It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Beijing-bound MAS plane carrying 239 people missing as of 20 mins ago.

page: 364
181
<< 361  362  363    365  366  367 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by sy.gunson
 


sy.gunson

The real scandal of the MH370 disaster is a crooked financial deal in 2011 which heavily involves Malaysia's current Prime Minister as the Chairman of Khazanah Nasional Finance which arranged for taxpayer money to fund an exploitative share swap deal between Air Asia and Malaysian Airlines to allow Air Asia to take over more than a hundred routes controlled by Malaysian Airlines and acquire the 20% of the Government owned airline.

Though the corrupt share swap was reversed by the Malaysian Commerce Commission in 2012 Air Asia kept the routes it acquired and several dubious political appointments made to the management of Malaysian Airlines remained in place.

Of particular relevance to the loss of MH370 a check inspector for Malaysian Airlines at Shanghai Azhari Mohd Dahlan was laid off and found a position with Air Asia.

Through the share swap deal of 2011 Azhari found himself suddenly catapulted into a position as Maintenance CEO for Malaysian Airlines, whilst highly qualified MAS maintenance managers were demoted.
...

It is about the cover up of a politically appointed corrupt deal by business figures associated with the Prime Minister using public taxpayer funds to asset strip and dismantle a Government owned airline for the benefit of a few private individuals.

It seems they are prepared to lie to the world and smear anybody to cover up the cause of 239 deaths in the Indian Ocean and the Government itself seems complicit in covering up the airline's maintenance problems.


Strawman argument! Seems a bit like holding a carrot out to posters in this thread to chase. A classic diversion tactic, that's what strawman arguments are. Now you are allowing yourself to become a little too obvious, methinks. '
But anyway.

There is absolutely NO confirming evidence yet to show that MH 370 crashed, let alone that it crashed because of some maintenance problem.

As for the cover up by the Malaysian government you imply here, if that is true then complicity must also EVENTUALLY fall upon each and every government that pretends ignorance of the cause of the accident, which you are pinning on Malaysia.

For my money "the real scandal" is the complicity of each and every government and militaries involved. But it would run deeper than that wouldn't it? Since as I have already pointed out Rolls Royce and Boeing have been effectively silenced as to the nature of the data from the engines (in the case of Rolls Royce who monitor each and every engine they hire out to all Boeing planes) and from the complex computerized technology throughout the plane itself able to be monitored by Boeing (as well as I would think by the airline company engineers).

The other 'real scandal' as you put it, which no one wants to discuss, is the obvious inadequacy of the present nation state system, where each and every nation must maintain secrecy over their own technological surveillance ability. That means the world cannot effectively act together in a search and rescue operation because secrecy demands critical data, i.e. critical at the time when it there is some chance of rescue if any, cannot be released because other nations will get to know just how advanced your satellite surveillance system actually is!

You can be damn sure, as others on this thread have already pointed out, that the US know exactly where that plane touched down!. If it was in the Southern Indian Ocean then so naturally would the Australians, only I am thinking they don't because it is not there.

edit on 8-4-2014 by Tallone because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 02:31 AM
link   

Tallone
reply to post by sy.gunson
 


sy.gunson

The real scandal of the MH370 disaster is a crooked financial deal in 2011 which heavily involves Malaysia's current Prime Minister as the Chairman of Khazanah Nasional Finance which arranged for taxpayer money to fund an exploitative share swap deal between Air Asia and Malaysian Airlines to allow Air Asia to take over more than a hundred routes controlled by Malaysian Airlines and acquire the 20% of the Government owned airline.

Though the corrupt share swap was reversed by the Malaysian Commerce Commission in 2012 Air Asia kept the routes it acquired and several dubious political appointments made to the management of Malaysian Airlines remained in place.

Of particular relevance to the loss of MH370 a check inspector for Malaysian Airlines at Shanghai Azhari Mohd Dahlan was laid off and found a position with Air Asia.

