British Expats

British Expats (https://britishexpats.com/forum/)
-   The Maple Leaf (https://britishexpats.com/forum/maple-leaf-98/)
-   -   disappointment with petsaway.uk (https://britishexpats.com/forum/maple-leaf-98/disappointment-petsaway-uk-657265/)

oicur0t Mar 23rd 2010 11:17 am

Re: disappointment with petsaway.uk
 

Originally Posted by dbd33 (Post 8443008)
Humans are also less given to humping on aeroplanes.

lol, that is sooo wrong :)

dbd33 Mar 23rd 2010 11:55 am

Re: disappointment with petsaway.uk
 

Originally Posted by BadgerNaboo (Post 8442624)
?

This was a reference to my perception that the poster of the BMW picture has a penchant for spirited acceleration. I've since been advised that this is not, in fact, the case and that the dog has nothing to fear from being driven at a "sensible 80 km/h". I retract appropriately.

Novocastrian Mar 23rd 2010 1:50 pm

Re: disappointment with petsaway.uk
 

Originally Posted by dbd33 (Post 8443097)
This was a reference to my perception that the poster of the BMW picture has a penchant for spirited acceleration. I've since been advised that this is not, in fact, the case and that the dog has nothing to fear from being driven at a "sensible 80 km/h". I retract appropriately.

But surely, the issue is not the terminal velocity, but rather the weight of the foot on the accelerator pedal.

I think the poster of the BMW picture might have confused her physics.

ireland2canada Mar 23rd 2010 2:04 pm

Re: disappointment with petsaway.uk
 

Originally Posted by Novocastrian (Post 8443277)
But surely, the issue is not the terminal velocity, but rather the weight of the foot on the accelerator pedal.

I think the poster of the BMW picture might have confused her physics.

Well really, there is nothing confusing about the physics.

Stomp on pedal, car goes whizz, dog suckered into back seat. Scientific fact, although I accept that the makers of obnoxious cars can explain it much more thoroughly than I.

All much preferable to being crammed under an airplane seat.

Novocastrian Mar 24th 2010 6:28 am

Re: disappointment with petsaway.uk
 

Originally Posted by ireland2canada (Post 8443298)
Well really, there is nothing confusing about the physics.

Stomp on pedal, car goes whizz, dog suckered into back seat. Scientific fact, although I accept that the makers of obnoxious cars can explain it much more thoroughly than I.

All much preferable to being crammed under an airplane seat.

The makers of obnoxious cars are not necessarily obnoxious themselves, it's just the people who buy them.

With this in mind, the makers of said cars might stretch to expressing "car goes wizz" "dog suckered into back seat" more precisely by applying the formula F=ma, in which the backward canine acting force (F) is shown to be equal to the particular canine's mass (m) multiplied by the acceleration of the obnoxious car in the forward direction. Leaving the niceties of vectors alone, we won't be bothered about negative signs and all that.

Now, to return to dbd33's no doubt inaccurate reportage of your first remark, please note that the velocity of the vehicle plays no role and that by the time you are driving at a quiet steady 80 kph the damage has already been done by the "stomp on pedal bit".

dbd33 Mar 24th 2010 6:41 am

Re: disappointment with petsaway.uk
 

Originally Posted by Novocastrian (Post 8445186)
The makers of obnoxious cars are not necessarily obnoxious themselves, it's just the people who buy them.

With this in mind, the makers of said cars might stretch to expressing "car goes wizz" "dog suckered into back seat" more precisely by applying the formula F=ma, in which the backward canine acting force (F) is shown to be equal to the particular canine's mass (m) multiplied by the acceleration of the obnoxious car in the forward direction. Leaving the niceties of vectors alone, we won't be bothered about negative signs and all that.

Now, to return to dbd33's no doubt inaccurate reportage of your first remark, please note that the velocity of the vehicle plays no role and that by the time you are driving at a quiet steady 80 kph the damage has already been done by the "stomp on pedal bit".

I worked with this guy, Tom someone, a sad and geeky fellow, as so many of us in this business are. He was in his mid-thirties then and lived with his Mum. One day he came into the smoke room, his face a mass of bruises, his eyes blackened. He'd been driving and failed to observe that the vehicle ahead of him had come to a halt. He hit it at considerable speed. Not being restrained by a belt he'd used his head to bring forward momentum to a halt. We muttered sympathetically.

"And my dog" he said, breaking into sobs.

