Dillon Pyron wrote:
> [Default] Thus spake "Tom K" :
>
>> "Gadget World" wrote in message
>> news:25883-4A4ACC0C-561@baytvnwsxa001.msntv.msn.com...
>>> Remember the days when the 4th of July was celebrated with a great
>>> fireworks show off the aft of the ship.
>>>
>>> I cannot understand why this does not happen, when seaside towns do
>>> their fireworks shows on the water off-shore.
>>>
>>> I can especially see a very special fireworks show on ships with a large
>>> seating area at the aft, like Princess and soon the Oasis.
>>>
>>> I think that every cruise should be celebrated with fireworks for a
>>> memorable experience.
>>>
>>>
>> Fireworks are intrinsically dangerous. They're explosives. They blow up.
>> They cause fires. If you were an insurance company, would you allow it on
>> ships that you insure? If you were a passenger on a ship hundreds of miles
>> away from any help... would you want dangerous fireworks around?
>>
>> That reminds me about the time a passenger on a bridge tour asked Captain
>> Ioannis on Constellation why no cruise ships had nuclear reactors. He said
>> it's because they're VERY dangerous.
>
> I know. And look at the US Navy. They've had what, no failures?
>
>> Three Mile Island had a partial core
>> melt down and now thousands of people in New Jersey have thyroid cancer
>
> Umm, the incidence of thyroid cancer above average is about 2. Where
> did you get your statistics from? I have mine from my radiopath text.
>
>> (that's the way the wind blew the radiation... what did you think would
>> happen when you built a nuclear plant near a populated area and had a melt
>> down?).
>>
>> It's simply better to avoid dangerous things. Even if they're 99.9% safe...
>> that 0.1% of the time something bad happens... it's REAL bad.
>>
>> --Tom
>>
I wonder if Tom has one of those dangerous things called a vehicle
carrying HIGHLY flammable and explosive gasoline. I'll never own one. Whew. |