Passenger airliner hijacked out of Sea-Tac.
- Thread starter Blaze
- Start date
- Status
That makes my head hurt, but it's the usual conspiracy theory nonsense. Throw in whatever buzzword about whatever imaginary group of actors is the conspiracy flavour of the day, weave a tall tale, always say there is no such thing as coincidences, and you're well on your way. The disclaimer at the outset is a riot.
Crimony, this rubbish isn't even falsifiable. Then again, that's what conspiracy theory is all about. They might as well have included aspects of the dark side of the moon and Nazi moonbases while they were at it.
Crimony, this rubbish isn't even falsifiable. Then again, that's what conspiracy theory is all about. They might as well have included aspects of the dark side of the moon and Nazi moonbases while they were at it.
Originally Posted By: spasm3
How was a baggage handler able to perform the startup sequence on a twin engine turbo prop plane?
A bit of luck and following the on board Checklist...
How was a baggage handler able to perform the startup sequence on a twin engine turbo prop plane?
A bit of luck and following the on board Checklist...
Originally Posted By: Cujet
Conversely, I'm a pilot and can't fly desktop sims with any proficiency. Maybe it does work the other way though.
It does... My pilots friends suck at desktop air combat such as
WarBirds because its 1G flying with 0.0% feel... whereas the kids
raise on desk top Sims perform surprising well during the first flight
at EAA Young Eagles day... however the kids do get wide eyed when you
load more than 1G on their little bodies...
Larry call sign -xlax- WarBirds...
Conversely, I'm a pilot and can't fly desktop sims with any proficiency. Maybe it does work the other way though.
It does... My pilots friends suck at desktop air combat such as
WarBirds because its 1G flying with 0.0% feel... whereas the kids
raise on desk top Sims perform surprising well during the first flight
at EAA Young Eagles day... however the kids do get wide eyed when you
load more than 1G on their little bodies...
Larry call sign -xlax- WarBirds...
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Would MSFS have shown one how to attempt a loop, fail, end up inverted and then roll the aircraft back to its proper orientation?
MSFS would afford you many attempts at loops and aileron rolls without
the penalty of death... practiced many times you learn to raise the
noses 10 to 15 degrees BEFORE rolling inverted which he failed to
do... instead his flight path was level when he rolled inverted and
his orientation was improper which progressed into a classic low
altitude Split S maneuver coming very close to lawn darting the
water... listen to the props on pull up... the tips are over speeding
like the drone you hear at the Reno Air Races...
Rolling Inverted...
Classic Split S maneuver...
Close to Lawn Darting the Water...
Would MSFS have shown one how to attempt a loop, fail, end up inverted and then roll the aircraft back to its proper orientation?
MSFS would afford you many attempts at loops and aileron rolls without
the penalty of death... practiced many times you learn to raise the
noses 10 to 15 degrees BEFORE rolling inverted which he failed to
do... instead his flight path was level when he rolled inverted and
his orientation was improper which progressed into a classic low
altitude Split S maneuver coming very close to lawn darting the
water... listen to the props on pull up... the tips are over speeding
like the drone you hear at the Reno Air Races...
Rolling Inverted...
Classic Split S maneuver...
Close to Lawn Darting the Water...
Last edited:
Mercy, some people are spring loaded to the conspiracy position...
CONSPIRACY THEORIES Scientific American, April 2017
Despite optimistic talk about "collective intelligence," the Web has
helped create an echo chamber where misinformation thrives. Indeed,
the viral spread of hoaxes, conspiracy theories, and other false or
baseless information online is one of the most disturbing social
trends of the early 21st century.
Social scientists are studying this echo chamber by applying
computational methods to the traces people leave on Facebook, Twitter
and other such outlets. Through this work, they have established that
users happily embrace false information as long as it reinforces their
preexisting beliefs.
Faced with complex global issues, people of all educational levels
choose to believe compact- but false- explanations that clearly
identify an object of blame. Unfortunately, attempts to debunk false
beliefs seem only to reinforce them. Stopping the spread of
misinformation is thus a problem with no apparent simple solutions.
