London Banter - ELL video

Tom Anderson wrote on 05 May 2010 00:51:23 ...
On Tue, 4 May 2010, Richard J. wrote:

Tom wrote on 03 May 2010 11:26:52 ...
On Fri, 30 Apr 2010, MIG wrote:

On 30 Apr, 22:38, "Richard wrote:
wrote on 30 April 2010 16:32:41 ...

And what I should have said was that the NLL goes further W than the
WLL, further S than the SLL and further E than the ELL ...

Further south than the SLL is a questionable claim. Based on Google
maps, I believe Richmond (the southernmost part of the NLL) is just
slightly further north than the southernmost part of the SLL (the
flyover over Brixton station) - by about 0.0004 degrees of latitude, or
around 50 metres.

Please don't spoil my claims with facts.

Hang on, surely that means that if you only consider points served by the
lines, ie stations rather than bits of track such as Brixton where the SLL
famously does not stop, then your claim is supported by the facts?

Aha, I knew someone would raise that! His claim was that the NLL "goes
further S" than the SLL, not that it stops further south.

If a railway line's trains don't call somewhere, then it can't be said to
go there - it might pass through it, but it doesn't go there. If i take
the tube from the Angel to the Elephant, would you let me get away with
saying "i went to the middle of the Thames today"?

"to" implies a destination, which the middle of the Thames clearly
isn't, so your statement is badly phrased.

We were talking about which of two lines went the furthest south. A
similar topic would be to discuss which tube line goes deepest when
passing under the Thames. ('Deepest' = furthest below mean sea level)
I'm sure you would agree that this is a perfectly valid thing to measure
and discuss even though you can't get out of the train there. I'm just
doing the same sort of thing in a different direction.

--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)