Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    I'm well aware, but nobody's saying "oh, these incidents all happened to Boeings, therefore maybe there's something wrong with Boeing".

    All I'm getting at is that too draw a conclusion that something is wrong with A320s because of these few incidents is a massive leap into the unknown at this point.
    If terrorism is the root cause of this particular incident, it could just be that A320s are being singled out, for reasons that are of course unknown.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by beta_tester)
    this bomb was set to go off 20 minutes before landing
    How do you know this?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Destoroyah)
    If terrorism is the root cause of this particular incident, it could just be that A320s are being singled out, for reasons that are of course unknown.
    Or it could just be that these events happen in Europe/ North Africa where the A320 is simply more common?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by beta_tester)
    I'd be surprised if a terrorist who infiltrates one of the most secure airports in Europe would make a mistake.
    You have not yet shown that a terrorist infiltrated Paris. You haven't yet shown that Paris is as secure as you claim. Your confidence in the infallibiity of terrorists is touching. Countless incidents of accidental self-destruction have occurred over the years.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    How do you know this?
    I don't but its the safest way for a terror cell to place a bomb on a plane and to get away from the airport as fast as possible without leaving any trace.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    How do you know this?
    That too.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Destoroyah)
    If terrorism is the root cause of this particular incident, it could just be that A320s are being singled out, for reasons that are of course unknown.
    Then again, as I'm sure you'll agree, it could be that they are not being singled out.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    You have not yet shown that a terrorist infiltrated Paris. You haven't yet shown that Paris is as secure as you claim. Your confidence in the infallibiity of terrorists is touching. Countless incidents of accidental self-destruction have occurred over the years.
    I'll refer you to my backup source

    this was almost certainly not an explosion, a 'heat flash' was detected and reported just hours after the Sinai plane crash, if a bomb went off, the same thing would've been indicated, but instead it was actually dismissed, from The Guardian:

    Name:  Screen Shot 2016-05-20 at 11.06.58.png
Views: 44
Size:  41.8 KB
    • Study Helper
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    (Original post by Drewski)
    How do you know this?
    Seems like he took my advice to read tea leaves.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by beta_tester)
    I've told you already.

    1. the bomb went off 3:40 into a 4:00 flight, a time at which the plane is very likely to start descending, at lower altitudes, the force of a bomb is lessened because of the pressure difference

    2. the plane performed a 'left and right circle' manoeuvre after the incident, a significant bomb probably would break the aircraft in two and it would not do this, a source on BBC also verified that it is more likely to be an incident in the cockpit rather than a bomb

    3. the plane left from Paris and Cairo previously, two very secure airports, given that they have been subject to two major terror attacks in the last year

    4. no one has claimed responsibility
    1) the first part is right the issue started at 3:40 we do not know what this was. the rest is your opinion

    2) it has been reported yes and the fats are below other people opinions just because they support your are not facts.

    "The picture we have at the moment of the accident as it emerges from the Greek air force operations centre is that the aircraft was approximately 10-15 miles inside the Egyptian FIR [flight information region] and at an altitude of 37,000 feet.
    "It turned 90 degrees left and then a 360-degree turn toward the right, dropping from 37,000 to 15,000 feet and then it was lost at about 10,000 feet."


    3) all airports are considered secure until they are not so this isn't really a fact just your opinion (also given the recent issue of some airport staff having their security clearance revoked over fears of links to Islamic extremist it's a bizarre claim to make)

    4) yes they have

    So your facts are not actual facts apart from 2 points when the issue started and the odd behavior of the turns

    You've then thrown in a lot of opinion and cherry picked news reporting

    But tell me why do you not want to wait for the facts before stating specifically it wasn't terrorism?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by beta_tester)
    I'll refer you to my backup source

    this was almost certainly not an explosion, a 'heat flash' was detected and reported just hours after the Sinai plane crash, if a bomb went off, the same thing would've been indicated, but instead it was actually dismissed, from The Guardian:

    Name:  Screen Shot 2016-05-20 at 11.06.58.png
Views: 44
Size:  41.8 KB
    How does that shed any light on the security of the Paris airport, or the infallibility of terrorists?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    1) the first part is right the issue started at 3:40 we do not know what this was. the rest is your opinion

    2) it has been reported yes and the fats are below other people opinions just because they support your are not facts.

    "The picture we have at the moment of the accident as it emerges from the Greek air force operations centre is that the aircraft was approximately 10-15 miles inside the Egyptian FIR [flight information region] and at an altitude of 37,000 feet.
    "It turned 90 degrees left and then a 360-degree turn toward the right, dropping from 37,000 to 15,000 feet and then it was lost at about 10,000 feet."


    3) all airports are considered secure until they are not so this isn't really a fact just your opinion (also given the recent issue of some airport staff having their security clearance revoked over fears of links to Islamic extremist it's a bizarre claim to make)

    4) yes they have

    So your facts are not actual facts apart from 2 points when the issue started and the odd behavior of the turns

    You've then thrown in a lot of opinion and cherry picked news reporting

    But tell me why do you not want to wait for the facts before stating specifically it wasn't terrorism?
    I'll refer you to my source, as you evidently won't believe a thing I say

    Name:  Screen Shot 2016-05-20 at 11.06.58.png
Views: 46
Size:  41.8 KB
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    How does that shed any light on the security of the Paris airport, or the infallibility of terrorists?
    It doesn't but it rules out the possibility of an explosion
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by beta_tester)
    I'd be surprised if a terrorist who infiltrates one of the most secure airports in Europe would make a mistake.

    and ISIS hasn't claimed responsibility, if it did, it would be plastered over the entire internet and not just one obscure news source
    repped by mistake
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    repped by mistake
    Stop lying, ISIS have not claimed responsibility

    if they did, it would be plastered all over the entire internet
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by beta_tester)
    I'll refer you to my source, as you evidently won't believe a thing I say

    Name:  Screen Shot 2016-05-20 at 11.06.58.png
Views: 46
Size:  41.8 KB
    again just someones opinion
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by beta_tester)
    It doesn't but it rules out the possibility of an explosion
    No. If true, it tends to rule out the likelihood of an explosion.

    You don't even name or link to your source.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    No. If true, it tends to rule out the likelihood of an explosion.

    You don't even name or link to your source.
    I said the guardian, learn to read


    This is what I said:

    this was almost certainly not an explosion, a 'heat flash' was detected and reported just hours after the Sinai plane crash, if a bomb went off, the same thing would've been indicated, but instead it was actually dismissed, from The Guardian:




    are you blind, by any chance?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by beta_tester)
    Stop lying, ISIS have not claimed responsibility
    No you are right I read a report yesterday which has since been pulled

    See this is what happens when you reply upon news rather than facts
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016...-flight-ms804/

    Now rightly this is being ignored as hot air but to say they haven't claimed would be wrong

    You didn't answer my question again

    But tell me why do you not want to wait for the facts before stating specifically it wasn't terrorism?
    Oh, that's weird

    Name:  Screen Shot 2016-05-20 at 11.17.19.png
Views: 87
Size:  110.0 KB

    Now who do I trust, some random source I've never seen before, or the BBC?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: December 16, 2016
Poll
“Yanny” or “Laurel”
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.