Conspiracy theories are nothing new, but in an age of rampant populism
and digital activism, they have acquired new power to influence
real-world events- usually for the worse. In a 2013 report on global
risks, the World Economic Forum named the viral spread of baseless or
false information as one of the most dangerous social trends of the
age, on an equal footing with terrorism. With antidemocratic
politicians on the rise throughout the West, we are now seeing the
danger of viral misinformation become manifest. People are
surprisingly bad at distinguishing credible information from hoaxes.
In my country, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation
and Development, more than half of Italians between the ages of l5 and
65 have poor literacy. And social media have made it easy for
ideas-even false ones- to spread around the globe almost
instantaneously.
Social scientists have recently made significant progress in
understanding the spread and consumption of information, its effect on
opinion formation, and the ways people influence one another. Advances
in technology have made it possible to exploit the deluge of data from
social media-the traces that people use as they choose, share and
comment online- to study social dynamics at a high level of
resolution. The approach, called computational social science, unites
mathematics, statistics, physics, sociology and computer science, with
the aim of studying social phenomena in a quantitative manner.
By applying the methods of computational social science to the traces
that people leave on Facebook, Twitter, You Tube and other such
outlets, scientists can study the spread of conspiracy theories in
great detail. Thanks to these studies, we know that humans are not, as
has long been assumed, rational. Presented with unfiltered
information, people will appropriate that which conforms to their own
thinking. This effect, known as confirmation bias, fuels the spread of
demonstrably false arguments- theories about global mega conspiracies,
connections between vaccines and autism, and other nonsense. And
unfortunately, there seems to be no easy way to break this cycle.
THE ECHO CHAMBER
AT THE IMT SCHOOL for Advanced Studies Lucca, my colleagues and I have
spent the past five years investigating the spread of information and
misinformation on social networks. The research group comprises two
physicists (Guido Caldarelli and Antonio Scala), a statistician
(Alessandro Bessi, now at the University of Southern California's
Information Sciences Institute), a mathematician (Michela Del
Vicario), and two computer scientists (Fabiana Zollo and me). We are
especially interested in learning how information goes viral and how
opinions are formed and reinforced in cyberspace.
One of our first studies on the subject, which we began in 2012 and
published in 2015, was designed to learn how social media users treat
three different types of information: mainstream news, alternative
news and online political activism. The first category is
self-explanatory: it refers to the media outlets that provide
nationwide news coverage in Italy. The second category includes
outlets that claim to report information that the mainstream media
have "hidden." The final category refers ~o content published by
activist groups that use the Web as a tool for political mobilization.
Gathering information for our study, especially from alternative
sources, was time-consuming and painstaking. We collected and manually
verified various indicators from Face book users and groups active in
hoax busting From the 50 Face book pages that we investigated, we
analyzed the online behavior of more than two million Italian users
who interacted with those pages between September 2012 and February
2013. We found that posts on qualitatively different topics behaved
very similarly online: the same number of users tended to interact
with them, to share them on social media and to debate them. In other
words, information from major daily newspapers, alternative news
sources and political activist sites all reverberate in the same way.
Two different hypotheses could explain this result. The first
possibility was that all users treat all information equally,
regardless of its veracity. The other was that members of certain
interest groups threat all information equally, whether it is true or
not if it reinforces their preexisting beliefs. The second hypothesis
was, to us, more interesting. It suggested that confirmation bias
plays an important role in the spread of misinformation. It also
suggested that, despite optimistic talk about "collective
intelligence" and the wisdom of crowds, the Web has in fact driven the
creation of the echo chamber.
THE MANAGER AND THE MESSAGE
THE NEXT STEP was to test these two hypotheses. We decided to compare
the online behavior of people who read science news with that of
people who usually follow alternative news and conspiracy theories. We
chose these two types of content because of a very specific
difference-whether they have a sender, a manager of the message.
Science news is about studies published in scientific journals: work
by authors and institutions that are known quantities. Conspiracy
theories, in contrast, have no understanding the viral nature of the
phenomena. These groups tend to exclude anything that does not fit
with their worldview. sender: they are formulated to amplify
uncertainty. The subject is always a secret plan or truth that someone
is deliberately concealing from the public.