Through the share swap deal of 2011 Azhari found himself suddenly catapulted into a position as Maintenance CEO for Malaysian Airlines, whilst highly qualified MAS maintenance managers were demoted.
...

It is about the cover up of a politically appointed corrupt deal by business figures associated with the Prime Minister using public taxpayer funds to asset strip and dismantle a Government owned airline for the benefit of a few private individuals.

It seems they are prepared to lie to the world and smear anybody to cover up the cause of 239 deaths in the Indian Ocean and the Government itself seems complicit in covering up the airline's maintenance problems.


Strawman argument. Now you are allowing yourself to become a little too obvious, methinks.

There is no evidence yet to show that MH 370 crashed, let alone that it crashed because of some maintenance problem.

As for the cover up by the Malaysian government you imply here, if that is true then complicity must also EVENTUALLY fall upon each and every government that pretends ignorance of the cause of the accident, which you are pinning on Malaysia.

For my money "the real scandal" is the complicity of each and every government and militaries involved. But it would run deeper than that wouldn't it? Since as I have already pointed out Rolls Royce and Boeing have been effectively silenced as to the nature of the data from the engines (in the case of Rolls Royce who monitor each and every engine they hire out to all Boeing planes) and from the complex computerised technology throughout the plane itself (which is able to be monitored by Boeing as well as the airline company engineers).

The other 'real scandal' as you put it, which no one wants to discuss, is the obvious inadequacy of the present nation state system, where each and every nation must maintain secrecy over their own technological surveillance ability. That means the world cannot effectively act together in a search and rescue operation because secrecy demands critical data, i.e. critical at the time when it there is some chance of rescue if any, cannot be released because other nations will get to know just how advanced your satellite surveillance system actually is! You can be damn sure as many on this thread have pointed out already, the US know exactly where that plane touched down!. If it was in the Southern Indian Ocean then so naturally would the Australians, only I am thinking they don't because it is not there.

edit on 8-4-2014 by Tallone because: (no reason given)


2nd that! This whole incident is a joke because of todays technology (and the 20 year ahead stuff)!
Foul Play - RED Card!



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 03:39 AM
link   

auroraaus
BREAKING UPDATE:

Autonomous Underwater Vehicle "Blue Fin 21" has now been deployed. Bear in mind the extent of depth it can go is 4500metres, some areas of the floor go beyond 5000metres.

Blue Fin will do initial sweep to see any anomalies, and if so, it will be equipped with camera to take pictures.

Robo sub joins search

Edit to add another article
Hope for news within "hours"
edit on 7-4-2014 by auroraaus because: add content


I thought the blue fin won't be deployed unless more pings are detected?



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 04:13 AM
link   
reply to post by violet
 


That's exactly what I thought, after what Houston said at the press conference yesterday. Then the Acting Prime Minister said today it was being deployed today. THEN his spokesperson said that he made a mistake. See bottom of previous page for post.



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 04:33 AM
link   

Tallone
reply to post by sy.gunson
 


sy.gunson

The real scandal of the MH370 disaster is a crooked financial deal in 2011 which heavily involves Malaysia's current Prime Minister as the Chairman of Khazanah Nasional Finance which arranged for taxpayer money to fund an exploitative share swap deal between Air Asia and Malaysian Airlines to allow Air Asia to take over more than a hundred routes controlled by Malaysian Airlines and acquire the 20% of the Government owned airline.

Though the corrupt share swap was reversed by the Malaysian Commerce Commission in 2012 Air Asia kept the routes it acquired and several dubious political appointments made to the management of Malaysian Airlines remained in place.

Of particular relevance to the loss of MH370 a check inspector for Malaysian Airlines at Shanghai Azhari Mohd Dahlan was laid off and found a position with Air Asia.

Through the share swap deal of 2011 Azhari found himself suddenly catapulted into a position as Maintenance CEO for Malaysian Airlines, whilst highly qualified MAS maintenance managers were demoted.
...

It is about the cover up of a politically appointed corrupt deal by business figures associated with the Prime Minister using public taxpayer funds to asset strip and dismantle a Government owned airline for the benefit of a few private individuals.

It seems they are prepared to lie to the world and smear anybody to cover up the cause of 239 deaths in the Indian Ocean and the Government itself seems complicit in covering up the airline's maintenance problems.


Strawman argument! Seems a bit like holding a carrot out to posters in this thread to chase. A classic diversion tactic, that's what strawman arguments are. Now you are allowing yourself to become a little too obvious, methinks. '
But anyway.

There is absolutely NO confirming evidence yet to show that MH 370 crashed, let alone that it crashed because of some maintenance problem.


Yes an oil rig worker who saw the aircraft on fire at the time MH370 was due overhead the Vietnamese coast.

Yes the lack of contact with MH370 since 8th March in the absence of any evidence to the contrary that it landed is evidence the aircraft has crashed.

Automated Inmarsat satellite contact with the aircraft is evidence it flew for 7.5 hours before transmissions stopped and therefore must have run out of fuel.

Yes appropriate black box locator pings from the seabed are proof the aircraft hit and sank beneath the sea.

The fact you don't accept that evidence is not proof there is no corroboration.



As for the cover up by the Malaysian government you imply here, if that is true then complicity must also EVENTUALLY fall upon each and every government that pretends ignorance of the cause of the accident, which you are pinning on Malaysia.


There is no evidence of any complicity by either Australia, USA or China to conceal the fate of MH370.... You're dreaming




For my money "the real scandal" is the complicity of each and every government and militaries involved. But it would run deeper than that wouldn't it? Since as I have already pointed out Rolls Royce and Boeing have been effectively silenced as to the nature of the data from the engines (in the case of Rolls Royce who monitor each and every engine they hire out to all Boeing planes) and from the complex computerized technology throughout the plane itself able to be monitored by Boeing (as well as I would think by the airline company engineers).


There is nothing for them to be silenced about, since what do they know... You provide not one skerrick of real evidence they know anything more that has been released.

Able to monitored by Boeing if the aircraft is enabled by the airline with ACARS but in this case Malaysian Airlines declined to enable and pay for the ability.

Likewise with Rolls Royce, their engines are linked by INMARSAT satellites and have to be powered up electrically to work. Ergo if they are not transmitting they are not powered. Pretty simple.

It is not me but you who holds out straw men theories with no evidence.




The other 'real scandal' as you put it, which no one wants to discuss, is the obvious inadequacy of the present nation state system, where each and every nation must maintain secrecy over their own technological surveillance ability. That means the world cannot effectively act together in a search and rescue operation because secrecy demands critical data, i.e. critical at the time when it there is some chance of rescue if any, cannot be released because other nations will get to know just how advanced your satellite surveillance system actually is!


In fact baring the obstructiveness of the Malaysians themselves the other nations involved have shown pretty incredible co-operation and you avert your gaze and decline to accept the hindrance of the Malaysian Government because you have built your tedious Strawman theory on rumour peddling by none other than the Malaysian Government themselves.

In essence you are an apologist for the corrupt and inept Malaysian administration's efforts to divert the debate.



You can be damn sure, as others on this thread have already pointed out, that the US know exactly where that plane touched down!. If it was in the Southern Indian Ocean then so naturally would the Australians, only I am thinking they don't because it is not there.


..but you don't know where it is and you have not produced a single skerrick of evidence that it landed anywhere....just page after page of tedious rather flakey speculation.




Now you are allowing yourself to become a little too obvious, methinks. '



Obvious about what, that I don't live in an advanced state of paranoia trying to concoct conspiracy theories from every innocent event in the world around me?

Are you suggesting I am in the pay of some foreign Government?

Seek help Tallone
edit on 8-4-2014 by sy.gunson because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 04:49 AM
link   

charlyv
The frequency stability window is indeed a problem.

With an emitter at 37500hz, and heading directly to the target, at 15knots,
in seawater at normal temperatures and salinity, the relative increase in frequency is 1khz.

Since the specs of the device are +/- 1KHZ, that is a +/- 15 knot error window.
This article suggests it may not even meet that +/- 1kHz specification, especially when the batteries are run down, like they are probably run down pretty far by now:

Ship hunting for more 'pings' in plane search

The black boxes normally emit a frequency of 37.5 kilohertz, and the signals picked up by the Ocean Shield were both 33.3 kilohertz, U.S. Navy Capt. Mark Matthews said. But the manufacturer indicated the frequency of black boxes can drift in older equipment.

Houston said the frequency of the sounds heard was considered "quite credible" by the manufacturer, and noted that the frequency from the Air France jet that crashed several years ago was 34 kilohertz. Pressure from being so deep below the surface and the age of the batteries can also affect the transmission level, he said.



For doppler to be of value here, they would have to identify what that center frequency really is. Whatever it really is would follow this ratio, but out of the box, it would be impossible to know until they CPA the target.
I thought CPA was "Certified Public Accountant" but you obviously mean something else here...but what? As for the rest of your comment you're right, even if it was 34 kHz nominal it would still get higher when they headed toward it and lower when they headed away from it, unless they were directly on top of it in which case it wouldn't change when the direction changed.

I still think 33.3 kHz seems a long way off though; I wasn't expecting they would think that's a valid 37.5 +/- 1 kHz signal, before reading that article, and I'm still not so sure, but it did raise some doubts.



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 05:18 AM
link   
reply to post by sy.gunson
 


Tallone
reply to post by sy.gunson
 


sy.gunson

The real scandal of the MH370 disaster is a crooked financial deal in 2011 which heavily involves Malaysia's current Prime Minister as the Chairman of Khazanah Nasional Finance which arranged for taxpayer money to fund an exploitative share swap deal between Air Asia and Malaysian Airlines to allow Air Asia to take over more than a hundred routes controlled by Malaysian Airlines and acquire the 20% of the Government owned airline.

Though the corrupt share swap was reversed by the Malaysian Commerce Commission in 2012 Air Asia kept the routes it acquired and several dubious political appointments made to the management of Malaysian Airlines remained in place.

Of particular relevance to the loss of MH370 a check inspector for Malaysian Airlines at Shanghai Azhari Mohd Dahlan was laid off and found a position with Air Asia.

Through the share swap deal of 2011 Azhari found himself suddenly catapulted into a position as Maintenance CEO for Malaysian Airlines, whilst highly qualified MAS maintenance managers were demoted.
...

It is about the cover up of a politically appointed corrupt deal by business figures associated with the Prime Minister using public taxpayer funds to asset strip and dismantle a Government owned airline for the benefit of a few private individuals.

It seems they are prepared to lie to the world and smear anybody to cover up the cause of 239 deaths in the Indian Ocean and the Government itself seems complicit in covering up the airline's maintenance problems.


Strawman argument! Seems a bit like holding a carrot out to posters in this thread to chase. A classic diversion tactic, that's what strawman arguments are. Now you are allowing yourself to become a little too obvious, methinks. '
But anyway.

There is absolutely NO confirming evidence yet to show that MH 370 crashed, let alone that it crashed because of some maintenance problem.

That's what I said, an' then you said the following, and more. Let me step through your assertions.




Yes an oil rig worker who saw the aircraft on fire at the time MH370 was due overhead the Vietnamese coast.

Not confirming evidence. Who is this oil rig worker? Was he sober at the time? How do you know he didn't see the planet Venus?
There were multiple witnesses in the Maldives who witnessed 'a low flying jumbo' within the flight time of MH 370's fuel tank allowance. That sighting was the other side of Malaysia and heading towards Africa not Australia. Multiple witnesses surely beat a single witness. But funnily enough you don't mention them since they are not helping your argument it crashed in the Southern Indian Ocean.


Yes the lack of contact with MH370 since 8th March in the absence of any evidence to the contrary that it landed is evidence the aircraft has crashed.

No it doesn't. It simply means there has been no contact. The plane could have flown in any direction and landed in a number of possible locations already discussed in the thread. Since ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE has been found confirming it lies at the bottom of the southern Indian Ocean we cannot confirm it has crashed at all, let alone confirm the status quo story put out by TPTB, which you obviously wish us to fall in line with.

Automated Inmarsat satellite contact with the aircraft is evidence it flew for 7.5 hours before transmissions stopped and therefore must have run out of fuel.

Yes, and this supports the distance the plane flew, NOT the direction in which it flew. Another example of how you want to lead the people reading this thread into the same fallacious hole you seem to have fallen into yourself.


Yes appropriate black box locator pings from the seabed are proof the aircraft hit and sank beneath the sea.

Yes, that would be correct IF the pings were found to be from the MH 370 and they have not. The pings could just as easily have come from a ship or even submarine for that matter. At this stage, nearly two days over the expected battery life, we could expect there would be a deterioration in the strength of pings and period duration between pings. So I would be fairly suspicious if clear clean pings were being picked up. If the plane is there they will find it. Why are you in such a hurry to shout down all of the other possibilities?


The fact you don't accept that evidence is not proof there is no corroboration.

Well there is nothing to corroborate yet is there?! For there to be something to corroborate you would need to find MH 370 wreckage, non-biological or biological.

Since this is a dog and pony show in the southern Indian Ocean are you in the ring or in the audience? That's what I'd like to know.


edit on 8-4-2014 by Tallone because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 05:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


CPA = Closest Point of Approach



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 06:15 AM
link   

Tallone
reply to post by sy.gunson


Strawman argument! Seems a bit like holding a carrot out to posters in this thread to chase. A classic diversion tactic, that's what strawman arguments are. Now you are allowing yourself to become a little too obvious, methinks. '
But anyway.

There is absolutely NO confirming evidence yet to show that MH 370 crashed, let alone that it crashed because of some maintenance problem.






Yes an oil rig worker who saw the aircraft on fire at the time MH370 was due overhead the Vietnamese coast.

Not confirming evidence.


Yes confirming evidence which you refuse to accept. Sighting of an aircraft on fire is evidence of a technical maintenance failure


Who is this oil rig worker? Was he sober at the time?


have you any evidence he wasn't sober?


How do you know he didn't see the planet Venus?


Because on 8 March 2014 Venus was a morning star visible in the east and in fact I saw Venus that same morning myself and it was a star, not a burning aeroplane, but Mike Mckay saw the aircraft burning high in the sky to the west. Venus was in the east.



There were multiple witnesses in the Maldives who witnessed 'a low flying jumbo' within the flight time of MH 370's fuel tank allowance. That sighting was the other side of Malaysia and heading towards Africa not Australia.


Flying north to south you forgot to mention... not east to west and two Government radar stations on the Maldives said it was not seen on their radar



Multiple witnesses surely beat a single witness. But funnily enough you don't mention them since they are not helping your argument it crashed in the Southern Indian Ocean.


I am well aware of that sighting but there was no radar confirmation and no positive identification including no witness recalled seeing the words Malaysian which are very prominent on the lost aircraft. Therefore you have not yet proved that it wasn't some other aircraft.




Yes the lack of contact with MH370 since 8th March in the absence of any evidence to the contrary that it landed is evidence the aircraft has crashed.

No it doesn't. It simply means there has been no contact. The plane could have flown in any direction and landed in a number of possible locations already discussed in the thread.


Actually there was an extensive crowd sourced Tominrod survey of all the world's airfiled by hundreds of thousands of enthusiastic motivated people none of whom could spot the aircraft on any runway. That is fairly substantial evidence it did not land anywhere.



Since ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE has been found confirming it lies at the bottom of the southern Indian Ocean we cannot confirm it has crashed at all,


The detection of sonar pings specific to flight data recorders is sufficient evidence for any reasonable person.




let alone confirm the status quo story put out by TPTB, which you obviously wish us to fall in line with.


I don't even know who TPTB are and personally i don't actually care what you believe, but i do care when people distort the truth.




Automated Inmarsat satellite contact with the aircraft is evidence it flew for 7.5 hours before transmissions stopped and therefore must have run out of fuel.

Yes, and this supports the distance the plane flew, NOT the direction in which it flew.


In the absence of any substantiated evidence from you that it actually landed somewhere it is sufficient proof that it ran out of fuel and crashed.



Another example of how you want to lead the people reading this thread into the same fallacious hole you seem to have fallen into yourself.


I am debating my point of view in a forum where people win their arguments by production of evidence none of which you have provided. If people wish to subscribe to a fantasy then I am not going to lose any sleep over it.




Yes appropriate black box locator pings from the seabed are proof the aircraft hit and sank beneath the sea.

Yes, that would be correct IF the pings were found to be from the MH 370 and they have not. The pings could just as easily have come from a ship or even submarine for that matter.


Not at all. It is not just the 37.5 kHz frequency which is specific to flight data recorders, but also the pulse repetition rate which makes these pulses unmistakably from a downed airliner and therefore also only conceivably from an airliner crashed within the last 30 days. Do you know of several other lost airliners which these pings could come from lost in the last 30 days?




At this stage, nearly two days over the expected battery life, we could expect there would be a deterioration in the strength of pings and period duration between pings. So I would be fairly suspicious if clear clean pings were being picked up.


Since you have not heard the strength or clarity of these pings yourself and have not provided any credentials for expertise in the subject of sonar identification yourself what proof have you that there was any deterioration?



If the plane is there they will find it. Why are you in such a hurry to shout down all of the other possibilities?


I am in no hurry at all. the truth will emerge from the deep in due course... I hope you are offering to come back online and concede I was right when that happens?

Somehow i suspect you wont have the nerve to post again once the black boxes are raised. Will I get my apology then or should I not bother to hold my breath?



edit on 8-4-2014 by sy.gunson because: Multiple edits to sort out correct quote closures



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 06:41 AM
link   
After reading most of the posts here I think the most possible solution to fit all the data is the following IMHO:

- There was a fire on board and the pilot tried everything to return the plane to Malaysia. I guess he pushed the button for the fire extinguisher and set the autopilot to heading hold with a heading turning the plane back south. With a fire on board there are just two things that are important for the pilot: Getting the fire out and bringing the plane as back to an airport. So setting a quick heading to roughly let the autopilot fly back is a good choice I thing as you could concentrate on the fire while letting the autopilot get you back.
- The fire destroyed some of the wire bundles leading to transponder / communication failures we see.
- All on board died/became unconscious as the cabin filled with toxic smoke. Maybe the oxygen generators for the crew failed to operate (no maintenance) or they just don't have enough time to use them...
- The fire extinguished (either due to missing fuel or the extinguishers worked)

Now we have a damaged plane with no communication but still able to fly with autopilot in heading hold mode flying the selected south heading until all the fuel is empty.

Maybe Malaysia Airline knew that their maintenance was responsible and they don't want the aircraft to be found or it is just over their head to handle such a situation leading to all the false/misleading statements.

I won't rule out all the other possibilities but the best theory is the one that fits most of the data with the least assumptions. With the pings now heard I'm pretty sure they will find the aircraft laying on the ground there somewhere.
I'm still wondering why they don' t see debris there but it is still possible the plane didn't break up completely and sunk in one peace after floating for a few hours. With all the waves and wind there for 4 weeks now the few debris that where floating could be displaced over a large area.



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 06:44 AM
link   

sy.gunson


Tallone
reply to post by sy.gunson


Because on 8 March 2014 Venus was a morning star visible in the east and in fact I saw Venus that same morning myself and it was a star, not a burning aeroplane, but Mike Mckay saw the aircraft burning high in the sky to the west. Venus was in the east.



There were multiple witnesses in the Maldives who witnessed 'a low flying jumbo' within the flight time of MH 370's fuel tank allowance. That sighting was the other side of Malaysia and heading towards Africa not Australia.


Flying north to south you forgot to mention... not east to west and two Government radar stations on the Maldives said it was not seen on their radar


Just because it was not on their radar, does not mean it wasn't there, planes can fly under the radar.



Multiple witnesses surely beat a single witness. But funnily enough you don't mention them since they are not helping your argument it crashed in the Southern Indian Ocean.



am well aware of that sighting but there was no radar confirmation and no positive identification including no witness recalled seeing the words Malaysian which are very prominent on the lost aircraft. Therefore you have not yet proved that it wasn't some other aircraft.


How do we know the "aircraft" the one single witness saw burning wasn't any other aircraft or something else?



Yes the lack of contact with MH370 since 8th March in the absence of any evidence to the contrary that it landed is evidence the aircraft has crashed.


No it doesn't. It simply means there has been no contact. The plane could have flown in any direction and landed in a number of possible locations already discussed in the thread.



Actually there was an extensive crowd sourced Tominrod survey of all the world's airfiled by hundreds of thousands of enthusiastic motivated people none of whom could spot the aircraft on any runway. That is fairly substantial evidence it did not land anywhere.


With the Tomnod crowd source, how come no one could find ANY floating debris either? Surely if the plane crashed SOMETHING from the plane would have been floating, no?



Not at all. It is not just the 37.5 kHz frequency which is specific to flight data recorders, but also the pulse repetition rate which makes these pulses unmistakably from a downed airliner and therefore also only conceivably from an airliner crashed within the last 30 days. Do you know of several other lost airliners which these pings could come from lost in the last 30 days?


correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the pings that were picked up were not actually 37.5 kHz? I thought they were like 33.5 kHz? Which from what I understand CAN still be in the range of an airliner flight data recorder.

It just seems strange to me that NOTHING has been found from this plane yet, i mean even with the Air France flight that went missing, didn't they find some debris within like 2 weeks? The whole story is just weird. Personally I am not sure that it crashed, for all I know it could have landed somewhere else and be in a hangar or it could just be on the bottom of the ocean, but we won't know for sure until if / when a black box is actually FOUND. I'm suspicious of them finding the pings only because almost every other time they have said that they "found" something related to MH370 it has turned out to be nothing.

Just my .02 =]
Have a good day.



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 07:33 AM
link   
I'd like to promote another theory/thought about MH370.

How financial healthy was MAS? I'm not an expert here, but 2012 it looks like they were in trouble and 2013 they barely concluded with a surplus, when I interpret my quick glance on their fiscal report correctly. MAS is state owned, so the government is involved.
If they were in trouble this year, what if they used MH370 to create a revenue...

You know, something along the line of insurance fraud:
A new 777 is worth somewhat around 300 mio $. I think I read, that the insurance company already paid around 250 mio in advance for the allegedly crashed plane. And the parts on the black market should be worth a fortune too. 239 lifes for ~500mio$... people get killed for a lot less....

Take the plane out normal and in the right time and place, turn off the communication devices
Kill the passengers (35.000ft climb without oxygen supply in the cabin)
Land the plane on an airport in the region
Pay the pilots enough, so they can get a new life (or kill them after landing...)
Take the plane apart and sell the parts on the black market
Tamper with the black boxes and dump them somewhere in the southern indian ocean

Meanwhile: make the most dumbass errors in history of searching for a crashed plane and buy enough time for the selling and dumping process.

