mr2mk1g

Mate, if you wrote that you deserve a fucking comedy medal. hahahahahahahaa

The important figure is generally cited as 10,000ft. Commercial air liners don't register a pressure change of more than about 6,000ft (IIRC) in the cabin. The reason it will break your nice expensive hard drive containing gizmo is hard drives are a spinning disk on which a reader head floats (kinda like a record player). The reader head floats on few molecules of air. Above 10,000ft there simply aren't enough air molecules around to keep the head floating and it hits the disk. Sometimes this just causes failure but the potential for causing permanent and fatal damage is also very real. There's loads of info on the topic in the camera forum if you're interested or a google search will through up more than you'd ever need to know.

Why will this inevitably come down to a shooting match? That was the attitude that caused the First World War - nothing more! The likelihood is the whole thing will be an economic battle... one decided by who can build the most TV's and waffle irons.

should read: "Dog has lucky girlfriend".

If you become pregnant then you have been "knocked up". An alternative meaning of the phrase is that if you were to knock on someone's door in the morning to wake them up then you would have "knocked them up". The meaning can only be conveyed by the context... kinda like the word "bollocks". That can have many meanings dependant on the context.

To a degree of course, but the phenomenon is a particularly strong American characteristic... but lets not bother these nice people in their actors thread hey.

I don't think people are stupid - just 'Americocentric'. What you see here in this thread is people assuming that if an actor speaks English they must be American; assuming that if they've seen them in Hollywood movies they must be American. I just noted the fact and found it amusing; that is all.

Some of them are in the first post and poll options.

Yeah I suppose you could actually go off on a pretty good rant about the Bush admin. Is your teacher a Republican or a Democrat? You could just bang on about Plame and some of the other theories out there and depending on their political pursuasion you could be looking at instant A grades or instant expulsion for something that suddenly materialises in your permanent record you knew nothing about. Didn't Nixon have a black list of people he used to sick the IRS on?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism is a good place to start.

I think the greatest example of cross-pond misunderstanding is the Cockneyism: "can I bum a fag?" In the UK you'd just be asking to borrow a cigarette... in the US... well.. I'm sure you all imagine the 'fun and games' that could ensue.

SO = "Serious Other" - as in the person with whom they'd mate.

Worst case scenarios: You'll fuck your hearing because you'll need it that loud. You'll cause a canopy collision because you didn't hear the warning shouts. You'll do something else wrong because you're concentrating on it/fiddling with buttons when you should by concentrating on not dieing. If it has a hard drive it won't work at altitude and you run the risk of killing it permanently just by turning it on at altitude. Course it'd probably work out just fine most of the time... I don't like counting on "probably" my self but each to their own.

hahahaha - seriously? You guys would really refer to your loved one as the person you mate with? Or is this one of those phrases that you just wouldn't hear out there and if you did hear it from a foreigner you would have to ascribe to it the above meaning?

What's funniest is seeing how many planks think half these people are actually AMERICAN. hahahahaha A cursory glance shows you people so far have at least listed several Englishmen, an Irishman, Scotsman, Welshman, Australian and a Canadian.

Sounds plausible. My father and friends apparently caused a series of newspaper reports and UFO sightings in post-war Cardiff by releasing dry cleaning bags filled with street gas with a torch battery, flashing light and ball of tin-foil suspended beneath them.

Does anyone know what about this plane is considered to be "record breaking"?

Um... well your link you posted does say "the mouthless cat turned global icon of cuteness". Is there something wrong with using a "global icon of cuteness" on a commemorative $60 coin which no one's going to spend?

Maybe, could also be because the convention that keeps getting cited only came into force in 1997. I Dunno. As I posted a few pages back, the Pentagon concluded in its 1995 report entitled "Possible Use of Phosphorous Chemical Weapons by Iraq" that Iraq was using it illegally as a chemical weapon when it fired WP at "rebel forces". I guess they've now changed thier mind.

You keep repeating the stuff which is the very reason why WP may end up classified as a "chemical weapon". Remember, under the treaty it only needs to cause harm or temporarily incapacitate to be termed a chemical weapon. The minor effects you keep talking about are inflammation of the eyes and lungs etc. That is all WWI gasses were often required to do, (yes they also ended up killing people too, especially the later worse gasses employed); the primary goal was often simply to temporarily incapacitate the enemy so we could take their trenches. That's why there's the "temporarily incapacitate" clause in the treaty. This is what I've been saying right from my very first post on the topic a couple of weeks ago. Whether or not WP is a chemical weapon actually hangs on a great big huge technicality. The technical point of whether or not the subject is incapacitated enough for them to fall within the heading of being "temporarily incapacitated" under the treaty palls in comparison to the harm the thermic properties the weapon exhibits.

um... yes it is - that is exactly what you do if you breath in WP smoke. By definition you inhale a concentrated acid. Equally, acid by definition is harmful - it doesn't matter how much you come into contact with, ANY acid touching you will have harmful effects. Contrast that with air or water as you use in your example which do not have harmful effects in small amounts, only large amounts. That there is is a big difference.

Then there's Northern Ireland notes and money from the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands.

The Queen evidently... http://www.reptiles1.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/british/gill.jpg http://www.reptiles1.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/british/lowtheraj42.jpg http://www.reptiles1.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/british/lowthera.jpg

[Mr. Slave] Jeazuth Chritht [/Mr. Slave] man this things going down the pan fast... and I thought Fridays were all peace and love in the SC... guess it started out alright. Ah well - IBTL.

I can't answer for what other people wrote. I was merely expressing exasperation that people were still persisting with the same retarded arguments after I tried to clear the situation up with my first post to this second thread on the issue in the last couple of weeks. Remember it doesn't need to be lethal for it to be covered by the treaty to which our countries subscribe – just cause harm or incapacitate through a chemical process. If you can't see that inhaling a cloud of acid is going to produce harm or incapacitate you while you cough up your guts (as that's all that is required) then there's really little point continuing the discussion. The facts we've cited above are enough for me to agree that there are reasons why the international community might wish to looked into the issue. At the end of the day though, I can't express any opinion above and beyond that. I simply can't comment on whether or not the risk of chemical injuries amounts to being sufficient for this weapon to be considered a "chemical weapon". All I've tried to do here is clarify the arguments for people and acknowledge that there are questions to be asked.