TimR

And read that thinking of me with a gentle smile on my face and a pint in my hand.

[quote name='jakenewmanbass' timestamp='1391777578' post='2361159'] ... Now, in saying that, I'm pretty sure that it's not your intention to present in such a manner, ... [/quote] No it's not cheers. It just winds me up when people just repeat what they've read in the papers or some urban legend without thinking for themselves. People aren't stupid but what we're fond of doing is just repeating stuff without thinking whether it's right and if it goes against what we would like then it's doom and gloom or a conspiracy. My Facebook feed is full of it, the papers are full of it, my mates repeat it down the pub, people harp on about it here, my colleagues go on about it at work. I really am not surprised Fly and Dad have left the rat race and given up (obviously from the other standpoint) but I think if people just stopped to think for a second how things actually are, there'd be a lot more happiness.

[quote name='jakenewmanbass' timestamp='1391776939' post='2361149'] Dad and flyfisher, it strikes me that some people, when faced with the apparently abhorrent if not terrifying notion that not all peoples on Earth agree with them, get their knickers in a twist. [/quote] It's not a slight disagreement, it's the assertion that we're all heading into a doomed blind alley. Which is plainly nonsense.

[quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1391775429' post='2361129'] ...but why this virulent exageration all of a sudden..? I don't recognise your descriptionabove from the posts in this thread. It's been stated many times that qualifications are indeed valued; it has simply been mooted that they are not the only and definitive way of establishing competence. Is that so terrible an assertion..? [/quote] Ok. I think I've got threads confused, both this thread and the PAT thread seem to have run into a parrellel corner (if such a thing exists). Someone posted a video of a boiling frog. I was under the impression they thought the whole world was doomed because everyone was paralysed over bits of paper and H&S.

[quote name='Bilbo' timestamp='1391774172' post='2361106'] I can't get over the carnage caused in the 90s by all those petrol stations exploding because people used their mobile phones on the forecourt. It was bedlam. I am all for risk management but sometimes.... [/quote] I'm sure that was because a couple of people in the states caught fire when answering their phones while fuelling. Obviously it's pretty difficult to work out exactly why and the phone seems to be the obvious thing and easiest thing to avoid doing until investigations are conclusive that phones are ok.

Not really a personal insult. Just two character traits of people who believe they're better than everyone else and don't need a bit of paper to show it.

It's a children's story. Frogs and people don't behave like that in real life. Of course the doom and gloom merchants like you to think this is how the world actually works and that they're somehow enlightened and the only ones that can see the 'danger'. Arrogance and pomposity.

[quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1391710572' post='2360530'] Fixed..? My own replies would be...[list=1] [*]To avoid having the death of a frog on their conscience..? [*]To keep the water in the pan..? [/list] Could be wrong... [/quote] No. It's an experiment. Several people have carried it out using different rates of heat and different types of pan. In all cases the frog gets agitated and tries to escape when the temperature reaches the critical point. So 1. Use a stunt frog in your 'demonstration' because the stunt frog won't show agitation at the high temperature. 2. Use steep sides so that when you initially heat the water the frog can't jump out. Dad, I thought your motto was always question everything?

My degree is in electrical and electronic engineering. It taught me to question things I'm told and not follow blindly. I understand why people should be tested and proved competent by another person. This prompts me to ask two further questions about the boiling frog experiment: 1. Why did they use a stunt frog? 2. Why do they use a container with steep sides?

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1391650000' post='2359848'] And there's my point. There will always be total dicks and the only way to totally protect everyone is to gradually introduce more and more regulations and restrictions, which is what is happening and as each new raft of regulations is introduced it clears the way to look for more risks, which of course abound, and so it goes on. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/22/people-getting-dumber-human-intelligence-victoria-era_n_3293846.html or the more amusing version: ... [/quote] Or maybe as the population increases and the materials (like lithium ion batteries) we use and the processes we carry out become more complex then so do the risks. Maybe the real solution is to train everybody in the world up to the highest safety standards that we can. I'm looking forward to picking up my Nuclear Power Station Handbook and also my one day course learning all about how to safely operate an oil rig. I've already ordered my book on 'fracking in your own back garden' from amazon just in case.

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1391653437' post='2359855'] ... At least the Engineering Council was enlightened enough to let me call myself a Chartered Engineer on the basis of my proven experience, even in the absence of all those bits of paper, so that was handy when people who didn't have a clue wanted to understand what I could do. Of course, I'm still not deemed to be competent enough to check a mains lead, so I'd have to pay someone who has likely never even heard of Ohms law but has done a one day course and can flourish their 'certificate of competence' with pride. I was never really sure whether to laugh or cry, so I just bailed out of all the madness as soon as I could. [/quote] Still missing the point. The chartered engineer 'piece of paper' is something that shows you have reached a certain standard, however you got there. It saves people having to ask you to prove yourself over and over again and people having to asses you individually on various criteria everytime they want to employ you. They just say they're looking for a chartered engineer. Same with a driving test. Imagine trying to employ a bunch of people to drive your fleet of vans. How do you assess hundreds of applicants and narrow them down to 20, if they all say they can drive but none of them have a licence and none of them have a 10year pile of insurance 'bits of paper' to prove their competency. As I say it's all about scale. We're operating on a European (even global) scale nowadays, where any one of several thousand million people could turn up on your doorstep looking for work. Not just one of a few thousand from your nearest town.

