4 ms·
The video itself mentions an incident from 2002.
by flemhans 5y ago
The video itself mentions an incident from 2002.
- dang 5y agoThanks, I'll tentatively update to 2002. Where does it say that? Edit: thanks, you guys - seems to have been a misunderstanding so we've reverted to 1999 now.
- bellyfullofbac 5y agoSeems like GP is talking about a different video, that plays next on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Flq-zl1CAb0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Flq-zl1CAb0 . At 0:08 it has text that mentions an incident in 2002. Assuming archive.org is accurate, surely the video couldn't have been published in 1999 and be talking about an accident in 2002? Unless the coal industry invented a time machine...
- flemhans 5y agoSorry, yes, must've watched the wrong video!
- dredmorbius 5y agoGiven a random uncited YouTube attribution and two catalogue-oriented organisations (Worldcat and Archive.org), I'd go with the catalogues and their 1999 date.
- dredmorbius 5y agoI've watched 3 times without seeing or hearing this. At what timestamp?