[202X] Project Horizon (SW9?): Planning Approved

[Tom]

They’ve already said in one of the appendices that no digging is to be done.

Where exactly is that out of interest? Would have though you would need something for foundations but maybe not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Matt N]

Where exactly is that out of interest? Would have though you would need something for foundations but maybe not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think it was in the Environmental Impact Assessment. I took it to mean that they weren’t digging a big pit or something.

The exact quote was something along the lines of “The current topography of the site is flat, and this will not need to change for this development”.

 

[Dave]

Which helps the point. When you know something it's only human to not appreciate you are interpreting circumstantial evidence as unequivocal proof. That isn't how that evidence looks to people who don't know.

It all feels very accident aliens.

Again we talk about confirmation bias, but that’s not what is happening here.

If anything the idea that this isn’t a rollercoaster is the pure definition of confirmation bias. Some people think this isn’t a coaster and are using the similarity between the Towers and Thorpe applications as a source of potential error in the Towers application to confirm their bias.

Or you read “roller coaster” and agree what is being built is a roller coaster. The flying theatre brigade are a classic example of confirmation bias.

Being open minded does not mean you believe everything, it means you are willing to consider any outcome if the evidence leads you there. The evidence here does not in anyway support anything other than something that operates to all intents and purposes as a rollercoaster.

 

[Matt N]

Again we talk about confirmation bias, but that’s not what is happening here.

If anything the idea that this isn’t a rollercoaster is the pure definition of confirmation bias. Some people think this isn’t a coaster and are using the similarity between the Towers and Thorpe applications as a source of potential error in the Towers application to confirm their bias.

Or you read “roller coaster” and agree what is being built is a roller coaster. The flying theatre brigade are a classic example of confirmation bias.

Being open minded does not mean you believe everything, it means you are willing to consider any outcome if the evidence leads you there. The evidence here does not in anyway support anything other than something that operates to all intents and purposes as a rollercoaster.

I’m not in the flying theatre brigade (I very much agree that this is most likely be a roller coaster based on the building dimensions), but my thought was that going out and straight up declaring “roller coaster” in only two sentences out of thousands in the application when all the others say “indoor attraction” is somewhat fishy, and could hint towards roller coaster having been accidentally left in there in 2 instances.

Alton are under no obligation to talk about the building’s contents seeing as the application is for the building rather than the attraction inside it, and if Alton wanted to keep the attraction type secret as they seem to want to in practically every other part of the consultation, wouldn’t they have wanted to say “indoor attraction” like they have everywhere else?

I’m not saying that it isn’t a coaster by any means (I think it is most likely to be a coaster), but there are plenty of reasons why I don’t think we should necessarily take 2 instances of “roller coaster” out of hundreds of potential instances for it (all the others say “indoor attraction”, which is more vague) by a third party as empirical clear-cut confirmation that it is a coaster.

 

[Josh555]

I hope it isn’t a rollercoaster purely for the moment it will give Matt when it’s unveiled.

 

[Nick🎢]

Again we talk about confirmation bias, but that’s not what is happening here.

If anything the idea that this isn’t a rollercoaster is the pure definition of confirmation bias. Some people think this isn’t a coaster and are using the similarity between the Towers and Thorpe applications as a source of potential error in the Towers application to confirm their bias.

Or you read “roller coaster” and agree what is being built is a roller coaster. The flying theatre brigade are a classic example of confirmation bias.

Being open minded does not mean you believe everything, it means you are willing to consider any outcome if the evidence leads you there. The evidence here does not in anyway support anything other than something that operates to all intents and purposes as a rollercoaster.

Anyone that says 100% either way is - I agree. I am not witnessing much "it's not" but maybe that's my own bias ignoring those posts because that's a bonkers position to take. We need to be careful to not confuse those that haven't drunken the 100% it's a coaster coolaid with people thinking it's not a coaster. It's not the same thing.

 

[Matt N]

I hope it isn’t a rollercoaster purely for the moment it will give Matt when it’s unveiled.

Oh believe me, I want it to be a roller coaster. I think it most likely will be a roller coaster.

I just think that the theory that it saying “roller coaster” twice out of hundreds of sentences might be a mistake is a valid one based on what I’ve heard. It seems odd to me that Alton would intentionally sacrifice their desire for secrecy in just those two sentences when it says “indoor attraction” (much more vague) everywhere else, even within the same appendices.

