addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscontroller-playcrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgooglegroupshelp-with-circleimageimagesinstagramFill 1launch-new-window--smalllight-bulblinklocation-pinm-swarmSearchmailmessagesminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1ShapeoutlookpersonJoin Group on CardStartprice-ribbonprintShapeShapeShapeShapeImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruserwarningyahoo

Was: "The Bible", Now: Conspiracy Theories

From: Chris K
Sent on: Monday, March 11, 2013 4:50 PM
Apparently someone's already beaten me to the flight 592 conspiracy idea.

From "Above Top Secret":

 " hardly seems to measure up to the significance of 9/11 - but still, from the impact aftermath, it just reminds me of Flight 93. it makes me wonder how a plane that large could vanish, practically without a trace into a swamp, with not much evidence to show for..."

Sent from my ayayayphone

On Mar 11, 2013, at 4:46 PM, Chris K <[address removed]> wrote:


I'm on my iPhone and don't have a computer nearby so I'm not sure exactly what picture it is you're looking at. 

I can tell you that if you were able to look at the ValuJet crash site on the day the crash happened you would not have been able to see any sign of an airplane.

It was only many days later after repeated dives and hauling pieces of wreckage out from inside the crater that enough pieces of plane were gathered to lay out into something vaguely resembling airplane wreckage.


Sent from my ayayayphone

On Mar 11, 2013, at 4:09 PM, Tim Campbell <[address removed]> wrote:

Here's the wiki account of that crash. Apparently the aircraft hit nose first at appr 500mph into a "deep swamp" area that was covering bedrock, so that would explain why not much was left of the aircraft!  However, looking at the pictures of the scene, the aircraft is clearly visible.
Problem in recovering bodies was the location--over a quarter mile from the nearest road, in deep swamp, and in sawgrass, with alligators prevalent!

On the afternoon of May 11, 1996, Flight 592 pushed back from gate G2 in Miami after a delay of 1 hour and 4 minutes due to mechanical problems.[1] There were 105 passengers, mainly from Florida and Georgia, on board, as well as a crew of two pilots and three flight attendants, bringing the total number of people on board to 110. At 2:04 pm, 10 minutes before the disaster, the DC-9 took off from runway 9L and began a normal climb.

At 2:10 pm, Captain Candi Kubeck and First Officer Richard Hazen heard a loud bang in their headphones, and noticed the plane was losing electrical power. Seconds later, flight attendant Mandy Summers entered the cockpit and advised the flight crew of a fire in the passenger cabin. Passengers' shouts of "fire, fire, fire" were recorded on the plane's cockpit voice recorder when the cockpit door was opened. Though the ValuJet flight attendant manual stated that the cockpit door should not be opened when smoke or other harmful gases might be present in the cabin, the intercom was disabled and there was no other way to inform the pilots of what was happening.

Kubeck and Hazen immediately asked air traffic control for a return to Miami due to smoke in the cockpit and cabin, and were given instructions for a return to the airport. One minute later, Hazen requested the nearest available airport. Kubeck began to turn the plane left in preparation for the return to Miami.

Flight 592 disappeared from radar at 2:13:42 pm. It rolled onto its side and slammed to the ground nose-first in the Francis S. Taylor Wildlife Management Area in the Everglades, a few miles west of Miami, at a speed in excess of 507 miles per hour (816 km/h). The crew continued to fly the plane until seven or fewer seconds before impact, likely until the front left floor beams collapsed and caused failure of the flight controls.[1] Kubeck, Hazen, the three flight attendants, and all 105 passengers aboard were killed. Recovery of the aircraft and victims was made extremely difficult by the location of the crash. The nearest road of any kind was more than a quarter mile (400 m) away from the crash scene, and the location of the crash itself was a deep-water swamp with a bedrock base. The DC-9 shattered on impact with the bedrock, leaving very few large portions of the plane intact. Sawgrass, alligators, and risk of bacterial infection from cuts plagued searchers involved in the recovery effort.

In a message dated 3/11/2013 3:56:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [address removed] writes:
That's excellent, thank you for sharing.

In 1996 I was working in South Florida in public relations for disaster relief organizations. You may recall there was a crash of an airliner on the edge of the Everglade shortly after takeoff which killed all 110 people on board.

I didn't go to the actual site on a boat but it was only a few hundred yards from where I was stationed on the edge of one of the canals.  I spoke to many people who  had been to the site and the overwhelming feeling was one of sheer disbelief that a large jet airplane could simply vanish into a couple of feet of water and coral rock.

If I'm not mistaken the largest piece of human remains was only a few inches long.   


Sent from my ayayayphone

On Mar 11, 2013, at 3:25 PM, Aaron Humphreys <[address removed]> wrote:

I am attaching the transcript from an interesting lecture on the cognitive trap of conspiracy thinking which may shed some light on this discussion.  Please forgive the formatting issues.  I copied this from something else and don't have time to correct them.  I will point out a few relevant concepts expressed throughout the lecture.

"There are various cognitive traps that conspiracy thinking falls into. One is confirmation bias, which involves the tendency to see all evidence as confirming the conspiracy. Any bit of evidence can be cast in a sinister light. Therefore, ambiguous and even negative evidence tends to reinforce the conspiracy theorists’ certainty and confidence in their conspiracy after awhile. This is a self-reinforcing effect that makes conspiracy theorists incredibly resistant to change. Conspiracy theorists often commit to what is called the fundamental attribution error, which is the tendency to blame other people’s behavior on internal, rather than situational, factors. Conspiracy theorists tend to think that all actions and outcomes are deliberate and intended. They ignore or downplay the quirky nature of history and of individual action, refusing to believe that people may be innocently responding to a situation rather than deliberately orchestrating every detail. For these reasons and others, the conspiracy theory tends to become immune to refutation."

"All evidence against the conspiracy can be explained as being part of the conspiracy itself."

"...unless every quirky detail of the events of 9/11 can be explained to an arbitrary level of detail, conspiracy theorists will claim that there are still holes in the standard explanation. Conspiracy theorists engage, like many pseudoscientists, in anomaly hunting."

"If you take any complex historical event—such as the John F. Kennedy assassination or 9/11—there will be many anomalous details, or events that cannot be fully explained. This is because of the law of large numbers—the fact that the number of variables is so high that quirky events and strange coincidences are bound to happen. Plus, we cannot know all the situational factors that may have contributed to how events occurred. Conspiracy theorists often combine anomaly hunting with naive assumptions about how things should happen. For example, what should the debris should look like after a large commercial jet crashes into a reinforced building, such as the Pentagon?  It is naive to assume that we can know with any detail what would result; such an event is unprecedented, and the physics of high energy impacts are not always intuitive. However, 9/11 conspiracy theorists premise their claims on the notion that they can know what it should look l

Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by Chris K ([address removed]) from The Cleveland Freethinkers.
To learn more about Chris K, visit his/her member profile
Set my mailing list to email me As they are sent | In one daily email | Don't send me mailing list messages

Meetup, POB 4668 #37895 NY NY USA 10163 | [address removed]

Our Sponsors

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy