Tuearts right boot
Well-Known Member
Coastal erosion is worse than we thought.
The photos thread
- Thread starter peoffrey
- Start date
ColinBellsjockstrap
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Dec 2009
- Messages
- 8,484
The day I met "Father Christmas" at Lewis's in Manchester in 1955.
calumdown
Well-Known Member
ahem.
i like you very much, mate.
if it was anyone else arguing the point i'd have told them to do one,
but as it is you i'm more than happy to waffle on about why you are wrong :)
your argument holds no water at all.
no no no.
once no
twice no
thrice no
sadly,
after once twice thrice there are no specificly named follow-ons.
we just have to say four times, five times, six times, etc.
shame that, it'd be ace if there were more.
anyroad,
a million times no.
after once twice thrice there are no specificly named follow-ons.
we just have to say four times, five times, six times, etc.
shame that, it'd be ace if there were more.
anyroad,
a million times no.
starting with your last sentence...
you are right,
as kids we played with train sets.
they were sets of trains.
they ran on railway lines/tracks.
the bigger the train set the longer the amount of railway tracks.
i agree.
but if your train set was lucky enough to have a station on the railway tracks it was called a railway station not a train station.
the point being,
it is a station on a railway line,
hence why it's called a railway station.
it is not a station on a train,
hence why it is not called a train station.
the journey is spent on a train on a railway line
and you board the train at a railway station.
for comparison...
when you take a plane somewhere,
you board the plane at an airport.
you do not board the plane at a planeport.
you spend the journey on a plane in the air.
it can be argued that loads of people call them train stations.
they do.
they are all wrong though.
let's consult the dictionaries...
this is the photos thread,
so i'd best bung a couple in so as not to be accused of going off-topic
if you insist on disagreeing,
it's highly likely the officer in question will not only pay you a visit,
she will handcuff you,
transport you to llandudno
and take you up the funicular to prove our point.
Oh dear, oh dear oh dear. Whilst I have read and inwardly digested your reply I simply cannot agree.ahem.
i like you very much, mate.
if it was anyone else arguing the point i'd have told them to do one,
but as it is you i'm more than happy to waffle on about why you are wrong :)
your argument holds no water at all.
no no no.
once no
twice no
thrice no
sadly,
after once twice thrice there are no specificly named follow-ons.
we just have to say four times, five times, six times, etc.
shame that, it'd be ace if there were more.
anyroad,
a million times no.
starting with your last sentence...
you are right,
as kids we played with train sets.
they were sets of trains.
they ran on railway lines/tracks.
the bigger the train set the longer the amount of railway tracks.
i agree.
but if your train set was lucky enough to have a station on the railway tracks it was called a railway station not a train station.
the point being,
it is a station on a railway line,
hence why it's called a railway station.
it is not a station on a train,
hence why it is not called a train station.
the journey is spent on a train on a railway line
and you board the train at a railway station.
for comparison...
when you take a plane somewhere,
you board the plane at an airport.
you do not board the plane at a planeport.
you spend the journey on a plane in the air.
it can be argued that loads of people call them train stations.
they do.
they are all wrong though.
let's consult the dictionaries...
View attachment 126387
View attachment 126388
this is the photos thread,
so i'd best bung a couple in so as not to be accused of going off-topic
if you insist on disagreeing,
it's highly likely the officer in question will not only pay you a visit,
she will handcuff you,
transport you to llandudno
and take you up the funicular to prove our point.
I would like to propose a simple survey of Bluemoon members.
A simple question to them should help decide who is right and who is a stinky pooh.
The question I would seek to be put forward to our good members is this........
When travelling by train to an away match do you catch it at Piccadilly train station or are you one of the very few people in the civilised world who catches it from Piccadilly railway station.
I think my question is fair and to the point but I am open to modifications. Perhaps removing Piccadilly train station, replacing it with Victoria train station would avoid unnecessary accusations of bias.
calumdown
Well-Known Member
survey away.
have a quick gander at this first though.
you won't need to go much further than the first line, mind.
Manchester Piccadilly station - Wikipedia
calumdown
Well-Known Member
[/QUOTE]
Anyone can edit Wiki. I'm not throwing any accusations you understand, I believe you play with a straight bat but, if I wanted to win an argument I would also edit Wiki and post it on here. Not that you have.survey away.
have a quick gander at this first though.
you won't need to go much further than the first line, mind.
Manchester Piccadilly station - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
calumdown
Well-Known Member
calumdown
Well-Known Member
I'm suprised you haven't resorted to posting them toffee nosed post brats yet, The Railway Children' :-)