1 like 0 dislike
in General Factchecking by Apprentice (1.4k points)
Some conspiracists on Twitter believe that the plane collision that occurred recently was deliberate.

4 Answers

1 like 0 dislike
by Newbie (210 points)
Conspiracies are difficult to prove, thankfully there is an ongoing investigation regarding the Texas Airshow Crash. In this article posted by ABC News, they explain how there have been several other airshow crashes involving older fighter jets. With this information, it could be speculated that the collision was not deliberate due to the history of air show crashes. As evidence continues to grow, we will not know for sure what happened until the investigation is closed.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/killed-vintage-aircraft-collide-dallas-air-show-93213596
by Innovator (56.5k points)
0 0
Using a source, like a reputable news outlet, can provide good evidence to support your fact-check. Given that an ongoing investigation is taking place and no media reports have mentioned the crash to be intentional, this claim would be rated likely misinformation, but more information is needed since it's a developing situation. I wanted to add that one aviation analyst mentioned that wind gust may have played a role in the crash.
by Newbie (340 points)
0 0
I see you referenced older airshow crashes to justify the idea that mechanical failures are common in these cases. While this is useful, it might help your case to include data on how often mechanical failure versus pilot error happen for airshow crashes. Were there similarities in either models of the aircraft or work practices?
0 like 0 dislike
by Newbie (230 points)
Conspiracies are conspiracies until proven true. This article discusses your statement but does not confirm it. As far as I am aware, there has been no confirmation at all.

https://meaww.com/wings-over-dallas-air-crash-trolls-claim-medical-episode-or-intentional-as-investigation-begins
by Innovator (56.5k points)
0 0
Good catch -- the article supporting the claim doesn't actually confirm it. Also, when answering a claim with your own fact-check it is best to provide original sources or add links to further support your fact-check.
1 like 0 dislike
by Novice (570 points)
While a conspiracy could be the case, it is too early to determine the cause of the crash. Some speculation puts the blame on the blind spot of the P-63, making the crash a complete accident.

https://abc7chicago.com/plane-crash-air-show-dallas-texas-airport-collision/12449443/
by Innovator (56.5k points)
0 0
This is a strong answer to the claim. The ongoing investigation indicates that the crash cause isn't known -- whether intentional or not. However, no media outlets have stated that it could be intentional.
0 like 0 dislike
by Newbie (380 points)
Comments from people on the internet are not exactly the tightest pieces of evidence. After reading over the claim and visiting the website that was linked I was able to see that a lot of the things that were being said conspiring about the crash being planned in some way was just relating to how the crash looked from below and how it just "looked intentional". I  was able to find a source that explains why what went wrong, went wrong.

https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/news/inadequate-planning-cited-for-deadly-mid-air-collision-at-2022-dallas-air-show-ntsb/
Exaggerated/ Misleading

Community Rules


• Be respectful
• Always list your sources and include links so readers can check them for themselves.
• Use primary sources when you can, and only go to credible secondary sources if necessary.
• Try to rely on more than one source, especially for big claims.
• Point out if sources you quote have interests that could affect how accurate their evidence is.
• Watch for bias in sources and let readers know if you find anything that might influence their perspective.
• Show all the important evidence, whether it supports or goes against the claim.
...