There is another major difference between science news and conspiracy
theories. Whether true or not, science news belongs to a tradition of
rational thinking based on empirical evidence. Conspiracy thinking, on
the other hand, arises when people find themselves unable to determine
simple causes for complex, adverse circumstances. The very complexity
of issues such as multiculturalism, the growing intricacy of the
global financial system and technological progress can lead peo- ple,
regardless of educational level, to choose to believe compact
explanations that clearly identify an object of blame. Martin Bauer, a
social psychologist at the London School of Economics and a scholar of
conspiracy dynamics, describes conspiracy thinking as a
"quasireligious mentality." It is a little bit like the dawn of
humanity, when people attributed divinity to storms.
For this study, which we called "Science vs Conspiracy: Collective
Narratives in the Age of Misinformation'' and published in PLOS ONE,
we investigated 73 Face book pages, 39 of which trafficked in
conspiracy and 34 of which published science news. Altogether, these
pages had more than a million Italian users between 2010 and 2014. We
found that both sets of pages attracted very attentive audiences-users
who rarely leave their echo chambers. People who read science news
rarely read conspiracy news, and vice versa. But the conspiracy pages
attracted three times more users.
The tendency of Face book to create echo chambers plays an important
role in the spread of false rumors. When we investigated 4,709 posts
that satirized conspiracy theories (example: "Airplane chemtrails
contain Viagra"), we found that consumers of "real" conspiracy news
were much more likely to read these satirical pieces than readers of
legitimate science news. We also found that users who focus primarily
on conspiracy news tend to share content more widely.
When we reconstructed the social networks of our two groups (science
news readers and fans of conspiracy theories), we discovered a
surprising statistical regularity: as the number of likes for a
specific type of narrative increased, the probability of having a
virtual social network composed solely of users with the same profile
also increased. In other words, the more you are exposed to a certain
type of narrative, the greater the probability that all your Face book
friends will have the same news preferences. The division of social
networks into homogeneous groups is crucial understanding the viral
nature of the phenomena. These groups tend to exclude anything that
does not fit with their worldview.
A WICKED PROBLEM
In 2014 WE DECIDED to start investigating efforts to correct the
spread of unsubstantiated claims in social media. Does debunking work?
To find out, we measured the "persistence"-the tendency of a person to
continue engaging with a specific type of content over time-of
conspiracy news readers who had been exposed to debunking campaigns.
The results, currently pending for publication, were not encouraging.
People who were exposed to debunking campaigns were 30 percent more
likely to keep reading conspiracy news. In other words, for a certain
type of user, debunking actually reinforces belief in the conspiracy.
We observed the same dynamics in a study of 55 million Facebook users
in the U.S. Users avoid cognitive discord by consuming information
that supports their preexisting beliefs, and they share that
information widely. Moreover, we found that over time people who
embrace conspiracy theories in one domain say, the (nonexistent)
connection between vaccines and autism will seek out such theories in
other domains. Once inside the echo chamber, they tend to embrace the
entire conspiracy corpus.
These dynamics suggest that the spread of online misinformation will
be very hard to stop. Any attempt at reasoned discussion usually
degenerates into a fight between extremists, which ends in
polarization. In this context, it is quite difficult to accurately
inform people and almost impossible to stop a baseless report.
In all probability, social media will continue to teem with debates on
the latest global mega conspiracy. The important thing is to share
what is being hidden from us; whether it is true or false hardly
matters. Perhaps we should stop calling this the Information Age and
start calling it the Age of Credulity.
CONSPIRACY THEORIES Scientific American, April 2017
Despite optimistic talk about "collective intelligence," the Web has
helped create an echo chamber where misinformation thrives. Indeed,
the viral spread of hoaxes, conspiracy theories, and other false or
baseless information online is one of the most disturbing social
trends of the early 21st century.
Social scientists are studying this echo chamber by applying
computational methods to the traces people leave on Facebook, Twitter
and other such outlets. Through this work, they have established that
users happily embrace false information as long as it reinforces their
preexisting beliefs.
