Thanks BC. But I really don't think there is anything to win or lose here. I simply posted a thread and expressed an opinion. I'm surprised (yet not really) by all the concerted reaction of mostly the usual suspects with deliberately condescending smilies and comments trying to make me LOOK dumb. These are posters with a chip on their shoulders about me for one reason or another, historical or geographical. I'm used to it but I admit it does get annoying some times.

BTW, there's not ONE post here from me in which I have disagreed with their theory. My point has been all theories expressed have some merit but they act as if theirs are gospel and the ONLY reason this can happen.

Thanks again for posting a message of sanity. :toast:

LMAO

That you claimed these things are indestructible.

Oh, **** it! Never mind. This whole thing is not worth my time to spend debating on.

I bet BossChief feels really guilty after this post.

LMAO

Errr, Frankie?

What did I say about nervous agitated laughter? Here's a great example from a man who thinks man rode dinosaurs before Noah.

No, I didn't.

I'm not arguing with anyone, dumbass. Read the thread. I have not posted ONE post calling their theories about the incident wrong or dumb. Others are arguing with me. I'm just pointing out their personal motivations.

You just argued.

Frankie, if you stop acting like you're smarter than everyone else while posting proof of the complete opposite, maybe people wouldn't laugh at you so much. It's nothing personal, man.

You honestly thought BossChief's post was serious? You didn't detect even a hint of sarcasm? When people started to make fun of your uninformed, sensationalistic claim in OP (which was obviously based solely on the picture), you made up an argument that didn't exist (the "indestructible" part). I'm trying to help you understand why people don't give you the credit you think you deserve.

The only argument I remember having with you was about your extremely selfish posting style (when you come back and reply post by post to a thread that has already moved on beyond that point) so I don't know where this whole "agenda" against you theory is coming from, at least as far as I'm concerned.

This is EXACTLY what he meant by arguing with half-wits.

He's beating people with logic and debate, that's not arguing. It's something other than arguing.

I believe his word of choice was actually "witless."

4321

Well, I give you more credit than he does. You're at least a half-wit.

Check post 107.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showt...43#post7699943

I know you do and, for that, I thank you.

Ummm, not everyone else. Just you and the usual cavemen like you who can't handle a "ferner" who is smarter than them. Case in point this very thread. I think and most reasonably logical people agree:

1- Airplanes, as well designed and aerodynamic as they are built are subject to incredible forces in flight.

2- Airplanes do get old. Most wind tunnel tests about their integrity are done with a certain number of flight factored in.

3- Total immaculate maintenance is necessary to keep them safe. Not all airlines do this. Especially if they are owned by countries like Trinidad or Iran.

4- ALL theories expressed here about why this particular accident happened hold water. To totally dismiss one is mega stupid, especially if one does it calling the other person dumb. You see what I mean? The very reaction speaks of one's lack of logic or purposeful and personally motivated condescension.

5- This thread and it's subject is not important enough to have a debate on. Starting one is personal assholery and enduring ass-hurt dating back to some other debate.

6- (1+2+3+4+5) = Frankie is the logical one in this unnecessary debate and you* are an asshole with a chip on your shoulder.

(* = Applies to all assholes in this thread who qualify via 4 & 5. You are welcome.)

Somebody please tickle the rest of us so we can laugh here.

Hey Iovagian, I have noticed too many half-wits of the CP have laughed at your mostly unfunny lines over the years and it has gotten to your head. Hate to break it to you dude, but you are not FAX or Rain Man. In fact quite the opposite.

Frankie, no one is arguing that aircraft are indestructible. They aren't. But no commercial aircraft has EVER experienced a complete fuselage failure like the one shown in the OP while in flight.

Do you understand now?

Thanks man. But no "OUT" is needed.

Also thank you for admitting that you are wrong. I'm not saying that your theory about this incident is wrong. I'm saying to hold steadfastly to ONLY your theory being right is wrong.

http://www.wesleyan.edu/psyc/dierker...n_Jay_Leno.jpg



You don't have a huge brain, you're suffering from hydrocephalus, you silly waterhead.


If you had a brain, you'd take it out and play with it.

I get it now. You believe in the quantity over quality. I guess if you try enough of them one can accidentally be halfway funny. We are still waiting though.

Holy shit. You've got serious issues.

ROFL Come on dude. I remember you too. I'm not a very tall man, but you are shorter than I am.

Frankie, did you take debate in high school and lose the championship on some bogus argument by your opponent?

Sure man, sure. :LOL:

So did the flying monkeys ever come out of your anus? If so, how did it really work?

I agree with you here. When a plane is damaged after careening off a runway and crashing, we must not dismiss any theory.

The plane could have been damaged after metal fatigue suddenly struck and ripped the plane in half. It could have caught some sort of airplane leprosy which caused parts to rot off. It could have been damaged because it went crashing into a field moments earlier.

I don't know, I'm not an engineer. You keep fighting the good fight, Frankie.

Airplane Leprosy.

LMAO

I think you need to look up the de Havilland Comet. They had catastrophic fatigue failures in flight that killed everyone on board and eventually grounded the fleet. The two most famous crashes were operated by British Overseas Airways Corporation. The planes flew in the '50s. It changed aircraft design forever.

It doesn't take a walkthrough of a TSA airport screener to see the labia holding your guts in. Yes, I'm saying I think you're a walking talking, weathered Granny Cooter.




The truth of the matter is, no one is debating your points because they are so utterly pointless that out of 100,000 members, no single poster actually believes that your point is worthy of a serious response. Well, ari will be along shortly to blame the illuminati for damaging that plane with cheap, chinese duct tape to cause this catastrophic calamity.

The 2nd truth is, you're so smart, you couldn't confuse III with a conversation on human reproduction.

