« You can’t make an omelette without taking mugs | Main | Attack – that’s what we lack »
Lardberg ahoy!
Sometimes we ask ourselves: how did we get here? Specifically, why are we discussing whether a lard iceberg would have sunk the Titanic, or whether a lard/water composite was responsible? We can feel a Discovery Channel special coming on.
‘Lard at zero degrees centigrade or below is rock-hard (or ice-hard if you prefer), so a composite lard-tipped iceberg would not have been required to sink the Titanic,’ says a contributor who, wisely, signs himself only as ‘Peter’.
‘An iceberg stays frozen in warmer conditions due to its mass,’ says Paul Cripps, at ShopRite. ‘Given that the freezing-point of lard is only four degrees less than water, given a sufficient mass of the lard tip it too would also have been largely frozen.
‘This means the Titanic is doomed, as the frozen lardberg would have brushed the side of the ship, causing similar gashes – a fact amplified by the brittleness of the ship’s steel at the given water temperature on the night of about -0.5 degrees.’
Wait, there’s more: ‘Lard is much denser than ice, so the lard tip would extend far down into the water, well below the keel of the Titanic,’ points out John Blenkinsop.
’But then, the lard being heavier than the equivalent volume of ice, it would probably be on the bottom of the iceberg and not the top. This could explain why no submarines were injured by this
iceberg, even if the Titanic was.’
Post a comment