Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald
Yes, Occam's Razor is a good rule to bring up. Which is the simplist explanation? Poor, uneducated, rubes that could not fly cessnas were able to pentrate multiple levels of national security and then commandeer multi-engine commercial airliners and fly them into buildings and ground structures, one of which included some flying that the best pilots in the world could not pull off (the hitting of the Pentagon)
or
something else?
 |
I think you underestimate what these guys were capable of: 1) They dedicate years to this one cause, so its hardly unfathomable if they spent the time training solely for this moment. 2) Pre-9/11, it wasnt that hard to penetrate multiple levels of security, its as simple as that. 3) I don't agree with your assessment that the technical skills required to do what they did, were unattainable. In subscribing to your pretense, you are unneccesarily complicating the issues with a false premise. I sincerely doubt that there are genuine scientific experiments out there that have assessed the best pilots in the world crashing into buildings. I am not a pilot (and I doubt you are too), but I don't think it would be that hard to fly in a straight line, especially after some practice and a bit of luck. Rather than implying that they were doing arial combat maneuvers and evading sam sites in a 757 or whatever, why not keep it simple and logically assume they just flew in a straight line?
Sounds pretty simple to me, rather than your alternative. No offense, but look at how many lines of text its taken you just to explain your theory, and its still wrought with holes.
________
LovelyWendie99