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.

 

As mystery deepens with Malaysia Airlines flight 370, Alien contact must be considered.

page: 5
14
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 11:05 PM
link   
The more we learn about the extreme navigation moves and flight duration of the Malaysian airliner, the more likely it seems that some form of other-world influence is at work here. Is it possible that the aircraft was pulled inside a large UFO and its electrical systems shorted out over time?

This could account for the massive altitude changes in short amounts of time and the confusion as to where the place was at any given hour before its last emissions were silenced. What a world-changing event this would be if the intelligent non-human interference theory ends up being the correct one. (slim chance, but we know so little at this point)
-cwm




posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 12:12 AM
link   
why must alien contact b considered instead of human and political ineptitude? why not bigfoot contact? or skynet? or neo and mr.smith? why not Magneto or my little pony?



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 01:18 AM
link   

RealityTrip
reply to post by RossWellOldMexico
 


RossWellOldMexico
List the encounters that I have missed then? I only used events that were recent. I used to term "likely". I didn't say it was a certainty.

There is nothing wrong with thinking outside of the box. Like Han Solo told C3P0 in the "Empire Strikes Back", "Never tell me the odds"


I think you might have misunderstood me. I wasn't saying your list was incomplete. I was saying that even if your list of UFO cases was much larger, the ratio of UFO incidents to total number of flights in a given period of time is extremely low.

Your choice of words is important to my response. The word "likely" is chiefly synonymous with "probable". The definition of "probable" is "almost certainly".

Given the extremely low occurrence rate, the UFO theory is hardly a near certainty. Ergo, NOT likely.

And I absolutely agree that there is NOTHING wrong with thinking outside the box. As a software engineer (architect), I am paid to think outside the box in the course of problem solving, which is essentially what I do. However, that is only applicable when all other solutions are suboptimal. There are plenty of much more plausible "solutions" to this question, other than UFO involvement. Hence, my response


PS. I personally believe there is something to the UFO phenomenon so I am not dismissing your theory out of hand to debunk. In the UFO world, one can (and should) approach the subject with a healthy dose of skepticism and still come to the same ultimate conclusion as those who don't - belief in the extraterrestrial hypothesis.

edit on 17-3-2014 by RealityTrip because: spelling
You're right, I misunderstood your comment. My bad, RealityTrip. I must admit that I am a guarded ufo enthusaist though. My username is a poor pun of the ufo subject. I want to believe, but I have to see the evidence. There are some ufo cases that are real ie Stevenville Texas, Betty and Barney Hill abduction case and some I don't believe in like the Billy Meier case, or the J-Rod Alien being housed by the U.S. gov't.

You are very fortunate to work within an industry to think outside the box. I, on the other hand don't have that luxury, I work in the gaming industry which is a bottom line business. You are instructed to think in a certain way. I appreciate the healthy dialogue. I just hope the authorities in charge of the missing Malaysian airliner finds the truth and give closure to the relatives of the missing passengers and crews.

Many cheers, RealityTrip.



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 09:09 AM
link   
reply to post by carewemust
 


The other thing everyone is debating about, how come none of the passengers used their cell phone? More suspicion and evidence that falls in line with UFO encounters disabling electronics.



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by taoistguy
 


I'm embarrassed that I even replied to the posts attempting to derail my thread.



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 09:14 AM
link   

game over man
The mainstream media and experts have nothing. There are anomalies, and experts are saying they haven't seen a mystery like this in over 50 years. Very much could be a close encounter.



Just because the experts are telling you they have nothing doesn't mean they have nothing
.
edit on 16331America/ChicagoTue, 18 Mar 2014 09:16:56 -0500up3142 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by interupt42
 


You actually had to edit that post?

Just in case you aren't trolling, you're implying there is a cover up?



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 10:42 AM
link   

game over man
reply to post by interupt42
 


You actually had to edit that post?


Apparently, you have some difficulty developing logical conclusions and rather jump to the most unlikely scenarios. Therefore I will clarify for you. Editing a post is not specifically for content purposes, sometimes its due to metadata or improper syntax such as not closing tag elements. I can further clarify if you are still not following or grasping the concept that editing a post is not dependent solely on content.




Just in case you aren't trolling, you're implying there is a cover up?


