Germanwings Tragedy - Is it now all about the money?
- Thread starter Quantum Quack
- Start date
- Status
Bells
Staff member
And this is significant because of?
http://www.businessinsider.com/germ...recorder-was-damaged-in-the-crash-2015-3?IR=T
http://www.dw.de/germanwings-crash-usable-data-recovered-from-black-box/a-18342174
It's a pretty foregone conclusion. He literally piloted that plane into a mountain.
So they know.
Yes. We have.
Repeatedly.
I'm sorry, you still didn't get it?
Everything you have written in this thread has been offensive. From blaming the captain and the door, to inventing scenarios and insinuating that the bodies weren't there, as though this was false. To mocking the relatives and loved ones of those who died on that plane and insinuating they were actors.
The irony of your position in this thread is that you have absolutely no qualms in in slandering and making things up about the relatives and friends of those who died on that plane, but you pitch a crazy fit because the investigation has the co-pilot as a mass murderer who flew a plane into a mountain. How hypocritical can you possibly be?
The only funny thing about this thread is that you are so far up yourself that you believe you are smart enough to actually play this game. You aren't. You have tried to pass yourself off as an expert, when it is clear that you are not. But then again, this is typical behaviour of people like you.
A brief?
Ah, the narcissistic delusions continue.
The terrifying thing is that you have either made all of this up and you are going to actually contact the AFP, like you contacted the media about this plane crash. Or you are some crazy quack who may have stalked someone and invented things about them to contact the AFP.
I can only hope that they lock you up.
Which truth? The real truth? Or the truth that you have fabricated in your head.
You don't think mocking the victims and their families as you have done in this thread has been disrespectful? You don't think trying to deny they were even in the plane by questioning why there weren't any bodies and even trying to deny that the plane was flown into the mountain - by insinuating that the site where all of those people died just looked like a rubbish dump with bits of plane thrown there to make it look like a crash, was disrespectful of the situation?
As I said QQ, you lack the intelligence to pull this kind of crap off.
Start from your OP. And read through the thread and look at every single post you have posted in this thread.
Let me guess. You are going to try to help them along after you appear to have stolen someone's driver's license details or made them up about someone (because the person you are claiming you know of is dead) and written a "brief" full of your delusional rantings?
And I am sure they will be interested with your "tee hee" that you have peppered through the thread as you giggled about the deaths of all of those people, after slandering those relatives and lying about them, likening the site where the remains of that plane and their loved ones to a rubbish tip, questioning if they even died there since you can't see any blood or their bodies, accusing the friends and family of the loved ones of being paid actors because they aren't crying enough for your liking...
Yazata
Valued Senior Member
The fact that Quantum Quack (a total layman when it comes to aircraft crash investigation) doesn't think that something is credible doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. The experienced and competent crash investigators don't seem to doubt it , which is good enough for me.
If an aircraft comes into contact with a mountain, Newton's third law says that they are each going to exert equal force on each other. And while airliners look big and imposing at the airport, they are actually thin aluminum or carbon composite (high tech plastic) shells intended to be as light as possible. Airplanes aren't solid lead bullets. So a solid stone mountain is going to do a lot more to an airplane, then the airplane is going to do to a mountain.
What's more, I'm confused about how all this new criticism of the crash scene serves your purposes. Have you abandoned your theory that a crazed computer rather than the co-pilot flew the plane into the ground, in favor of a new theory that a crash never happened and the alleged crash site is a crudely executed fake, the work of the evil Conspiracy? A Conspiracy that represents the fixed and seemingly immoveable axis around which all of the rest of your ideas turn, the 'deus-ex-machina' delusion that in your mind justifies anything that you imagine?
The investigators reported that while they found no intact bodies, they found many body parts. These were collected and the forensic people say that they've identified 150 different DNA signatures, corresponding to the number of people on the plane.
If the passengers and crew weren't splattered across that mountainside, where are they now? Abducted by flying saucers?
Why have you become convinced that you know all of this? Do you have access to the investigators' exhaustive inventory of everything they have found and precisely where they found it? (I expect that they have divided the crash site into a grid and are carefully numbering and logging every piece of aircraft debris they find.) If you had access to that list, wouldn't you just dismiss it as a product of the Conspiracy?
Kittamaru posted a photo of a tire.
But once again, what is your point? Are you trying to suggest that the crash never happened and that the crash site is fake? Who would do such a thing? Why would they do it?
While in your mind your imaginary Conspiracy 'explains' everything you can imagine, what justifies belief in the Conspiracy? You believe that the fact that your universal and omnipotent Conspiracy can 'explain' anything you imagine is itself 'evidence' that the Conspiracy must exist, don't you? Once one assumes the existence of the Conspiracy, everything else seems to fall into a dark and malevolent pattern. (That's reminiscent of some 'will-of-God' rhetoric from religion, in reverse.)