Faced with complex global issues, people of all educational levels
choose to believe compact- but false- explanations that clearly
identify an object of blame. Unfortunately, attempts to debunk false
beliefs seem only to reinforce them. Stopping the spread of
misinformation is thus a problem with no apparent simple solutions.
Conspiracy theories are nothing new, but in an age of rampant populism
and digital activism, they have acquired new power to influence
real-world events- usually for the worse. In a 2013 report on global
risks, the World Economic Forum named the viral spread of baseless or
false information as one of the most dangerous social trends of the
age, on an equal footing with terrorism. With antidemocratic
politicians on the rise throughout the West, we are now seeing the
danger of viral misinformation become manifest. People are
surprisingly bad at distinguishing credible information from hoaxes.
In my country, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation
and Development, more than half of Italians between the ages of l5 and
65 have poor literacy. And social media have made it easy for
ideas-even false ones- to spread around the globe almost
instantaneously.
Social scientists have recently made significant progress in
understanding the spread and consumption of information, its effect on
opinion formation, and the ways people influence one another. Advances
in technology have made it possible to exploit the deluge of data from
social media-the traces that people use as they choose, share and
comment online- to study social dynamics at a high level of
resolution. The approach, called computational social science, unites
mathematics, statistics, physics, sociology and computer science, with
the aim of studying social phenomena in a quantitative manner.
By applying the methods of computational social science to the traces
that people leave on Facebook, Twitter, You Tube and other such
outlets, scientists can study the spread of conspiracy theories in
great detail. Thanks to these studies, we know that humans are not, as
has long been assumed, rational. Presented with unfiltered
information, people will appropriate that which conforms to their own
thinking. This effect, known as confirmation bias, fuels the spread of
demonstrably false arguments- theories about global mega conspiracies,
connections between vaccines and autism, and other nonsense. And
unfortunately, there seems to be no easy way to break this cycle.
THE ECHO CHAMBER
AT THE IMT SCHOOL for Advanced Studies Lucca, my colleagues and I have
spent the past five years investigating the spread of information and
misinformation on social networks. The research group comprises two
physicists (Guido Caldarelli and Antonio Scala), a statistician
(Alessandro Bessi, now at the University of Southern California's
Information Sciences Institute), a mathematician (Michela Del
Vicario), and two computer scientists (Fabiana Zollo and me). We are
especially interested in learning how information goes viral and how
opinions are formed and reinforced in cyberspace.
One of our first studies on the subject, which we began in 2012 and
published in 2015, was designed to learn how social media users treat
three different types of information: mainstream news, alternative
news and online political activism. The first category is
self-explanatory: it refers to the media outlets that provide
nationwide news coverage in Italy. The second category includes
outlets that claim to report information that the mainstream media
have "hidden." The final category refers ~o content published by
activist groups that use the Web as a tool for political mobilization.
Gathering information for our study, especially from alternative
sources, was time-consuming and painstaking. We collected and manually
verified various indicators from Face book users and groups active in
hoax busting From the 50 Face book pages that we investigated, we
analyzed the online behavior of more than two million Italian users
who interacted with those pages between September 2012 and February
2013. We found that posts on qualitatively different topics behaved
very similarly online: the same number of users tended to interact
with them, to share them on social media and to debate them. In other
words, information from major daily newspapers, alternative news
sources and political activist sites all reverberate in the same way.
Two different hypotheses could explain this result. The first
possibility was that all users treat all information equally,
regardless of its veracity. The other was that members of certain
interest groups threat all information equally, whether it is true or
not if it reinforces their preexisting beliefs. The second hypothesis
was, to us, more interesting. It suggested that confirmation bias
plays an important role in the spread of misinformation. It also
suggested that, despite optimistic talk about "collective
intelligence" and the wisdom of crowds, the Web has in fact driven the
creation of the echo chamber.
THE MANAGER AND THE MESSAGE
THE NEXT STEP was to test these two hypotheses. We decided to compare
the online behavior of people who read science news with that of
people who usually follow alternative news and conspiracy theories. We
chose these two types of content because of a very specific
difference-whether they have a sender, a manager of the message.