Therefore, I don’t think we should count our chickens before they hatch, even if I agree that a coaster looks like the most likely outcome here. As @Nick🎢 said, I’m not 100% saying “it’s not a coaster”, because I don’t agree with that and I think it would be overly rash to rule out anything at this stage. I simply don’t think it’s quite as simple as “2 sentences in appendices say roller coaster instead of indoor attraction = Roller coaster is 100% confirmed”, and I would advise caution about being too confident at this stage.

 

[BarryZola]

I’m not saying that it isn’t a coaster by any means (I think it is most likely to be a coaster), but there are plenty of reasons why I don’t think we should necessarily take 2 instances of “roller coaster” out of hundreds of potential instances for it (all the others say “indoor attraction”, which is more vague) by a third party as empirical clear-cut confirmation that it is a coaster.

Honestly mate. I really like you. But, just stop giving the same message over and over again in multiple posts. It's just not necessary. Everyone is fully aware of what your feelings are about any potential attraction. It's 97% going to be a roller-coaster and there is a very small chance that it won't be. What's more to discuss? Why the need to make your point over and over again. Don't apologise after making another 400 word argument, just don't make it in the first place. We know, there's a small chance it won't be a coaster.

 

[Skyscraper]

Anyone that says 100% either way is - I agree. I am not witnessing much "it's not" but maybe that's my own bias ignoring those posts because that's a bonkers position to take. We need to be careful to not confuse those that haven't drunken the 100% it's a coaster coolaid with people thinking it's not a coaster. It's not the same thing.

The truth is it could literally be anything, and as Towers aren't obliged to divulge the ride hardware in the plans we won't find out till it's announced. Everyone has just got to be patient.

 

[tayspru]

Honestly mate. I really like you. But, just stop giving the same message over and over again in multiple posts. It's just not necessary. Everyone is fully aware of what your feelings are about any potential attraction. It's 97% going to be a roller-coaster and there is a very small chance that it won't be. What's more to discuss? Why the need to make your point over and over again. Don't apologise after making another 400 word argument, just don't make it in the first place. We know, there's a small chance it won't be a coaster.

Probably the fact that a lot of users are telling Matt he is 100% incorrect, which is not the case. People aren’t being lovely in the way they get this across either

 

[Josh555]

Oh believe me, I want it to be a roller coaster. I think it most likely will be a roller coaster.

I just think that the theory that it saying “roller coaster” twice out of hundreds of sentences might be a mistake is a valid one based on what I’ve heard. It seems odd to me that Alton would intentionally sacrifice their desire for secrecy in just those two sentences when it says “indoor attraction” (much more vague) everywhere else, even within the same appendices.

Therefore, I don’t think we should count our chickens before they hatch, even if I agree that a coaster looks like the most likely outcome here. As @Nick🎢 said, I’m not 100% saying “it’s not a coaster”, because I don’t agree with that and I think it would be overly rash to rule out anything at this stage. I simply don’t think it’s quite as simple as “2 sentences in appendices say roller coaster instead of indoor attraction = Roller coaster is 100% confirmed”, and I would advise caution about being too confident at this stage.

I’m only messing mate, just would be quite funny after you’ve been fighting a solo battle on not being totally convinced it’s a coaster.

Personally I’d rather either a trackless dark ride (but a really good one) or my dream AT attraction which would be an indoor version of the Jurassic Park ride with the Nemesis alien instead of the dinosaurs.

The thing is, having gotten really lucky with Rise of the Resistance and getting 4 rides on it in about 1.5 hours (bearing in mind the experience lasts for about 20 minutes,) I’m not sure any trackless dark ride will ever live up to that, so perhaps a coaster is best, especially given Merlin’s effort with an innovative dark ride at Thorpe.

 

[Matt N]

Honestly mate. I really like you. But, just stop giving the same message over and over again in multiple posts. It's just not necessary. Everyone is fully aware of what your feelings are about any potential attraction. It's 97% going to be a roller-coaster and there is a very small chance that it won't be. What's more to discuss? Why the need to make your point over and over again. Don't apologise after making another 400 word argument, just don't make it in the first place. We know, there's a small chance it won't be a coaster.

Sorry, Barry… I’ll stop now.

I’m only trying to tread the line of balance because on another forum, I got repeatedly told off for being too prejudiced when I said that I predicted it would be a coaster. People said I was using confirmation bias to try and prove it was a coaster when I suggested that the building dimensions could hint at a coaster over other options, and that the coaster theory was unfounded rubbish that was no more likely than any other option.