The most interesting thing to me about this discussion is the psychological insight it might provide into conspiracy theory ideation.
Last edited:
Correct. It is unlikely he will be found guilty and sentenced - mainly because people don't conduct criminal proceedings against dead people.
However, the investigation into the cause of the crash points to the copilot, and will likely conclude (after considering all the evidence) that he intentionally crashed the aircraft. And that is what the official record will show.
Since Kitt has since posted pictures of engine and landing gear components, will you now apologize for attempting to mislead and deceive people?
well have another look at teh CVR supopsedly recove
Not me sorry!
If you presented that in court a judge would laugh at you... Case dismissed...
Notice yet again no burn marks or any sign of heat. on any of the bits shown.
The engine part looks like it has come from an airline wrecking yard. and just propped there for cameras.
and you consider one indeterminable red object taken from a distance, one wheel out of 10 and one engine housing (out of two) enough evidence for you?
Not me sorry!
If you presented that in court a judge would laugh at you... Case dismissed...
Notice yet again no burn marks or any sign of heat. on any of the bits shown.
The engine part looks like it has come from an airline wrecking yard. and just propped there for cameras.
As usual you post links that don't prove your case.
There is no mention of actual location of the CVR. ( other than they have it in their possession and are analyzing it.)
So why are you post false links that don't support your case?
Because dare I suggest there are no links nor solid evidence that the CVR was even at the crash site. It is very poor crash scene investigation to remove evidence before documenting it properly.
The rest of your post is the usual diatribe and totally false.
I do not seek to blame any one where as you ... obviously do.
Indeed, that is generally how an area shot is done... to show the general location it was found in (which was, ironically enough, EXACTLY what you asked for)
With the rest presumably elsewhere in that maelstrom of parts...
I would presume the other engine housing is somewhere else... or did you expect them to detach from the plane and go for a cuppa joe before casually returning to the crash site and laying down to doze off side by side...? What the FLYING FUCK are you expecting them to do? Seriously... what do you expect from an aircraft that hit the ground at several hundred KPH?
Actually, a judge and jury would probably wait for more evidence... you know, as tends to happen in an ongoing investigation. Now... your theories, on the other hand, would be thrown out as baseless conjecture and you would likely be held in contempt.
Again, why WOULD there be? The plane wasn't on fire as it crashed...
More bullshit conspiracy nuttery...
it's pointless trying to present facts to you... as you saw, the wreckage is spread across quite a vast area, so obviously no one photograph is going to contain all the parts you think you should see.
No, you don't seek to blame anyone... you seek to blame NO ONE at all...
What we, and the general population (as well as the families of those lost onboard the flight) are seeking is the truth... and if that truth means that the co-pilot did this intentionally, then that's the sad truth. You, however, are content to do everything you can to absolve him of any wrongdoing...
You may recall our discussion about the CVR and how I felt it looked too intact to be genuine.
We also discussed the impact of a 38000kg craft not leaving a central point of impact.
here is the CVR again..
Now let me ask you Bells, Kittamaru and Yazata if this object was flown into a rock solid wall at 700kph ( less for crush zones) would you expect it to look like this?
If propelled, like a car is into a wall at 100kph how would they compare?
Maybe the question as too hard...as the answer is way too obvious.
At what velocity do you think this CVR hit the wall, oops, the rocky mountain side?
*I believe there is image recognition net trawling software available to see if the above image is used for "other" purposes on the net..
We also discussed the impact of a 38000kg craft not leaving a central point of impact.
here is the CVR again..
Now let me ask you Bells, Kittamaru and Yazata if this object was flown into a rock solid wall at 700kph ( less for crush zones) would you expect it to look like this?
If propelled, like a car is into a wall at 100kph how would they compare?
Maybe the question as too hard...as the answer is way too obvious.
At what velocity do you think this CVR hit the wall, oops, the rocky mountain side?
*I believe there is image recognition net trawling software available to see if the above image is used for "other" purposes on the net..
Last edited:
Obviously the task of arriving at any impartial or objective position is made considerably more difficult by having a world that has already "jumped" to conclusions and is attacking anyone who questions their jump. ( as demonstrated here in this thread - which you can consider to be a microcosm of the Western world's attitude generally)
Thanks for using the words "will likely" instead of "has been"...
finally you are starting to be a bit more responsible with your allegations and accusations.
will you apologize for not finding the other 9 wheels or other key parts like 160 odd seats and most importantly the indestructible security door.
