The whole of Sheiffield under water.

In message , Adrian A
writes
wrote:
On Jun 25, 11:25 pm, "Tom Bradbury" wrote:

He died of the cold, not from drowning.

Surely not?

it's England in June; summer.

And if you believe the do-gooders, global warming is out of control so
there's no possible way the water would or could have been cold enough
to kill him.

Unless global warming is a load of ******** of course......

What a pratt you are! It's global warming that is causing the extreme
weather.

Or maybe vice versa?
Ian.
--

On 25 Jun, 23:46, "Lord Turkey Cough" wrote:
"Mary Pegg" wrote in message

...

Lord Turkey Cough wrote:

"Derek Geldard" wrote in message
What's the apostrophy for ?

Its to indicate something is missing.

How do you indicate a missing apostrophe?

Its' done like that.



Google for Hartman's Law of Prescriptivist Retaliation!

David Hearn wrote:

My point is that I trust that the emergency services would have done
everything that they could to save the person, and that we're in
possession of little of the facts. There could have been a whole number

Agreed.

of reasons why they could not save him - and making various suppositions
about why the person died, ranging from incompetence of the services
("if they'd strapped a harness under him and then set 6 beefy firemen
pulling hard he would've come free eventually") through to refusal of
treatment ("I think your refusal of consent idea is probably behind
this.")

As was said at the beginning, "something's funny there". So people
speculate. And I don't think Huge was accusing anyone of incompetence,
just pointing out the fact that brute force would have got the guy
out, with or without foot.

isn't terribly helpful, especially to people related to or
knowing any of the people involved.

Dunno where *you're* coming from, but in uk.misc we have a, err,
"robust" approach to the news.

--
"Checking identity papers is a complete waste of time. If anyone can
be counted on to have valid papers, it will be the terrorists".

On 26 Jun, 10:01, "harrogate3" wrote:
"Jethro" wrote in message

oups.com... On 25 Jun, 21:10, Sam Nelson wrote:
In article ,



says...

Well you would think so the way the news channels are
going overvboard about it.
Blimey you would think these people had never seen a heavy
rain shower before!!
A waste of the license payers money.

Some poor bloke drowning in front of a bunch of helpless
firefighters
because he had his foot trapped in a gate is pretty serious stuff.
Isn;t it?

ITYM "grate"

No, he got his foot caught in a wrought iron gate.

Oops, my mistake - first news reports I heard yesterday was "grate"
and I hadn't re-read since.

Sorry.

In message . com,
Jethro writes
Oops, my mistake - first news reports I heard yesterday was "grate"
and I hadn't re-read since.

He was helping a mate,
to clear a grate and
got his foot stuck in a gate,
great.


--
bof at bof dot me dot uk

In article , Steve Walker spam-
writes
Palindrome wrote:

Even if access was very restricted, a helo overhead with a strop under
his bottom should have popped (most of) him out in a second or two..
possibly a bit more humane that half a dozen firemen pulling away..

Indeed - or even a JCB or forklift from any nearby site.

I think your refusal of consent idea is probably behind this.



This is starting to sound like uk.railway. Whenever theres a crash all
the armchair experts have their "cause" set in stone!.

I 'm sure in this case that all was done to try and save a life, and
there was some reason why they couldn't save the bloke concerned as none
of us was there and don't know all the facts of what went on......
--
Tony Sayer

In article [email protected]
reader02.plus.net, says...
On 26/06/2007 09:26, foghollow wrote:

In article [email protected]
reader02.plus.net, says...
On 26/06/2007 08:50, foghollow wrote:
Its to indicate something is missing.
^
|

How do you indicate a missing apostrophe?
Point at where it belongs with an arrow as above.

Shame it only lines up if everybody's using the same font
It shows up correctly when using *any* fixed spacing font, which is
traditional for usenet, would you rather I top-posted and used HTML with
8-bit characters too?

Courier is fixed innit? That's what I'm using.

Yes same here, and so it should have lined-up, actually with the
increasing levels of quote characters, varying styles of trimming and
probably a mixture of fixed 72 column and flowed wrapping, it is "edging
over" relative to the text it was originally pointing at.

Checking closely I find I had Courier 10 for normal text and Courier 9 for quoted text. God
knows why.
--
Snob? Were I a snob, I wouldn't be talking to you.

In article 1182849284.510950.105010
@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com, says...
On 25 Jun, 23:46, "Lord Turkey Cough" wrote:
"Mary Pegg" wrote in message

...

Lord Turkey Cough wrote:

"Derek Geldard" wrote in message
What's the apostrophy for ?

Its to indicate something is missing.

How do you indicate a missing apostrophe?

Its' done like that.



Google for Hartman's Law of Prescriptivist Retaliation!


[whoosh]
--
Snob? Were I a snob, I wouldn't be talking to you.

In message , harrogate3
writes

"mogga" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 22:36:06 GMT, "Lord Turkey Cough"
wrote:



What are Yorkshire water shares like at the moment;?....

Has the hosepipe ban ben lifted yet?


No and it won't be if the resevoir bursts.
--
http://www.freedeliveryuk.co.uk


Actually Yorkshire Water have not instituted a hosepipe ban in well
over a decade, ever since they got the water grid in place and the
aqueduct from Kielder.

Ah! So they steal it from Northumberland, do they?
Ian.
--

David Hearn wrote:
Why assume that it'll be the foot which comes off? Knee? Leg? Arm?
Either of those coming off and resulting in him having significant
bleeding, whilst in a sewer/drain, is also going be a significant risk
to life. It's not exactly a sterile area. Add to that the fact that
he may have been weak at the time. Basically, we have no idea what
really happened, the decisions that were made by the medical and
rescue staff, the amount of access (both to the patient, and the
immediate area around).

If you don't want to discuss current affairs within the limits of available
information, can I suggest that usenet perhaps isn't the right place for
you?

My point is that I trust that the emergency services would have done
everything that they could to save the person, and that we're in
possession of little of the facts. There could have been a whole
number of reasons why they could not save him - and making various
suppositions about why the person died, ranging from incompetence of
the services ("if they'd strapped a harness under him and then set 6
beefy firemen pulling hard he would've come free eventually") through
to refusal of treatment ("I think your refusal of consent idea is
probably behind this.") isn't terribly helpful, especially to people
related to or knowing any of the people involved.

If debate was stifled in every case where there was a victim or relative,
then we'd have nothing left to discuss except bus timetables.