Why stop. I know I'm smarter than you and it really eats at your every cell.

I'm not smarter than every CP poster nor as smart as some. But I certainly outsmart the regular cavemen who routinely engage in circle jerks like in this very thread. You know how I know that? It's because like I said, NOT ONE OF you can debate without relying on other cavemen to come in and form a group. It's always a group vs Frankie. Clearly you guys need to ad up your IQs to try to match mine.

Now suck on THAT for a while and burn inside with anger of being told the truth. It's so cool to KNOW that you guys do.

Or could just be Gremlins :shrug:

You really are way deep down in your own world and it has very little to do with reality, my man.

ROFL
Posted via Mobile Device

This thread is high quality entertainment.

I'll bet Frankie would win the Pyrite medal in the deadlift at the dumb**** olympics.


Hell, even Marty Shook knew when to hit the eject button.

...and why do you think this is, Frankie?

The. Damage. In. That. Photo. did. not. Occur. In. Mid-air. Dumb. Ass.

Damn, that's spot on.

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled people make poor decisions and reach erroneous conclusions, but their incompetence denies them the metacognitive ability to recognize their mistakes.[1] The unskilled therefore suffer from illusory superiority, rating their ability as above average, much higher than it actually is, while the highly skilled underrate their own abilities, suffering from illusory inferiority. Actual competence may weaken self-confidence, as competent individuals may falsely assume that others have an equivalent understanding. As Kruger and Dunning conclude, "the miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others" (p. 1127).[2]

The effect is about paradoxical defects in cognitive ability, in oneself and others

Only thing missing was Frankie's picture.

But what if it did?


Makes you think doesn't it? :hmmm:

JUST HOW SAFE ARE THOSE PLANES WE RIDE [sic] IN EVERYDAY [sic]? :eek:

/Frankie just saw a picture of an airplane torn in half without reading the article.

I told you....the answer for every CP issue lies here.
nsfw language
<iframe width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/zl8JlboU1N0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Yeah. We non-psych people call it not admitting you're wrong and fighting until you look really stoopid. The harder they fight the dumber they look.

I think Frankie actually believes what he says. He so deep in denial and his own preconceptions about things, there's no way out. Arguing with him is impossible. You can point out to him that the thing he thought to be black is actually white in reality and he will tell you that he's intellectually superior (after he says your original argument was that all things are white).

It doesn't just tear in half, it "breakes in two".

My guess is that the pilot didn't hit the breakes in time. He might have been over-worked. He should take a little breake from flying for a while.

If you think his falafel breath is bad, try smelling his left hand.

Typos are counted as stupidity? Do you realize how fast and furious I have to type to keep up with the resident ass-hurt shit throwing monkeys (see below)?

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_NjquDQPwwL...red+bottom.jpg

They are when the poster claims intellectual superiority over all viewers.

Where did I say it did? You are totally incapable of comprehending a simple thread topic and YOU are the one calling ME "dumbass?!!"

WOW, you guys are thick! You make sweathogs look like a bunch of NASA scientists. It's PATHETIC! :shake:

Actually that's the question I keep asking myself.

What is your obsession with the sweathogs?

Never mind. You're an Iranian, and Welcome Back Kotter is a 1970s American television show. It all makes sense.

Your hypothesis presented in the title of thread said what exactly?

You don't understand too well, do you? Color me shocked.

YOU don't understand too well.

Do you understand how bad you are getting trolled here?

Do you understand how easy it is to pull you offside?

You just keep falling for it and falling for it.

So what few here do you consider to be your intellectual superior?

Holy shit! Mensa! Killer!

LMAO I just noticed that!

ROFL

Gotta change his av to the busted up airplane.

What do Frankie and a Smart car have in common?

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/smart-car-1.jpg

This thread is a vampire. Someone please drive a stake through it's heart.
Posted via Mobile Device

those folks have some serious wind hair

Mensa won't let it die.

hope they stowed their carry on under their seat.
sec

Nope, still not a mult...but my 25+ years of aircraft maintenance experience says THAT. CAN. NOT. HAPPEN. IN. THE. AIR!!! DUMBASS!!

:huh:only if ya didnt shit through the seat.

Frankie is so smart, he can sniff 3 day old farts from a metro bus seat and tell you what the provider had for dinner the day before.

I'm familiar with the Comet. Their fuselages didn't break in half like the aircraft in the OP. The British dorks used rectangular passenger windows, which led to the skin of the fuselage ripping at the corners. But, no, the fuselage didn't break in half.

The provider probably had flying monkeys for dinner. They tried to fly out while the person was on the bus.

I hate this thread. It wont go away.

The Chiefs PR staff just pulled this thread up in a meeting and said "the threadstarter is the same dumbass criticizing your off-season moves, Scott".

I hate this thread so much that I'll bump it and prolong it's life by posting a comment complaining about it.

I was pointing out the fact that metal fatigue has caused catastrophic disasters. They don't know that the failures were caused by the windows. It was more likely a combination of the unknown properties of aluminum and rivets used in the construction.

Frankie, Frankie, Frankie. Let me clear up the argument everyone is making since you were unable to tie all the pieces together. Planes do not just break in half while flying through the air. Not modern planes anyhow. Planes are designed to take off of a runway, fly through the air, and then land on a runway. They are not designed to careen off the runway and into a ditch. When they do that, yes, there is a chance they may break in two being as they aren't designed to do it. The article never mentions the plane ever got off the ground, and simply states that the plane ran off the runway. Therefor, buy deductive reasoning alone, you should be able to see that this in no way proves anything other than the fact that 737's flying in Guyana, can split in two when they run off of the end of the runway. Nothing else is implied here. You are welcome.

:spock: