Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to Loup321,pje16,AsleepInYorkshire,swill453,bruncher, for Donating to support the site

Health & Safety Gone Mad?

XFool
Lemon Half
Posts: 6953
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 865 times

Health & Safety Gone Mad?

#417410

Postby XFool » June 4th, 2021, 10:48 pm

'Unseaworthy' Noah's Ark replica detained at Ipswich Waterfront

BBC News

A giant replica of Noah's Ark has been deemed unseaworthy and detained where it is docked.

Mike4
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3458
Joined: November 24th, 2016, 3:29 am
Has thanked: 754 times
Been thanked: 1657 times

Re: Health & Safety Gone Mad?

#417411

Postby Mike4 » June 4th, 2021, 10:58 pm

Hmmm... AIUI any fule is free to pilot their death trap of a boat out to sea. There are endless anecdotes of narrowboats crossing the channel or the Wash, loons setting out to sea in a bathtub, and idiots being rescued from five miles out from their rubber duck bought from a seafront novelty shop.

No this ark is obviously not seaworthy being mounted in a steel tray/pontoon suitable only for harbours and inland waterways, but by what law has it been restrained from setting out to sea?

One for the legal board, I'd say...

Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4071
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 2388 times

Re: Health & Safety Gone Mad?

#417458

Postby Gengulphus » June 5th, 2021, 1:23 pm

Mike4 wrote:Hmmm... AIUI any fule is free to pilot their death trap of a boat out to sea. There are endless anecdotes of narrowboats crossing the channel or the Wash, loons setting out to sea in a bathtub, and idiots being rescued from five miles out from their rubber duck bought from a seafront novelty shop.

No this ark is obviously not seaworthy being mounted in a steel tray/pontoon suitable only for harbours and inland waterways, but by what law has it been restrained from setting out to sea?

One for the legal board, I'd say...

The link to https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/noahs-ark-i ... nt-8021138 in the BBC article says (among other things) that the Maritime & Coastguard Agency does not consider it seaworthy, and that:

The detention report, seen by this newspaper, suggests the Ark arrived with legally-required load line certificates missing, no tonnage information, and a range of other concerns such as overdue services for fire equipment, life jackets and life crafts.

Its owners, who had planned to leave by March 31, said the Ark has always been categorised as a “non-certified floating object” not required to comply with international regulation. ...
...
Under UK maritime laws, it is mandatory for ships longer than 24m to have certificates specifying the ‘load line’ - a marking indicating the hull of a ship and legal loading limit for different water types and temperatures.

So if you want to attempt suicide by narrowboat, bathtub or rubber duck, it seems that you should take care to ensure that it's less than 24 metres in length!

Gengulphus

Dod101
Lemon Half
Posts: 8774
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 2084 times
Been thanked: 3832 times

Re: Health & Safety Gone Mad?

#417462

Postby Dod101 » June 5th, 2021, 1:32 pm

I think these objects should not be allowed to set out because if as seems likely something goes wrong, they will presumably expect to be rescued. Why should the RNLI or the Coastguard have to be put to the trouble and expense if it can be avoided?

S I am not sure about Health & Safety but it could be called 'Against the Public Interest' I think.

Dod

moorfield
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2404
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 1:56 pm
Has thanked: 803 times
Been thanked: 769 times

Re: Health & Safety Gone Mad?

#417587

Postby moorfield » June 6th, 2021, 12:25 am

Well if the Flood Myth is to be believed I think Mr Noah and his contemporaries and animals had much bigger concerns to worry about than the health and safety legislation of the day. On balance, I'd say he made the right call.

quelquod
Lemon Slice
Posts: 974
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 12:26 pm
Has thanked: 59 times
Been thanked: 87 times

Re: Health & Safety Gone Mad?

#418199

Postby quelquod » June 8th, 2021, 6:23 pm

moorfield wrote:Well if the Flood Myth is to be believed …


Aren’t you rather prejudging potential believers?

Arborbridge
Lemon Half
Posts: 7324
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 1940 times
Been thanked: 2777 times

Re: Health & Safety Gone Mad?