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1391636547' post='2359698'] ... In my own lifetime, people have become deemed to be 'incompetent' at wiring a mains plug, driving a motorcycle without a CBT course, towing a trailer after passing their driving test, re-wiring their house, installing a wood burning stove, erect scaffolding, use a chainsaw and nowadays test their appliances . . . and I'm sure there are loads of other examples. ... [/quote] Again you're talking daily mail style nonsense. For a start you can buy a mains plug in Maplins and fit it yourself. Absolutely no question. I've used a chainsaw, I'm not aware of any legal requirement to have a chainsaw licence. However, lots of people have been killed doing other things on that list because they've made their own flawed assumption on their own competence and what's worse is other people have died. I only hope that you're not electrocuted when you unplug someone else's dodgy mains plug, or die in a house fire at your friends house because they rewired their house with 0.75mm2 because it was cheaper. But then that would be your own fault. Wouldn't it?

[quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1391635683' post='2359677'] OT, so apologies, but the word 'obtuse' just sprang into my mind. Can't think why..! Sorry, as you were... [/quote] The point I'm making is that we don't live in 1940 where only one or two people in each street own a car. There's millions of cars on the road. You can't be asking people to be proving their competency every 10minutes. For a start everyone would be crying big brother when the police keep stopping them. The other is that people are (like it or not) very driven by money. They'll say they can do things if it means they can earn money. It's already been pointed out that you don't put out a chemical fire with water. How do you know this? Someone has told you or you've read it. How do I know you know this? I ask you at your induction, are you trained to use a fire extinguisher. If you haven't been then I'll ask you to avoid using them because we have people who are, and there is a likelihood that even with the best intentions you'll make things worse. Now we're back to the millions bit. There have been millions of events logged and examined that show this happens, it's not happened just once or twice and no one is trying to spoil anyone's fun or trying to nanny anyone. It's the way things work. If you've ever been in a serious incident and had to endure the picking over of events all this would all become very clear and you wouldn't question why it's done.

[quote name='White Cloud' timestamp='1391632732' post='2359601'] One thing I never say ever is never say never...ever. If you did say never say never ever you would limit yourself by saying never...ever. Why limit your options.... [/quote] As I say we're human beings. We're not computers with hard coded morals. Say whatever you want and revaluate as you gain life experience. It's not a weakness, it shows that you are able to develop as a person. Flea has made an admirable stand up to the Super Bowl he's managed to stick to his principles. Something has happened that has given him reason to evaluate his position and he's qualified that in his satement.

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1391633287' post='2359616'] Well, I'd point to my 35 years of accident-free driving for a start . . . [/quote] And how would you prove that?

[quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1391629912' post='2359520'] Absolutely, as indeed I did, and very safely too, until I passed my driving test. Yes, I knew it was prohibited, and un-insured, so I drove with even more due care and attention (if that's possible...). No, not recommended, and not to be imitated, but yes, I was competent well before having the licence to show for it. [/quote] And how would you demonstrate that competency to a policeman, insurance company or prospective employer?

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1391629060' post='2359492'] Arrgghh! Yes, but you should be able to assess your own competence! or do you need a certificate for that? [/quote] Absolutely. Just get in a car and drive no need for a test. That's what we used to do in the old days before all this competency nonesense.

Google 'musician electrocuted'. There's enough there to keep you going for a bit.

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1391627440' post='2359447'] Yep, another reason to sit back, do nothing and let a 'competent person' deal with it all. You're right that we can't all know everything, but we could all be a bit more aware of what we do and don't know instead of just assume we're incompetent (or worse, be told we are) unless we have a certificate that says otherwise. [/quote] Unfortunately until someone can demonstrate they're competent you have to assume they're not. That's always been the case since time began.

I think you're still missing the point. There have always been people like that. What about the 'technically competent' guy who removed the earth from our PA because it was causing an earth loop? You don't do that by accident! It used to be a common thing to do, and I suspect some people still do it thinking it's fine to do.

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1391620981' post='2359362'] Bonfires are not outlawed at all, never mind generally: https://www.gov.uk/garden-bonfires-rules Chip pan fires are not reliant on naked flames. Most people may no longer be confident around fire, but that's hardly surprising with all the rules and regulations (and misconceptions). It's symptomatic of a bigger problem though. [/quote] What rules and regulations? We don't use fire. That's not a regulation, it's a way of life. I'm confident around fire, I've spent enough years building and cooking on it to get close to it and pick up burning objects. We could spend time teaching our kids how to do this, but unless they're out doing it regularly there are other more important life skills for them to learn that are more relevant to the world we now live in. In the BBC article they point out that airline staff are now trained to deal with those sorts of fires. We can't all know everything.

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1391625805' post='2359429'] ... Still, they are allowed to get away with it so who are the stupid ones? [/quote] More old people stuck in their ways and refusing to move with the times.

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1391617447' post='2359293'] Funny sort of principles then. Seems more like a preference to me. [/quote] That's pretty much what principles are aren't they? We're human beings, we all have many different principles. Often they come into conflict and we have to decide which is more important. That's the trick. 1. We will never mine. 2. We would never turn down the opportunity to be on the TV in front of the whole world. 3. We'll never play a gig that takes longer to set up than we're playing for. 4. We'll never do a free gig. Some perfectly good principles. But which one is the overriding principle? What order of importance are they?

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1391622107' post='2359374'] Yeah, well that's what happens when you get old and cranky and start to see things for what they are instead of just going along with them. Not that I have any choice, of course, except to have the occasional rant. On your own heads be it. ... [/quote] My point is you're pretending you don't understand why it's done and you're deliberately trying to find excuses why it's a bad thing. Now you're likening it to being like a frog in a pressure cooker. Another poster and myself have posted real world examples of dangerous occurrences that have been found or would have been found if checked by a competent person but incompetent people have been using in a dangerous state. Surely you are either now just being obtuse for the sake if it or you really are daft!

Fly, you're being deliberately obtuse again.