Does Crash Of Amrican Airlines Flight Signal End Of Rational Thought Process in U.S.?

MB26/FR/News Reports | MB26

[MindBender26]

This entire series of posts and threads on the loss of the AA flight is an amazing display of 2001 sociology. If we thought the internet was going to change people’s commercial activities but not our core behaviors and underlying thought process, we were certainly wrong.

Many of us have been following the crash aftermath here in FR. This is not an indictment or criticism of any one poster, not will this post attack anyone. It will ask the question, who are these internet people, and what are we all becoming because oft hem. Even more, it is certainly not a criticism of FR itself, JR, etc. He has done great work for America.

There is a certain suspension of rational thought process going on here. People are making, defending and angrily supporting crash theories based on some rumor someone else says a friend told them was heard on the radio. People are angry because others seek to apply basic rules of physics to an argument. Others propose the wildest theories, and defend them ad infinitum. Last year, some poster claimed TW800 was caused by ghosts of a 1948 Navy electronics experiment gone wrong, and other chimed in to agree!

At least eleven mutually exclusive theories as to cause of this week’s accident have been proposed, and if one is determined to be the real cause, the proponents of the other ten will all probably cry "foul" and "government cover-up."

People are accusing the government of fraud and murder because they haven't yet determined the cause of the crash, or grounded the Airbus fleet. Others demand an answer right now, before any laboratory testing is complete. This failure to deliver a verdict before bedtime is taken as further proof of negative government intervention.

This post is certainly NOT directed as criticism at any one person, but rather as an amazed wonderment of what is going on in supposedly Conservative society. Does the anonymity of the internet encourage people to suspend the rational judgment process? Did Clinton and Clintonism so skew American thinking on the issue of government dependency that anytime our government does not give us what we want, and deliver it to us gift wrapped and right now, we begin to have our little internet temper tantrums?

Another amazing observation is how there is little attempt to understand who is posting fact and who is posting mental masturbation stories. In ordinary conversation, there is a constant "reality checking" processing going on in our minds. It seems absent here. If we were down at the Grange Hall, high school homecoming, or even Harvard, we would be using all our senses to help us understand what is going on here. If some person joined the conversation and began to blame the crash on a weight and balance problem or wake turbulence, we might listen for a moment. But when we saw he was 9 years old, wearing adult diapers and had a throazine bottle in his hand, we might tend to discredit his theories! On the net, he will have a brigade of followers within the hour.

Old pilot's ditty: "Fish gota swim, planes gota fly; and sometimes they crash when they try!" Crashes occur, but this one seems to have brought out a demonstration of a change in the way we think.... or don't think. What do these post crash threads say, not about the crash, but about us

Again, certainly not a criticism of anyone, just a wonderment, that with all the technology in the world, have we again become the Clan of Grug, Druhr, Mogor and Allihia arguing by grunting over our cave fire, while the Cave Bear waits in the near distance recovering from his wounds of 1992?

[ctdonath2]

Welcome to the TV generation, who expects that for any given problem, a completely preposterous yet fully accepted conclusion will be arrived at within 3 hours (usually much sooner).

[doc]

Even if it was a terrorist attack it will be released much later if at all for the very reasons you state.

[MindBender26]

Show me where the NTSB is heading this investigation? The FBI was on the scene immediately and continues to be.

Thank you for proving point of entire article. FBI is in scene of every FAA Part 121 (airline) and FAA part 135 (airtaxi/commuter) aircrash when there is loss of life.

So are the NTSB, the FAA, the CAB, representatives of the airframe manufacturer, the engine manufacturer, the pilot's union safety committee, the flight attendant's union safety committee, the fuel supplier, the airport authority if the accident is airport-related, physicians for post-mortums of crew and possible other significt people in crash, weather bureeu, navigational equipment manufacturers if accident is related to off course excursion and many more

The NTSB is in charge. The fact that you intimate that by being there FBI is in charge, is exactly what this post is all about.

[Dave S]

Well said. I think that the government has a vested interest in saying that it's not terrorism.

True because so many sheeple cringe in fear, they need words of assurance from their leaders. Cant believe so many cry babys. Whether its terrorism or not, the same number of people died and they are just as dead.

[MindBender26]

Is there any evidence that there was ever a rational thought process in the U.S.?

The writing of Jefferson and Adams. Not much since, though.....

[Kevin Curry]

Well, all you clever free-thinkers--e.g., you, mindbender, and OWK--simply must get together and let the rest of us know what the acceptable parameters of rational discussion are. we certainly wouldn't want to transgress a boundary that is so clear to the free-thinkers.

The rest of us desperately want to be be free-thinkers too. So, please set our limits for us so we can be as free as you are.

[MindBender26]

40, 44, & 52 are proof of what this post all about. Thank you

[nicmarlo]

I agree 100% with everything you wrote. Especially:

I would agree with your statements. I have not made any conclusions about this crash. We simply don't know yet why it happened. The problem with what the article/post puts forth is that it ignores problems that "We the People" have been experiencing for quite some time with the government, for its own reasons, not telling the truth to the people. We have become very aware of how spin works and can spot it a mile away.

I don't ask or expect the government to be able to provide the reason for this disaster immediately. What I DO expect is an honest statement about the circusmstances. A statement that does not need to be parsed. A statement that is not intentionally misleading.

