Talk:John J. Nance: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
←Blanked the page |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WPBiography|living=yes}} |
|||
== Controversial thesis on Airline Safety == |
|||
I have reverted the last revisions for several reasons: |
|||
They were made by John J. Nance himself. |
|||
His revision amounts to a rambling diatribe, filled with ''non sequiturs'' and irrelevancies. The style of writing is far below that expected in truly professional Wiki articles. One example: |
|||
:"The tawdry histories of the end of both Eastern Airlines and Pan Am show, definitively, how badly those deregulatory-assaulted airlines had performed at their end, and in lawsuits and prosecutions following Eastern's collapse in particular, it was unequivocally revealed that the airline had ceased to function safety in their last year, pressuring pilots to take questionable aircraft, presiding over a hatefest of poor relationships in the ranks that directly impacted safety, and cutting corners wholesale on maintenance staffs and procedures (as well as parts supplies) under the rancid "leadership" of Frank Lorenzo, who later brought Continental Airlines to the brink of extinction. These pressures derived from one and only one source: Deregulation." |
|||
He offers POV, original research, and bias to support his thesis, but not historical facts. One example: |
|||
:"There are voluminous sources available today to not only put these old arguments in their graves, but to show, as well, how profoundly the financial pressures of deregulation pushed the safety system to the brink. Nance's statements in the 80's were not only self-evident and correct, they were also endorsed (albeit reluctantly) by most aviation professionals - even those who supported deregulation - when he said that airline safety was not where it should be, and that the industry was not as safe as it had been." |
|||
In '''''Blind Trust''''', pg 5, Nance says: |
|||
:"The pages that follow are not meant to scare you away from the airline system of the United States. They are, however, meant to illustrate beyond doubt the extremely serious fact that we have a national crisis upon us: a significant deterioration in the margin of safety---the ''potential'' [Nance's emphasis] for fatal airline accidents." |
|||
The entire book tries to convince the reader, with little more than ''post hoc'' "logic," that the "margin of safety" became narrower after the 1978 Deregulation Act, than it was prior to that Act. |
|||
The historical facts about airline safety can be found at '''[[Air safety]]''' and they directly contradict the Nance "narrowed margin of safety" thesis. The concept of "Margin of Safety" is just that----a concept. It is not a measurable quantity in concrete reality, one that true science can get its hands on. Constantly referring to a reduced margin of safety, as Nance does in '''''Blind Trust''''' and in his response here, is not a valid form of evidence to support his thesis. It amounts to no more than a polemic claim, unsupported by any relevant, factual evidence. There has never been any way to actually measure such an alleged safety margin. '''''That''''' is fact. |
|||
Finally, "Wikipedia is not a soapbox; an advertising platform; a vanity press; an experiment in anarchy or democracy; an indiscriminate collection of information; or a web directory." [[Wikipedia:Five pillars]]. I think Nance's response to legitimate concerns about his controversial airline safety theory, amounts to a violation of some of the most prominent Wiki rules. |
|||
[[User:EditorASC|EditorASC]] ([[User talk:EditorASC|talk]]) 02:37, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|||