No, I'm implying that their is an investigation going on and typically things are withheld either on purpose or not on purpose solely due to the lack of importance or available resources to keep the public informed.

Other times disinformation is purposely put out in order to find out if someone or some group takes the bait in order to get a lead. Other times disinformation is put out to weed out the wannabees versus the true assailants if there are any. Other times is the media grabbing so called experts that have no ties to the actual investigation simply to create drama to get viewership.

I could go on and on and on with more logical conclusions at this time than saying its Aliens.



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by interupt42
 


Yeah well you should go into the main thread that has 5000 posts and it's a non stop debate, please go ahead.

As is my posts in that thread pertain to more normal theories I created this thread in the Alien/UFO section to discuss an unknown or alien encounter.

You and others can't seem to understand that.



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 10:57 AM
link   

game over man
reply to post by interupt42
 


You and others can't seem to understand that.


Oh I see, In your OP you conclude:




Conclusion nothing makes sense.


Than ask for our



Thoughts?


Than your fantasy gets squashed with opposing thoughts and we are no longer welcome.

edit on 57331America/ChicagoTue, 18 Mar 2014 10:57:58 -0500up3142 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by interupt42
 


The opposing thoughts were Santa Claus!

No one responded with my theory...What are your thoughts with a possible cover up and alien or UFO encounter?

Instead the simpletons ran to their keyboard to post aliens don't exist. Wow, really? I understand things don't exist until they are proven. All UFO and ET debates are What if scenarios. Are you all new to the discussion??!

Just my $0.02 on alien and UFO discussions.



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by game over man
 


From the mods: Here

"This is not to point the finger at skeptics only. A fair share of these posts can be attributed to believers who cannot take any other opinion than " I agree." This trend must also stop. If you are going to post a UFO video or topic, you can expect to be challenged by others with new ideas or differing opinions."


I'm embarrassed that I even replied to the posts attempting to derail my thread.


As stated above by "tothetenthpower", expect to be challenged. Because we are challenging your theory, for which you have provided little evidence other than supposition, that doesn't make us trolls. Nor, in my case, am I trying to "derail" your thread. This board is ofttimes about debate. You provided a theory and others countered it. If everybody just agreed with each other this would be a boring place!
edit on 18-3-2014 by RealityTrip because: spelling



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by RealityTrip
 


Fine, you guys win. You keep arguing the skeptics never trolled or derailed the thread, and you're absolutely right! This thread is just as good as any of the other threads to discuss any possibility of the craft disappearing.

Conclusion:

As the mystery deepens with the missing Malaysia Aircraft, Alien contact must not be considered.



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Here is an overview of all plausible hypotheses:

1. Landed in the Andaman Islands
The plane was apparently at one stage heading in the direction of India's Andaman and Nicobar Islands, the most easterly part of Indian territory, which lies between Indonesia and the coast of Thailand and Burma. It has been reported that military radar there might not even have been operating, as the threat level is generally perceived to be low.

The editor of the islands' Andaman Chronicle newspaper dismisses the notion that the aircraft could be there. There are four airstrips but planes landing would be spotted, he told CNN. He also believed monitoring by the Indian military would prevent an airliner being able to land there unnoticed. But this is an isolated spot. There are more than 570 islands, only 36 of which are inhabited. If the plane had been stolen, this might be the best place to land it secretly, says Steve Buzdygan, a former BA 777 pilot. It would be difficult, but not impossible, to land on the beach, he says. At least 5,000ft (1500m) or so would make a long enough strip to land on.

It would be theoretically possible but extremely difficult. With such a heavy aeroplane, using the landing gear might lead to the wheels digging into the sand and sections of undercarriage being ripped off. "If I was landing on a beach I would keep the wheels up," says Buzdygan. But in this type of crash landing, the danger would also be damage to the wings, which are full of fuel, causing an explosion. Even if landed safely, it is unlikely the plane would be able to take off again.


2. Flew to Kazakhstan
The Central Asian republic is at the far end of the northern search corridor, so the plane could hypothetically have landed there. Light aircraft pilot Sylvia Wrigley, author of Why Planes Crash, says landing in a desert might be possible and certainly more likely than landing on a beach somewhere. "To pull this off, you are looking at landing in an incredibly isolated area," says Wrigley. The failure so far to release a cargo manifest has created wild rumours about a valuable load that could be a motive for hijacking. There has also been speculation that some of those on board were billionaires.