Science news is about studies published in scientific journals: work
by authors and institutions that are known quantities. Conspiracy
theories, in contrast, have no understanding the viral nature of the
phenomena. These groups tend to exclude anything that does not fit
with their worldview. sender: they are formulated to amplify
uncertainty. The subject is always a secret plan or truth that someone
is deliberately concealing from the public.
There is another major difference between science news and conspiracy
theories. Whether true or not, science news belongs to a tradition of
rational thinking based on empirical evidence. Conspiracy thinking, on
the other hand, arises when people find themselves unable to determine
simple causes for complex, adverse circumstances. The very complexity
of issues such as multiculturalism, the growing intricacy of the
global financial system and technological progress can lead peo- ple,
regardless of educational level, to choose to believe compact
explanations that clearly identify an object of blame. Martin Bauer, a
social psychologist at the London School of Economics and a scholar of
conspiracy dynamics, describes conspiracy thinking as a
"quasireligious mentality." It is a little bit like the dawn of
humanity, when people attributed divinity to storms.
For this study, which we called "Science vs Conspiracy: Collective
Narratives in the Age of Misinformation'' and published in PLOS ONE,
we investigated 73 Face book pages, 39 of which trafficked in
conspiracy and 34 of which published science news. Altogether, these
pages had more than a million Italian users between 2010 and 2014. We
found that both sets of pages attracted very attentive audiences-users
who rarely leave their echo chambers. People who read science news
rarely read conspiracy news, and vice versa. But the conspiracy pages
attracted three times more users.
The tendency of Face book to create echo chambers plays an important
role in the spread of false rumors. When we investigated 4,709 posts
that satirized conspiracy theories (example: "Airplane chemtrails
contain Viagra"), we found that consumers of "real" conspiracy news
were much more likely to read these satirical pieces than readers of
legitimate science news. We also found that users who focus primarily
on conspiracy news tend to share content more widely.
When we reconstructed the social networks of our two groups (science
news readers and fans of conspiracy theories), we discovered a
surprising statistical regularity: as the number of likes for a
specific type of narrative increased, the probability of having a
virtual social network composed solely of users with the same profile
also increased. In other words, the more you are exposed to a certain
type of narrative, the greater the probability that all your Face book
friends will have the same news preferences. The division of social
networks into homogeneous groups is crucial understanding the viral
nature of the phenomena. These groups tend to exclude anything that
does not fit with their worldview.
A WICKED PROBLEM
In 2014 WE DECIDED to start investigating efforts to correct the
spread of unsubstantiated claims in social media. Does debunking work?
To find out, we measured the "persistence"-the tendency of a person to
continue engaging with a specific type of content over time-of
conspiracy news readers who had been exposed to debunking campaigns.
The results, currently pending for publication, were not encouraging.
People who were exposed to debunking campaigns were 30 percent more
likely to keep reading conspiracy news. In other words, for a certain
type of user, debunking actually reinforces belief in the conspiracy.
We observed the same dynamics in a study of 55 million Facebook users
in the U.S. Users avoid cognitive discord by consuming information
that supports their preexisting beliefs, and they share that
information widely. Moreover, we found that over time people who
embrace conspiracy theories in one domain say, the (nonexistent)
connection between vaccines and autism will seek out such theories in
other domains. Once inside the echo chamber, they tend to embrace the
entire conspiracy corpus.
These dynamics suggest that the spread of online misinformation will
be very hard to stop. Any attempt at reasoned discussion usually
degenerates into a fight between extremists, which ends in
polarization. In this context, it is quite difficult to accurately
inform people and almost impossible to stop a baseless report.
In all probability, social media will continue to teem with debates on
the latest global mega conspiracy. The important thing is to share
what is being hidden from us; whether it is true or false hardly
matters. Perhaps we should stop calling this the Information Age and
start calling it the Age of Credulity.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: BusyLittleShop
Mercy, some people are spring loaded to the conspiracy position...
It's all part of the dumbing down of America. That has taken place over the last 40+ years in this country. If someone would have told me, as I was watching the Apollo Moon landings take place in the late 60's and early 70's, that in my lifetime I would hear people say they actually believe they were "faked", I would have laughed at them out loud. Yet today, here we are. The easiest person to sell a conspiracy theory to is an idiot.
Mercy, some people are spring loaded to the conspiracy position...
It's all part of the dumbing down of America. That has taken place over the last 40+ years in this country. If someone would have told me, as I was watching the Apollo Moon landings take place in the late 60's and early 70's, that in my lifetime I would hear people say they actually believe they were "faked", I would have laughed at them out loud. Yet today, here we are. The easiest person to sell a conspiracy theory to is an idiot.
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: BusyLittleShop
Mercy, some people are spring loaded to the conspiracy position...
It's all part of the dumbing down of America. That has taken place over the last 40+ years in this country. If someone would have told me, as I was watching the Apollo Moon landings take place in the late 60's and early 70's, that in my lifetime I would hear people say they actually believe they were "faked", I would have laughed at them out loud. Yet today, here we are. The easiest person to sell a conspiracy theory to is an idiot.
I'd say the dumbing down of America has really gotten really bad in the last 10 years with all the social media and other crap that people read and automatically believe it's true. And I think it's the younger generations glued to social media that are easily fooled by fake info.
This story that "Q" was covering up some top secret mission to destroy a secret submarine (planned for an assassination mission) hidden underground on the tip of a small island where the military evacuated small children being held there by satanic pedophiles before dropping some special bombs 2 seconds before a remote controlled Q400 airplane "piloted" by an airport worker augured nose in, and broadcasting pre-recorded radio transmissions is so obviously contrived that even a 5 year old should know it's total fabrication.
Originally Posted By: BusyLittleShop
Mercy, some people are spring loaded to the conspiracy position...
It's all part of the dumbing down of America. That has taken place over the last 40+ years in this country. If someone would have told me, as I was watching the Apollo Moon landings take place in the late 60's and early 70's, that in my lifetime I would hear people say they actually believe they were "faked", I would have laughed at them out loud. Yet today, here we are. The easiest person to sell a conspiracy theory to is an idiot.
I'd say the dumbing down of America has really gotten really bad in the last 10 years with all the social media and other crap that people read and automatically believe it's true. And I think it's the younger generations glued to social media that are easily fooled by fake info.
This story that "Q" was covering up some top secret mission to destroy a secret submarine (planned for an assassination mission) hidden underground on the tip of a small island where the military evacuated small children being held there by satanic pedophiles before dropping some special bombs 2 seconds before a remote controlled Q400 airplane "piloted" by an airport worker augured nose in, and broadcasting pre-recorded radio transmissions is so obviously contrived that even a 5 year old should know it's total fabrication.
You can believe in the Q phenomenon or not it's always up to you. Yesterday Q posted they have all the Xbox Live chats the pedos were using for passing info thinking the chat platform was untraceable or not monitored. After posting this over night and today the Xbox Live system was crashing from so much data trashing.
I just don't think a ground employee with no training is going to fly one of those planes like a Top Gun.
Quote:
Q !!mG7VJxZNCI No.161
Aug 15 2018 16:55:08 (EST)
Texts, emails (gmail), drafts (gmail), HAM comms, PS/Xbox chat logs..
JC-BO-CS-LL-#2-NO-SY
Bonus round.
Q
Quote:
Q !!mG7VJxZNCI ID: 489187 No.2627887
Aug 16 2018 11:16:35 (EST)
Anyone have problems w/ their 'XBOX Live' accounts shortly after the drop yesterday?
[Purge]
How many coincidences before mathematically impossible?
Q
https://qanon.app/
I just don't think a ground employee with no training is going to fly one of those planes like a Top Gun.
Quote:
Q !!mG7VJxZNCI No.161
Aug 15 2018 16:55:08 (EST)
Texts, emails (gmail), drafts (gmail), HAM comms, PS/Xbox chat logs..
JC-BO-CS-LL-#2-NO-SY
Bonus round.
Q
Quote:
Q !!mG7VJxZNCI ID: 489187 No.2627887
Aug 16 2018 11:16:35 (EST)
Anyone have problems w/ their 'XBOX Live' accounts shortly after the drop yesterday?
[Purge]
How many coincidences before mathematically impossible?
Q
https://qanon.app/
People involved in such an in depth conspiracy with billions of dollars of equipment use Xbox to chat and don't know how to obfuscate and encrypt communications?
Originally Posted By: Garak
People involved in such an in depth conspiracy with billions of dollars of equipment use Xbox to chat and don't know how to obfuscate and encrypt communications?
One of the common comments from Q, these people are stupid......
People involved in such an in depth conspiracy with billions of dollars of equipment use Xbox to chat and don't know how to obfuscate and encrypt communications?
One of the common comments from Q, these people are stupid......
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
I just don't think a ground employee with no training is going to fly one of those planes like a Top Gun.
It wasn't even close to Top Gun level... the employee flubbed an
aileron roll like a no nothing Pudknocker... to fly like a highly
trained Top Gun means managing the forces in a barrel roll perfectly
and at the same time pour a glass of tee... Bob Hoover demonstrates...
I just don't think a ground employee with no training is going to fly one of those planes like a Top Gun.
It wasn't even close to Top Gun level... the employee flubbed an
aileron roll like a no nothing Pudknocker... to fly like a highly
trained Top Gun means managing the forces in a barrel roll perfectly
and at the same time pour a glass of tee... Bob Hoover demonstrates...
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
Originally Posted By: Garak
People involved in such an in depth conspiracy with billions of dollars of equipment use Xbox to chat and don't know how to obfuscate and encrypt communications?
One of the common comments from Q, these people are stupid......
That still doesn't address that concern. So, they're totally stupid and unable to handle secure communications but a sub, missiles, underwater bases, and airplanes are easy?
Originally Posted By: Garak
People involved in such an in depth conspiracy with billions of dollars of equipment use Xbox to chat and don't know how to obfuscate and encrypt communications?
One of the common comments from Q, these people are stupid......
That still doesn't address that concern. So, they're totally stupid and unable to handle secure communications but a sub, missiles, underwater bases, and airplanes are easy?
Re: Richard B. Russell -
Off topic, but if you're a sportbike rider or own a sports car, and find yourself in the Chattahoochee National Forest in North Georgia, don't miss the chance to ride or drive Richard B. Russell Scenic Highway, west of Helen, GA.
I found myself hooting and hollering in my helmet as I drug my knee on the pavement through the corners on my 2007 Yamaha R1.
Helluva road!
Off topic, but if you're a sportbike rider or own a sports car, and find yourself in the Chattahoochee National Forest in North Georgia, don't miss the chance to ride or drive Richard B. Russell Scenic Highway, west of Helen, GA.
I found myself hooting and hollering in my helmet as I drug my knee on the pavement through the corners on my 2007 Yamaha R1.
Helluva road!
Originally Posted By: john_pifer
Helluva road!
Noted with glee John... however Georgia is too far from my home state of California just to get a speeding ticket...
Helluva road!
Noted with glee John... however Georgia is too far from my home state of California just to get a speeding ticket...
At the end of the day, we have an obviously bright and capable young man who in the process of killing himself had conversations with ATC although he had already decided his fate.
He was convinced that he had no way out once he started the aircraft, taxied out and then took off, so he decided to end his life.
What if he had simply landed the aircraft and dealt with the legal consequences?
Might not have been all that awful, maybe no worse than unauthorized use.
Chilling as well as sad.
He was convinced that he had no way out once he started the aircraft, taxied out and then took off, so he decided to end his life.
What if he had simply landed the aircraft and dealt with the legal consequences?
Might not have been all that awful, maybe no worse than unauthorized use.
Chilling as well as sad.
It would have been interesting if an F-15 shot him down over the water.
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
What if he had simply landed the aircraft and dealt with the legal consequences?
If he got whole mess on the ground in one piece... no one could deny him the right to a pilot log book entry of take off and landing in a Q400...
What if he had simply landed the aircraft and dealt with the legal consequences?
If he got whole mess on the ground in one piece... no one could deny him the right to a pilot log book entry of take off and landing in a Q400...
- Status