Granted, the triangulated satellite data from Inmarsat doesn't really support this theory but greed let people do some really sinister things
edit on 8/4/2014 by Talliostro because: (no reason given)

edit on 8/4/2014 by Talliostro because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 08:10 AM
link   


With the Tomnod crowd source, how come no one could find ANY floating debris either?


The initial sat pics used were in a different area. Either way, with a res of 1 pixel = 1/2 meter all the little pieces of debris that people states should be everywhere is not going to be easily noticed.

The average person on the internet is not a satellite image analyst either.

Not as simple and quick as it sounds.



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 08:18 AM
link   


the triangulated satellite data from Inmarsat


Where did the 'triangulated' come from. So now there is a theory they know the exact locations but refuse to release it?

We might as well go back to the alien mother ship theory.



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 08:40 AM
link   

roadgravel



With the Tomnod crowd source, how come no one could find ANY floating debris either?


The initial sat pics used were in a different area. Either way, with a res of 1 pixel = 1/2 meter all the little pieces of debris that people states should be everywhere is not going to be easily noticed.

The average person on the internet is not a satellite image analyst either.

Not as simple and quick as it sounds.


I understand that, I was just replying to the poster that said "Actually there was an extensive crowd sourced Tominrod survey of all the world's airfiled by hundreds of thousands of enthusiastic motivated people none of whom could spot the aircraft on any runway. That is fairly substantial evidence it did not land anywhere."

with that logic, then its also fairly substantial evidence that it didn't crash because no one saw any floating debris / debris field.



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 08:57 AM
link   
I'm not too sure what's going on here.

I just find it strange that they hear the pings right when the battery is about to die. If they wanted to cover-up something, this would be the right time to say they heard pings. So they can say there is evidence of a crash (the pings) without any physical evidence to back it up.



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 09:02 AM
link   
I am not going to accept they found the plane, until they find the plane.

There have been to many false leads, fruitless searches and dis/mis-info to accept anything other than bodies and wreckage.

I really do hope they find it though.



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 09:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Imagewerx
 




As with most stories,, Tonight's Episode,, starts out innocent enough,,,

It is indeed another case simular too,

" At 1410 on 5 December 1945, five TBM Avengers comprising Flight 19 rose into the sunny sky above NAS Fort Lauderdale, Fla. Turning east the formation headed out over the Atlantic on the first leg of a routine exercise from which neither the 14 men of Flight 19 nor the 13-man crew of a PBM Mariner sent out to search for them were ever to return.

The disappearance of the five Avengers and the PBM sparked one of the largest air and seas searches in history as hundreds of ships and aircraft combed over 200,00 square miles of the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico, while, on land, search parties scoured the interior of Florida on the outside chance that the aircraft might have gone down there undetected. "


Sometimes stuff just go missing,,,,


And that brings us too tonights episode,, MH370 yur gone.



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 09:34 AM
link   
reply to post by ML8715

As one involved in the CrowdSource search I think if you go back in this thread you will see where I, and several others, posted pictures of aircraft asking for type verification. Also, again in earlier posts, you will see where some of us posted pictures of something, not necessarily wreckage, trash, etc. You will see that an intact airplane is VERY easy to identify versus flotsam of some nature. Just my .02.



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by rockflier
 


Maybe I wasn't making my point clear, I apologize. He was saying that the plane couldn't have landed because no one saw it on Tomnod at an airport, etc. I know people found stuff in the ocean on Tomnod as I have followed this thread from day one and read about the first 300 pages of it. What I'm trying to say is that the things that were found on Tomnod were I guess you could say not debris pertaining to MH370 or at least according to the authorities, there has been no debris found. My point was we really just DON'T KNOW where this plane is and there's no real concrete evidence one way or the other that it crashed in the ocean or that it landed elsewhere.

Sorry for any confusion!




top topics



 
181
<< 361  362  363    365  366  367 >>

log in

join