Reply #248: I'll provide a summary tomorrow. Now, concerning your other worries...

[Carefulplease]

Regarding the "learnt/learned" issue:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/radio/specials/1535_questionanswer/page47.shtml

Whoever said the fires were "hot as" a nuclear reactor? You must be mixing up heat and temperature. I claimed that the *heat* outputs were comparable (~1 GigaWatt). Somebody called bullshit on me so I backed up my statement thus:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=107817&mesg_id=108463

To which he replied: "I don't doubt that the heat output rivaled a nuclear power plant"

That was nice of him to tell me he had no such doubt.

Now, of course, the operation *temperature* of a typical (heavy or light) water cooled nuclear reactor is somewhat less (~650C) than the upper layer air temperature of a typical office fire (~1000C). You wouldn't want to experience a runaway core meltdown like one occured in Chernobyl, would you?