Big Bad Bob

*IF* most of the players are on monthly contracts, would they be considered self-employed for tax purposes, therefore they would be liable for their own tax and NI (employers and employees)?? All the club would cover is PAYE for their permanent players and staff and VAT..

http://www.xenophilia.com/zb0003a.htm http://www.clavius.org/envradfilm.html

As far as I understand it... Gatso cameras are generally fixed and will take a photo of the back of the car. Mobile cameras are forward facing and work on laser/infrared. Where Lord Duckhunter thinks he got caught would have been a mobile camera, they don't flash as it would flash in your eye and be a danger...

Van Allen belt explained But it's only one NASA apologist against 2 Conspiracy theorists, as there are 2 of them they must be believed...

It's not a static camera along that stretch of road, must have been a car (I've seen one before sitting on the central reservation) which would mean infrared at that time of night!! Saint Garrett raises an interesting point, variable speed limits!! Fair enough have 40s and 50s on dual carriageways during peak periods but, for heaven's sake, when it's quite up the limit a bit... When I was in Aus I drove past a school, they had a 20(?) limit between opening and closing times and a 40 otherwise.....

Although Google uses the word satellite, most of the high-resolution imagery of cities is aerial photography taken from aircraft flying at 800–1500 feet rather than from satellites; while most of the rest of the imagery is in fact from satellites. I thought everyone knew that??

Ah yeah, another dual carriageway with a 50 limit but only mobile cameras so no fatalities!! I guess they made it 50 because of the roundabouts or people pulling out of the side roads!! I do max 55 on the Dorset Way/Holes Bay and generally sit in the outside lane "overtaking" cars and you're right, it does hack a few people off. Like you say, the tech exists to track peoples' speed, in fact you can volunteer for one now to get a better insurance premium, so (human rights aside) why can't it be used to either stop people speeding (rev limit them) or alert the police when they do....

Where did you get caught then Lord Duckhunter. I know what you mean about the Holes Bay, that camera on the Traffic Light shortly after the speed limit drops from 50 to 30 has caught quite a few out. I can understand why they dropped the limit on the Holes bay, what with the number of people being killed and injured and they dropped the limit on the Dorset Way to protect the Lamp posts!! I do feel the same as you that they drop the limit to put a camera there to make money BUT apparently a speed camera has to be approved on a stretch of road if there has been a certain amount of casualties. I'm as guilty as you in speeding but I generally keep to the speed limit in the lower limit areas, ie 30s, 40s and 50s precisely because I don't want to give my hard earned to the government! So to counter what you say, to stop them being money spinning rackets, don't speed. Everyone knows where the cameras are theses days, even the mobile ones...

lead lined suits and lead impregnated visors.....

I've highlighted the appropriate word above, that being ON e.g. on the surface of the moon, not on a vehicle roving the moon. I think you'll agree they are very much different technologies! Honestly I think you're so wanting to believe that the Lunar landings were faked that you're using sematics and pedantics to try and convince yourself.

FFS it's like juggling sand. So, it's a multi-national PROVEN FACT, that there are reflectors on the moon, Russian and American!! Yet somehow we're to believe the photos of the Russian Lunar one but not the American Static ones... It's like juggling sand, honestly it is...

Quite prescient our Alps isn't he...

No it doesn't, not at all, the Luna reflectors are anchored firmly to the rovers, the Apollo reflectors are placed on the Moon's surface. Different methods of doing it. And don't you think that, even with a soft landing, the Apollo reflectors might be jarred out of place slightly so would need to be placed more gently. ie not dropped from Orbit even with the Moon's diminished gravity!!

I've just had a PTS tea over keyboard moment with that mental imagery

If you can't see the difference between the Luna solar arrays (actually, physically on the rovers) compared to the Apollo ones (a separate array placed on the Lunar surface) then I must assume you are arguing for arguing sakes..... Also I see that your not debating the veracity of the photos of the Apollo reflectors and the fact that their are footprints around where they were placed.

Or spider-monkies

Seriously, I didn't want to do this but

And I contend that you're still thinking of robotics and automation in today's terms. Back then there really wasn't the computing and automation technology for an unmanned probe to place an object in a perfect position and adjust it accordingly. Also the Surveyor missions had nothing more than trowels to dig with on them but of course the Americans, those sneaky buggers, sent up another probe *WHEN NO-ONE, NOT EVEN THE RUSSIANS, WAS LOOKING*

I saw it not long after it first came out, shocked me to be honest.. Oh, and Pap, http://www.clavius.org/index.html This is probably the most pertinent bit that applys to Pap (from what little I've been able to glean from his online persona) from http://www.clavius.org/why.html

So, what about the Camera from Surveyor 3 that was brought back to Earth by the Apollo 12 mission (the 2nd fake lunar landing mission!) And Apollo 13, that had to slingshot around the moon to get back home? Or Shephard hitting golf balls on the moon during the Apollo 14 mission? And what about their splashdowns that were filmed by TV crews all over the world? Or were Surveyor 1-3 faked too, which means that the US had been perpetrating this skulduggery for, what, 15 years?? Also, one thing Pap, you're assigning today's technology to faking things in the 60s, yes we can do things with photoshop now that make things seem not as they are but, back then, was it really *THAT* easy to fake 100s of photos and videos (or is that why there are so many errors?). *AND* surely if you were faking something you wouldn't make such a shoddy job of it, surely you'd get your camera angles and shadows correct? (OK, so ILM ****ed up a few times with Episode 4!!) Basically, Pap, you don't want to believe that the Lunar landings happened so you won't listen to any counter argument...

I was going out with a French Canadian girl many, many moons ago! This encouraged my mum to track down her estranged Father (he was Canadian GI during the war and did the usual after the war!) Anyway, she eventually tracks him and his family down and discovers that my maternal great Grandmother was Mi'kmaq Indian On her telling me this I informed my work mates I was 1/8 Indian and promptly did a Rain dance in the office, 2 hours later it started raining and didn't stop for 2 weeks (Coincidentally when I did a sun dance!!)

Ah, so Ben 10 is real then

Oh I don't know, I haven't watched it for ages. Actaully, they tried to bust the myth about mentoes in coke and failed......

FFS people, don't speed and you won't have to look for technicalities or payment for previous misdemeanours....

I suggest you go watch the program properly, not just one episode. Loads of "myths" that they haven't been able to bust...