Other thoughts (based on anecdotal evidence, including mine personally):

There is an agenda with the government and governmental entities. There are individuals within these organizations/entitities, who have become adept at spin, misleading statements, and subversion. One such example: AIDS and the CDC. The CDC, because of the "politically correct" climate, refused to condemn a particular lifestyle which contributes to the ever-increasing numbers of infection. And because "political correctness" became more important than treating AIDS as a contagious disease, people were not isolated, as has been a method of containment in the past (i.e., polio). If there was an outbreak of polio today, it was not be "politically correct" to isolate these people because "they have rights."

That said as just one example of political decisions made rather than logical decisions being made, I am usually suspect of people who "parrot" a mantra (Clintonesque). If you say something over and over again, then it must be true. And that is what is most insulting to me. Apparently, being honest and saying simply: "We don't know and won't know for at least 30 days; nothing is ruled out in the meantime. We will not rule out terrorism nor accident. Because we will not rule out either, we will look to see what more safety measures can be put in place, and implement them, whether that refers to terrorist acts or more frequent maintenance measures."

[Gumlegs]

Sigh. The Founders stand alone. Unfortunately.

[discostu]

Absolutely not.
1 - even if you assume it was terrorists you still need the "how", how did they do it: bomb, engine damage, rivet damage, mole for a pilot. How tells you a lot about who.
2 - other than a bomb all of the theoretical ways to deliberately take a plane down involve the same areas as the ways they come down on accident, if you're looking for signs of deliberate damage in those areas you might ignore signs of wear and tear; better to look to those areas for ANY signs of damage then determine if it was deliberate or maintenance.
3 - in the modern age very few leads go cold, all security cameras film has already gone to some safe place for examination if needed, because of non-stop news coverage human leads tend to come out of the wood work more as time goes by; criminals like to brag, it's amazing the number whose capture begins with them in a bar that's showing CNN talking about their crime.
4 - in this particular situation we're much more concerned (if it was terrorism) with how than who. We're already hunting down the terrorists, whether or not they do something else isn't going to significantly shorten their life expectancy, gaurding against how they did it to prevent future attacks is much more important.
5 - the "no predisposition" method of investigation is a universal ideal, aimed for by every police force in the nation, not jsut the NTSB. Predispositions make for sloppy investigations, sloppy investigations are more likely to let the bad guys walk than slow investigations.

[Plummz]

Cute. I'll let the good folks at FR decide who has the "obvious bias" and "trust" issues as this plays out.

[Goetz_von_Berlichingen]

You should probably not read too much into the lunacy regarding the allegation of plots, terrorists, Gov't coverups, Stinger missliles, volleys of rifle fire aimed at the jet intakes, Taliban-trained seagulls, or an assasination attempt against the Moran family. I don't know the size of the actual "population" of FR (even excluding the "lurkers") but I am guessing that only a small fraction of FReepers actually post to the air-crash-related threads. And an even smaller proportion have proposed the truly novelistic scenarios.

The majority of us have simply suspended judgement, pending the disclosure of findings. (Personally, I tend to go with the mechanical malfunction theory. These things happen. Not every domestic accident during wartime is due to enemy intervention.)

[discostu]

Last I heard the FBI was there but NTSB was running the show. Personally I'd like the FBI out completely unless or until the NTSB determines it was deliberate. If there's one thing we learned from TWA800 it was to let the plane experts lead the investigation of plane crashes, regardless of the pervailing opinion of the cause.

[MindBender26]

In a business setting such no-holds-barred discussion is called brainstorming and is a valued problem-solving technique.

Actually.... no.

In business, anyone making observations or reccmendations such some of what we see here would be sent to the EAP very quickly.

In business, there is focus. You know who is making the reccomendation. Their career depends on being right at least 51% of time.

Thinking outside the box is one thing. Some of this isthinking outside of rationality.

[MindBender26]

The majority of us have simply suspended judgement, pending the disclosure of findings.

I hope that is true. I fear it is not.

[soxfan]

It is entirely appropriate to be skeptical at this point of any conclusion of terrorism, accident, or otherwise, brought forth at such an early stage. It brings into question the motivation and intent of any individual or entity that would come forward with any conclusion based on so little information. Proceeding with any "outcome-based" analysis, i.e. starting with the "preferred" result, and basing your investigation accordingly, seems flawed. Occam's Razor, as others have mentioned, would suggest that given 9/11, we would logically proceed with an assumption of terrorism, because we were EXPECTING an act of terrorism, and we were hardly expecting an A300 crash of natural causes. We would then attempt to rule terrorism out first before we would try to rule an accident in. Certainly, hijacking would seem to be easy to rule out, next we would consider, perhaps, mechanical failure. Has terrorism (i.e. sabotage) been ruled out prior to assuming it was an accident? If so, why?

[MindBender26]

We really make the same point.

I am simply critical of the paranoia and rushes to judgement we so often see, without any critical review.

10:00's "It could never have happened that way" becomes 11:00's rumor, and Noon's assmption. By 2 PM, those who do not believe it are "government stooges."

[duvausa]

If some person joined the conversation and began to blame the crash on a weight and balance problem or wake turbulence, we might listen for a moment. But when we saw he was 9 years old, wearing adult diapers and had a throazine bottle in his hand, we might tend to discredit his theories! On the net, he will have a brigade of followers within the hour.

LOL—this gives me a whole new mental picture of some of the more flamboyant posters. Good thing to keep in mind.

[fourdeuce82d]

"I watched on TV while the plane was still crackling in flames, minutes after the crash, too hot even to touch with oven mitts. The mantra immediately began, "There is no evidence to suggest..."

I've heard from others that watching the press conferences gave a different sense of what the spin was than seeing the quotes in black and white. Fair enough- I don't have a tv, so I haven't seen them firsthand.