Any one seen of heard any one mention or comment about this precious piece of evidence? ( the security door)
Actually I am too busy looking for the 9 wheels that are missing, the "found" location of the CVR, the center of impact, and a whole host of other details before I can really get into whether the crash site is real or not.
Too many things do not add up as far as I am concerned and I am attempting to find reason to add them up... to get for example 1+1=2 instead of 1+ 1 = "a pink flying elephant"
So... Your answer is to ignore any evidence that we (admittedly) outsiders are privy to and instead "arrive at any impartial or objective position" through paranoia? You don't usually seem to be this f***ing stupid, why are you donning the tinfoil now?
Normally I would agree.
However there is the issue of a possible attempted cover up of missing flight MH370, the obvious FAC catastrophic failure in the Air Asia flight8501, the inexplicable shooting down of a flight over the Ukraine with all the BS that subsequently happened their and now this "accident" turned into a murder suicide with out proper investigations being concluded or even started.
There is no known motive, and I find the discovery of such convenient evidence on his tablet to be well, rather convenient if you wished to support the murder suicide theory that seems to be in vogue at the time. Circumstantial evidence is very weak regardless... what other things was he searching for..what was the actual context of his net use... any signs of violence or maliciousness? Nope! ( because if there were they would be all over it like a rash on a babies bum.)
Of course someone who is depressed may seek out suicide content. Of course someone who is in the Aviation industry may have concerns about what would happen if a pilot was suicidal may research security door systems. Of course ...
Maybe he was merely speculating on what would happen if he was that suicidal pilot. Remember the spat of suicidal pilots recorded in recent times...especially MH370
We also have the "magical" appearance of a CVR that appears to have survived hitting the ground at 700kph with it's folded plate steel casing more or less intact from a crash scene that makes even less sense to a critical observer.
I can make a dint in the side of the mountain using a light 1kg sledge hammer I wonder what a 83000kg sledge hammer loaded with thousands of litres of Aviation fuel would do.
Last edited:
Deal with the testing of the evidence that you have objectively and perhaps you will find out...
you can start by looking at post#590 if you want...
You may recall our discussion about the CVR and how I felt it looked too intact to be genuine.
We also discussed the impact of a 38000kg craft not leaving a central point of impact.
here is the CVR again..
Now let me ask you Bells, Kittamaru and Yazata if this object was flown into a rock solid wall at 700kph ( less for crush zones) would you expect it to look like this?
If propelled, like a car is into a wall at 100kph how would they compare?
Maybe the question as too hard...as the answer is way too obvious.
At what velocity do you think this CVR hit the wall, oops, the rocky mountain side?
*I believe there is image recognition net trawling software available to see if the above image is used for "other" purposes on the net..
I can't tell if you are honestly ignorant, trolling, or attempting to be deceptive...
That CVR didn't HIT the ground at 700kph... not even close.
Lets take our example - 700 kph, 45 meter overall length (assume 40 meters to account for the CVR being mounted somewhere in the tail).
If we assume the impacted surface (rock) to be completely and utterly immobile (it isn't, but it makes for a far simpler calculation and would actually result in a far greater force estimate)
The force being exerted upon the aircraft (work required to stop it) comes to approximately 4,400 tons, or 39,000,000 newtons at the time of impact. Now, factor this being spread across the collapse of 40 meters of fuselage, plus the wings and other components impacting, etc... the overall force exerted upon the CVR becomes much, much less.
Granted, it still most likely hit the dirt at a significant velocity - but it was nowhere near 700kph. If it were, even it would acted more like a liquid upon impact than a piece of metal.
Yazata
Valued Senior Member
Translation: The crash scene in France was faked by the Conspiracy and the airplane and its occupants were presumably abducted by aliens.
How do you know that it wasn't documented properly? You are just pulling that conclusion out of your butt. You have no reason to assume that they aren't carefully documenting everything they find and precisely where they found it, just because they haven't posted all of that information on the internet.
You've blamed Lufthansa of being complicit in a conspiracy to limit their own legal liability.
That conspiracy theory has seemingly grown over time, to the point where the French crash investigators, the German police, the aviation industry and the world's media are all assumed to be complicit in it. You're even suggesting that the crash-scene has been faked by the Conspiracy, which is now being imagined as more pervasive, powerful and secret than any government, so it deserves to be capitalized.
Once again: How do you know that they weren't found? Because you haven't seen any photos of them posted on the internet?
And assuming (merely for the sake of argument) that they haven't been found, what conclusions to you believe that people should draw from that?
It's on the flying saucer.
Last edited:
Let me ask you this - what, if anything, would be sufficient evidence that the "official" story is more or less accurate?
- Status