#418245

Postby Arborbridge » June 8th, 2021, 10:10 pm

Whether any law was broken or not, one feels that surely to God there should have been one!

It all very well for us to insist on having "freedom" to do silly things, but one does also have to consider those who will be expected to rescue idiots at sea, many of whom risk their lives voluntarily.

I admit it's a difficult slippery slope, and I would guess most of us would be happy to leave it to the judgement of our much maligned authorities to make a judgement call. They won't always get it right in the public's view, but I think they may have done so here.


Arb.

jfgw
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1813
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:36 pm
Has thanked: 551 times
Been thanked: 649 times

Re: Health & Safety Gone Mad?

#418270

Postby jfgw » June 8th, 2021, 11:52 pm

There was no health and safety in Noah's time. The Ark was built to God's design, though, so there would not have been any problems. Health and Safety would never have allowed the woodworms on board.

Julian F. G. W.

servodude
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3343
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 1287 times
Been thanked: 966 times

Re: Health & Safety Gone Mad?

#418278

Postby servodude » June 9th, 2021, 1:01 am

jfgw wrote:There was no health and safety in Noah's time. The Ark was built to God's design, though, so there would not have been any problems. Health and Safety would never have allowed the woodworms on board.

Julian F. G. W.


OK
- so why were the unicorns not allowed on?

- sd

Mike4
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3458
Joined: November 24th, 2016, 3:29 am
Has thanked: 754 times
Been thanked: 1657 times

Re: Health & Safety Gone Mad?

#418279

Postby Mike4 » June 9th, 2021, 2:12 am

servodude wrote:
jfgw wrote:There was no health and safety in Noah's time. The Ark was built to God's design, though, so there would not have been any problems. Health and Safety would never have allowed the woodworms on board.

Julian F. G. W.


OK
- so why were the unicorns not allowed on?

- sd


It was them nasty pointy spikes, obvs....

Hope that helps.

servodude
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3343
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 1287 times
Been thanked: 966 times

Re: Health & Safety Gone Mad?

#418281

Postby servodude » June 9th, 2021, 2:21 am

Mike4 wrote:
servodude wrote:
jfgw wrote:There was no health and safety in Noah's time. The Ark was built to God's design, though, so there would not have been any problems. Health and Safety would never have allowed the woodworms on board.

Julian F. G. W.


OK
- so why were the unicorns not allowed on?

- sd


It was them nasty pointy spikes, obvs....

Hope that helps.


So you could have elephants but not rhinoponies?
Doesn't seem fair

Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4071
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 2388 times

Re: Health & Safety Gone Mad?

#418349

Postby Gengulphus » June 9th, 2021, 11:55 am

servodude wrote:
Mike4 wrote:
servodude wrote:
OK
- so why were the unicorns not allowed on?

It was them nasty pointy spikes, obvs....

Hope that helps.

So you could have elephants but not rhinoponies?
Doesn't seem fair

Last time I looked at elephants in their natural state, most of them had two nasty pointy spikes at the front. So I think a more sophisticated explanation for the exclusion of the unicorns is needed...

Edit: Perhaps it was the odd nasty pointy spikes. Narwhals had those as well, but of course they had no need to get on board...

Gengulphus

servodude
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3343
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 1287 times
Been thanked: 966 times

Re: Health & Safety Gone Mad?

#418352

Postby servodude » June 9th, 2021, 12:05 pm

Gengulphus wrote:
servodude wrote:
Mike4 wrote:It was them nasty pointy spikes, obvs....

Hope that helps.

So you could have elephants but not rhinoponies?
Doesn't seem fair

Last time I looked at elephants in their natural state, most of them had two nasty pointy spikes at the front. So I think a more sophisticated explanation for the exclusion of the unicorns is needed...

Edit: Perhaps it was the odd nasty pointy spikes. Narwhals had those as well, but of course they had no need to get on board...

Gengulphus


I think you might be on to something!

A singular odd bias could also explain the lack of cyclopes ?

-sd


Return to “Curiosity Corner”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest