seriously america!?

[AzCivic]

Gt: you're arguments are very weak. Yup radar huh, there are NEVER any mid air collisions right? do a search on google I bet you'll find some. And there's NO other reason a pilot would have to make a drastic manuever right? Maybe to avoid a flock of geese or a hot air balloon some other flying thing that might not show up on an supposed infallible radar.

-aircraft engineers are sitting around designing safety measures: "hey lets make it impossible to avoid small aircraft that might not show up on radar or (insert some other reason to make a sharp turn) so someone doesn't get hurt if the pilot decides to play a joke on passengers by yanking the plane for no reason"- sounds perfectly plausible.

I always like how the conspiracy theorists like to break hugely complex situations down into some simple little kiddie problem and then shout "Look my highschool physics shows such and such is impossible, the gov't is out to get us!!" yup, rediculous.

What's the point?? Hmm maybe to ensure a sweeping victory of their party the next election perhaps? To get more allies on our side so we can go off and invade anyone else? For shits and giggles? Like you said everyone now hates bush, wouldn't it be nice for him to say "I TOLD you so!" and america will rejoice and he can bask in the glow of approval. Nah, planting some primitive weapons is too difficult.

dabouncer: huh? there's no argument about which method is more persuasive so whats your point?

[GT40FIED]

Originally Posted by AzCivic

I always like how the conspiracy theorists like to break hugely complex situations down into some simple little kiddie problem and then shout "Look my highschool physics shows such and such is impossible, the gov't is out to get us!!" yup, rediculous.

Holy shit...I would like to thank you for thoroughly proving the point I made earlier. You don't have anything that remotely resembles a rebutle so you have to resort to "conspiracy theorists are crazy!! LOLZ!!11!". Then again, it's physics which, on this planet anyway, are universal and more or less impossible to screw with. Seriously...if you don't have an answer for something either admit it or don't talk about it.

And really, just admit you don't have a clue about what software goes into commercial airliners. Your entire argument is based on suspicion and doubt, not fact, and my argument is weak? Either educate yourself and get back to me or just drop it.

If you're as wise and all knowing as you'd like me to to think you are, riddle me this. On a PBS 9/11 documentary, Larry Silverstein (owner of the WTC plaza) admitted that he made the decision to "pull" WTC 7...one of the much smaller buildings adjacent to WTC 1 & 2 (the main towers). In this case, to "pull" a bulding is a demolition industry term for demolishing a building via strategically placed explosives. Before Silverstein said this, the government's "official" explanation was that the building collapsed due to fire damage (regardless of the facts that it sustained little damage from falling debris and that no bulding made of steel reinforced concrete has ever collapsed due to fire damage alone). So clearly someone's lying, and I don't immediately see why Silverstein would have any reason to. It's also interesting to note that controlled demolitions aren't something that can be setup overnight. It takes a good amount of time to survey the building and place the explosives. So why were they there to begin with? Oh...and a member of the secret service died when that building was imploded so why hasn't anyone been charged with capital murder?

[AzCivic]

Originally Posted by GT40FIED

Holy shit...I would like to thank you for thoroughly proving the point I made earlier. You don't have anything that remotely resembles a rebutle so you have to resort to "conspiracy theorists are crazy!! LOLZ!!11!". Then again, it's physics which, on this planet anyway, are universal and more or less impossible to screw with. Seriously...if you don't have an answer for something either admit it or don't talk about it.

And really, just admit you don't have a clue about what software goes into commercial airliners. Your entire argument is based on suspicion and doubt, not fact, and my argument is weak? Either educate yourself and get back to me or just drop it.

where the HELL are your "facts" you just copied some retarded rant about software that, like everyother stupid little consipiracy theory, is all over the internet. YOU ARE NOT A PILOT AND YOU ARE NOT A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER nothing you say is a fact and copying it off another retarded website doesn't make anything you spout true. YOU HAVE NO PROOF. I at least have some common sense on my side. Common sense says that a pilot has the final say when it comes to what his aircraft will do incase he has to take drastic measures to save everyone on boards damn life.

YES YOUR ARGUMENT IS WEAK with nothing to support it. Maybe if you take some advanced physics/math classes you'll begin to understand a little about complex structures and that how they behave under extreme situations can't be summed up in a kids math book.

Educate myself? What conspiracy wack job websites do you recommend? Certainly thats where all your "facts" come from.

[GT40FIED]

Originally Posted by Wren57

Wonderful attacking and arrogant response, Steve. Drunk at 9:45AM? Model citizen, you are... THANK GOD we have people like you that know how to run the country better than our leaders, else we'd be fucked... oh, wait, apparently you aren't in office so maybe you don't?

As far as me joining the military, I met with a Navy recruiter yesterday to discuss my options of flight school or law school. I scored perfect on every Navy math test and near perfect on every Navy logic test, so these are my two best-fitting options. These are slots filled by officers, and being an officer requires a college degree, so no, I won't leave for an enlisted rank when I have the ability to become an officer in just one more year. Think I'm kidding, call LCDR O'loghlin @ Milton Navy Air Field in Florida. And don't give me any of this "real service" bullshit... you haven't served, so STFU. Just because I'm not going through ROTC on contract doesn't mean I won't serve just the same as they will after college. Please tell me the difference between "real service" and what I'm doing. Is the only difference that I don't NEED the gov't? That makes me a bad person? Well damn, I guess I don't NEED the gov'ts help but I'm going to fight for this country anyway instead of running one of the family businesses, yeah, thats right... I'm giving up an oppurtunity to be CEO right out of college to fight for my country, so if you give me any more of this bullshit I'll make sure to drop a laser-bomb on your retarded Kansas ass first chance I get.

I DO derive my own conclusions about things, and I do NOT agree with your ideas. It is not I that have to prove you wrong, for your opinion is the one of dissent... the burden of proof rests upon you, and you have come up with nothing other than conspiracies and things you've read on the internet. Yeah, thats much more informative than reading 2 newspapers a day and watching the news regularly... have I mentioned my roomates include a hippie and a liberal law-school student, and that my best friend is also a law-school student? I don't hang out with republicans hardly at all.

I really wish I could continue this now, but unlike some I'm not "privledged" enough to drink at 11am and must get back to work on some databasing issues...

Really? You're going to drop a laser bomb on Kansas? Hmmm...I'm not sure that such an attitude embodies the kind of nobility the Navy aspires for. That...and it would pretty much make you a terrorist as well. I'm not really sure where you drew the conclusion that all I did was copy and paste stuff from online, but I assure you thaty ou and Rob are dead wrong. And even if I had, does that make them any less true than something in a newpaper? "0h n0z! Nothing on the internet can possibly be true...evAr!". Did I feel as stupid typing that as you did thinking it? And bravo on watching a bunch of bullshit-laden biased news programs. No...really...cheers. I'm also pretty sure that you being a CEO straight out of college back up my point whether you're "giving it up" or not (trust me...it'll still be there when you get out of the Navy). That should really prepare you for the world of politics...a high level position that you didn't have to work for. Everything's coming up roses.

Oh...and just a quick note...I'm sure you'd like to think I woke up and started drinking today, but let's just say I had a long night. You're right...I was drunk at 9:45 this morning...but I wasn't drinking then. Besides, no class and no work today. Who cares?

Originally Posted by AzCivic

where the HELL are your "facts" you just copied some retarded rant about software that, like everyother stupid little consipiracy theory, is all over the internet. YOU ARE NOT A PILOT AND YOU ARE NOT A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER nothing you say is a fact and copying it off another retarded website doesn't make anything you spout true. YOU HAVE NO PROOF. I at least have some common sense on my side. Common sense says that a pilot has the final say when it comes to what his aircraft will do incase he has to take drastic measures to save everyone on boards damn life.

YES YOUR ARGUMENT IS WEAK with nothing to support it. Maybe if you take some advanced physics/math classes you'll begin to understand a little about complex structures and that how they behave under extreme situations can't be summed up in a kids math book.

Educate myself? What conspiracy wack job websites do you recommend? Certainly thats where all your "facts" come from.

Think I already covered the copy and paste bullshit. I honestly will look into the thing you posted there however, I do see a flaw. If a pilot can choose to override the system and maneuvers that would require them to need to override the system would have to be sudden and swift, what's the point? I'm not saying it's not possible, but by the time it could be disabled, wouldn't you already have hit whatever you were trying to avoid? Anyway, I digress.

Moving right along, I really don't see you disagreeing with anything besides the flight software thing. The arguments aren't weak, you just don't like them. And while I doubt that Galileo's law of falling bodies is in any kids math book, you haven't offered any substance to the contrary. You know what...I'll even stop using the word "facts" just to make you happy. Offer up evidence of another theory that can refute anything I've typed (aside from the software thing which was good...I'll look into it).

[GT40FIED]

Two quick things I forgot -

First of all....Wren...I'd just like to remind you that they guy you voted for for president was EXACTLY the kind of guy who was drunk at 10am long after he was my age, so there's hope for me yet. Then again...I'm getting better grades than he did.

And Rob...go check out http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/ . It's members include such "crazies" as a former deputy attorney general, former director of the "Star Wars" defense program, and one guy whose resume includes "Former assistant German defense minister, director of the German Secret Service, minister for research and technology, and member of Parliament for 25 years". Surely these people are all certifiable. Not to mention the countless other professors, lawyers, and experts in their field listed as founding members.