFF!!!
£60 and 3 points here I come!!
And the final straw???????????????? I was in the MX-5!!!
Pete
Originally Posted by pslewis
Nah, its just the new factor in our society of not wanting to accept responsibility for ones actions - PATHETIC!
Men just aren't men anymore .......... they are crying babies!
"Its not fair, I didn't mean to speed, there shouldn't be a camera there, I blame Labour, I wouldn't have killed anyone"
"I didn't see your child Mrs Smith - my neon lights dazzled me and I was doing 50 past the school, so what?? I can do what I want!!"
"Of course I didnt hear your 4 year old child scream Mrs Black, my BIG backbox drowns out any sound at all, and I can do any speed I like"
Pete
Men just aren't men anymore .......... they are crying babies!
"Its not fair, I didn't mean to speed, there shouldn't be a camera there, I blame Labour, I wouldn't have killed anyone"
"I didn't see your child Mrs Smith - my neon lights dazzled me and I was doing 50 past the school, so what?? I can do what I want!!"
"Of course I didnt hear your 4 year old child scream Mrs Black, my BIG backbox drowns out any sound at all, and I can do any speed I like"
Pete
Originally Posted by pslewis
Grow-up, pay-up, take it like a man, slow down and stop blubbering!!
Pete
Pete
18 January 2005, 03:20 AM
#117
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: All over...so who needs a car!
Posts: 1,739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Earlier in the thread--->
Pete (BSc Engineering Brunel, Senior Specialist Nuclear Physics, PHd Loughbrough, Honours Degree in Leadership Anglia University, HND Electronics, Full Tech Product Design, + other stuff I've forgotten)
Pete
Later in the thread ---->
Throwing in an 'A' Level as some indication of Scientific Intelligence is laughable ............. and only a kiddie would do such a thing!
Pete
What a ****
Originally Posted by pslewis
Pete (BSc Engineering Brunel, Senior Specialist Nuclear Physics, PHd Loughbrough, Honours Degree in Leadership Anglia University, HND Electronics, Full Tech Product Design, + other stuff I've forgotten)
Pete
Originally Posted by pslewis
Throwing in an 'A' Level as some indication of Scientific Intelligence is laughable ............. and only a kiddie would do such a thing!
Pete
18 January 2005, 12:04 PM
#120
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did mention that speeding offence mentioned above in anothert thread where he was berating some other chap for speeding. He ignored the post since it was true and shot him down in flames.
Very NL I reckon. Just what his hero does when he gets caught out.
Hades,
I had worked out what you mentioned and came to the same conclusion as you.
I gave him the chance to impress us all with a treatise on Doppler and how it actually causes the effect. No sign of that of course. Looks like he can't cope with the explanation, even though it is easy enough to find. He has ducked that as well and I am not surprised.
He has reverted to type with the insults so he is even more rattled now.
Nuclear scientist eh!
Les
Very NL I reckon. Just what his hero does when he gets caught out.
Hades,
I had worked out what you mentioned and came to the same conclusion as you.
I gave him the chance to impress us all with a treatise on Doppler and how it actually causes the effect. No sign of that of course. Looks like he can't cope with the explanation, even though it is easy enough to find. He has ducked that as well and I am not surprised.
He has reverted to type with the insults so he is even more rattled now.
Nuclear scientist eh!
Les