I remembered he'd had a non-dog, something of the sort Paris Hilton might forget in a bar. The dog had not done well within sudden deceleration. "Dog goes whizz" as one might say, followed by "dog goes splat". Tom's explanation was less technical and more heartfelt. At first we suppressed our giggles, but they spread in a wave, as they will. I don't recall now if that was the last moment of speaking to Tom but I no longer do.

In short then, rapid changes in rate of motion are not good for dogs.

Novocastrian Mar 24th 2010 7:41 am

Re: disappointment with petsaway.uk
 

Originally Posted by dbd33 (Post 8445221)
I remembered he'd had a non-dog, something of the sort Paris Hilton might forget in a bar. The dog had not done well within sudden deceleration. "Dog goes whizz" as one might say, followed by "dog goes splat". Tom's explanation was less technical and more heartfelt. At first we suppressed our giggles, but they spread in a wave, as they will. I don't recall now if that was the last moment of speaking to Tom but I no longer do.

In short then, rapid changes in rate of motion are not good for dogs.

Given that it's not yet Friday afternoon, I'll resist the notion of comparing the damage done by a whizzing toy poodle under these circumstances to that done by a tortoise of similar weight. I fear the discussion could all too quickly get very controversial.

And we don't want that.

fledermaus Mar 24th 2010 8:18 am

Re: disappointment with petsaway.uk
 

Originally Posted by Novocastrian (Post 8445394)
Given that it's not yet Friday afternoon, I'll resist the notion of comparing the damage done by a whizzing toy poodle under these circumstances to that done by a tortoise of similar weight. I fear the discussion could all too quickly get very controversial.

And we don't want that.

we don't?

Novocastrian Mar 24th 2010 8:29 am

Re: disappointment with petsaway.uk
 

Originally Posted by fledermaus (Post 8445514)
we don't?

Of course there's always a bolshie element on this type of forum whose only goal is to stir the pot, having for example no sensitivity towards the deep feelings that other posters share with their tortoises and in-bred lapdogs.

But we're not like that, are we?

ireland2canada Mar 24th 2010 10:10 am

Re: disappointment with petsaway.uk
 

Originally Posted by Novocastrian (Post 8445394)
Given that it's not yet Friday afternoon, I'll resist the notion of comparing the damage done by a whizzing toy poodle under these circumstances to that done by a tortoise of similar weight. I fear the discussion could all too quickly get very controversial.

And we don't want that.

What about an unsympathetically shaven half-a-poodle? I assume that the dog's newly aerodynamic form would present quite a hazard to fellow passengers should they be in any form of collision.

fledermaus Mar 24th 2010 10:37 am

Re: disappointment with petsaway.uk
 

Originally Posted by ireland2canada (Post 8445990)
What about an unsympathetically shaven half-a-poodle? I assume that the dog's newly aerodynamic form would present quite a hazard to fellow passengers should they be in any form of collision.

I would predict decapitation followed by defenestration.

fledermaus Mar 24th 2010 10:38 am

Re: disappointment with petsaway.uk
 

Originally Posted by Novocastrian (Post 8445562)
Of course there's always a bolshie element on this type of forum whose only goal is to stir the pot, having for example no sensitivity towards the deep feelings that other posters share with their tortoises and in-bred lapdogs.

But we're not like that, are we?

Is it legal to have deep feelings towards a tortoise??

Novocastrian Mar 24th 2010 10:53 am

Re: disappointment with petsaway.uk
 

Originally Posted by ireland2canada (Post 8445990)
What about an unsympathetically shaven half-a-poodle? I assume that the dog's newly aerodynamic form would present quite a hazard to fellow passengers should they be in any form of collision.

If by half-a-poodle you mean Charlie, I prefer not to comment.


Originally Posted by fledermaus (Post 8446066)
I would predict decapitation followed by defenestration.

It was indeed the defenestration aspect that I was thinking of. Mhos and all that.


Originally Posted by fledermaus (Post 8446072)
Is it legal to have deep feelings towards a tortoise??

I believe you have to be in a common law relationship and that the tortoise must be at least 16 years old. However I think it's the anatomical issues which might be more, err, pressing.

fledermaus Mar 24th 2010 11:35 am

Re: disappointment with petsaway.uk
 

Originally Posted by Novocastrian (Post 8446118)
It was indeed the defenestration aspect that I was thinking of. Mhos and all that.
.

It's an electric car?? Would it ever go fast enough?

Atlantic Xpat Mar 24th 2010 11:54 am

Re: disappointment with petsaway.uk
 
But what if the car (electric or otherwise) was on a giant treadmill........


All times are GMT -12. The time now is 6:41 am.

Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.