I’m a bit unsure what people want from me and how I should act sometimes… when I try and be decisive in coming to an evidence-based conclusion, people tell me I’m not being open-minded enough, yet when I try and be balanced, I’m told that I’m not considering the evidence well enough. When I’m optimistic, people laugh at me and view me as some comedy foil, yet when I try to evidence my viewpoints and get people to take me seriously, I seem to fail at that as well…

@Josh555 As far as I can tell, I’m not the only one who isn’t 100% convinced that it’s a coaster. For clarity, I do think it’s the most likely option for a number of reasons. I’m simply hesitant to count my chickens before they hatch, as I’ve been burned in this regard before. I’m simply trying to be open minded with what little tangible evidence we have.

 

[BarryZola]

Probably the fact that a lot of users are telling Matt he is 100% incorrect, which is not the case. People aren’t being lovely in the way they get this across either

Yeah, I totally understand that. But sometimes, you have to just say that "Yes, we disagree, but we've made our points and there's no further evidence, so let's just let it go until we know anything different". It's actually completely pointless to continue this particular argument with no further evidence.

 

[RIPCorky]

Alton Towers won't invest money into something that's not a rollercoaster. It just won't attract the crowds if it's some sort of rubbish theatre

 

[Matt N]

Alton Towers won't invest money into something that's not a rollercoaster. It just won't attract the crowds if it's some sort of rubbish theatre

I agree that Alton Towers typically view coasters as most marketable, but something like a flying theatre arguably wouldn’t just be a “rubbish theatre”, it would be a full-on simulator ride.

And I think the public would like it as well; have you ever seen how popular things like Soarin’ and Flight of Passage are? Or, closer to home, Flight of the Sky Lion?

I don’t think a flying theatre is too likely here for various reasons, though.

 

[RIPCorky]

I agree that Alton Towers typically view coasters as most marketable, but something like a flying theatre arguably wouldn’t just be a “rubbish theatre”, it would be a full-on simulator ride.

And I think the public would like it as well; have you ever seen how popular things like Soarin’ and Flight of Passage are? Or closer to home, Flight of the Sky Lion?

I don’t think a flying theatre is too likely here for various reasons, though.

Yes Thirteen is also "popular" and a crap ride. AT need to build on the success of Wickerman and continue with good ride, good theming combination. Before Wickerman you really need to go way back to Oblivion to say yep they nailed it.

Probably a 21st century thing or generation thing but I don't go to a theme park to watch a TV screen, we had those in the 90's, motion simulators, they move a bit maybe blow some wind in your face. Re-ride value is non existent.

 

[Josh555]

I agree that Alton Towers typically view coasters as most marketable, but something like a flying theatre arguably wouldn’t just be a “rubbish theatre”, it would be a full-on simulator ride.

And I think the public would like it as well; have you ever seen how popular things like Soarin’ and Flight of Passage are? Or, closer to home, Flight of the Sky Lion?

I don’t think a flying theatre is too likely here for various reasons, though.

There’s such a huge difference between Soarin’ and Flight if Passage - I’d be absolutely delighted with the latter and underwhelmed with the former.

For what it’s worth I think a flying theatre would be a welcome addition to any park if it was done correctly and part of a continuous development plan, I just can’t see how it can be a priority for a park like Alton Towers which are still leasing beaten up fairground rides to make up for the lack of flats.

 

[Benjsh]

The park have got all nostalgic of late. HH is getting a revamp, NST looks to be coming back. Nemmy getting a rebirth.

Maybe we are genuinely going to get a modern day Black Hole. Obviously this comment has been used on this forum of late for a laugh and not to be taken seriously but it could well be what happens which would be funny. I'd love it too. Space themed indoor coasters just work so well and Black Hole was a personal favourite of mine for years.

The building facade looks very clean and basic too which lends itself well to a Space theme.

 

[Matt N]

The park have got all nostalgic of late. HH is getting a revamp, NST looks to be coming back. Nemmy getting a rebirth.

Maybe we are genuinely going to get a modern day Black Hole. Obviously this comment has been used on this forum of late for a laugh and not to be taken seriously but it could well be what happens which would be funny. I'd love it too. Space themed indoor coasters just work so well and Black Hole was a personal favourite of mine for years.

The building facade looks very clean and basic too which lends itself well to a Space theme.

I think a space themed ride, whether it makes reference to Black Hole or not, is a very plausible theory. The building would aesthetically lend itself to a space theme, what with the glass extension and very “flight” style exterior!

 

[Josh555]

Can’t see a space theme personally unless they re-theme Galactica (which would be welcome).

Would be a bit weird having it in two separate places.