"A lot of air traffic control gear is old - they might be used to getting false positives from flocks of birds and, therefore, it would be easy to discount it”
Sylvia Wrigley
Pilot and author
But the plane would have been detected, the Kazakh Civil Aviation Committee said in a detailed statement sent to Reuters. And there's an even more obvious problem. The plane would have had to cross the airspace of countries like India, Pakistan and Afghanistan, which are all usually in a high state of military preparedness. But it's just possible that there are weak links in the radar systems of some of the countries en route to Central Asia, Wrigley speculates. "A lot of air traffic control gear is old. They might be used to getting false positives from flocks of birds and, therefore, it would be easy to discount it."

3. It flew south
The final satellite "ping" suggests the plane was still operational for at least five or six hours after leaving Malaysian radar range. For Norman Shanks, former head of group security at airports group BAA, and professor of aviation security at Coventry University, the search should therefore start from the extremes of the corridors and work up, rather than the other way around. He thinks the southern corridor is more likely for a plane that has so far avoided detection by radar.

The southern arc leads to the huge open spaces of the Indian Ocean, and then to Australia's empty northern hinterland. Without knowing the motive, it is hard to speculate where the plane's final destination was intended to be. But the plane may just have carried on until it ran out of fuel and then glided and crashed into the sea somewhere north of Australia.


4. Taklamakan Desert, north-west China
There has been speculation on forums that the plane could have been commandeered by China's Uighur Muslim separatists. Out of the plane's 239 passengers, 153 were Chinese citizens. One possible destination in this theory would be China's Taklamakan Desert. The region - described by Encyclopaedia Britannica as a "great desert of Central Asia and one of the largest sandy deserts in the world" - has no shortage of space far from prying eyes. The BBC's Jonah Fisher tweeted on 15 March: "Being briefed by Malaysia officials they believe most likely location for MH370 is on land somewhere near Chinese/Kyrgyz border."

But again, this theory rests on an extraordinary run through the radar systems of several countries.

Marking locations on a map onboard a Malaysian Air Force flight
5. It was flown towards Langkawi island because of a fire or other malfunction
The loss of transponders and communications could be explained by a fire, aviation blogger Chris Goodfellow has suggested. The left turn that the plane made, deviating from the route to Beijing, could have been a bid to reach safety, he argues. "This pilot did all the right things. He was confronted by some major event onboard that made him make that immediate turn back to the closest safe airport." He aimed to avoid crashing into a city or high ridges, Goodfellow argues. "Actually he was taking a direct route to Palau Langkawi, a 13,000ft (4,000m) strip with an approach over water at night with no obstacles. He did not turn back to Kuala Lumpur because he knew he had 8,000ft ridges to cross. He knew the terrain was friendlier towards Langkawi and also a shorter distance." In this theory it would be assumed that the airliner did not make it to Langkawi and crashed into the sea.

But Goodfellow's theory has been disputed. If the course was changed during a major emergency, one might expect it to be done using manual control. But the left turn was the result of someone in the cockpit typing "seven or eight keystrokes into a computer on a knee-high pedestal between the captain and the first officer, according to officials", the New York Times reported. The paper says this "has reinforced the belief of investigators - first voiced by Malaysian officials - that the plane was deliberately diverted and that foul play was involved."

Pakistan's North West frontier
6. The plane is in Pakistan
Media tycoon Rupert Murdoch has tweeted: "World seems transfixed by 777 disappearance. Maybe no crash but stolen, effectively hidden, perhaps in northern Pakistan, like Bin Laden." But Pakistan has strenuously denied that this would be possible. The country's assistant to the prime minister on aviation, Shujaat Azeem, has been reported as saying: "Pakistan's civil aviation radars never spotted this jet, so how it could be hidden somewhere in Pakistan?" Like the Kazakhstan theory, this all seems far-fetched, not least because the junction between Indian and Pakistani air space is one of the most watched sectors in the world by military radar. And despite the remoteness and lawlessness of northern Pakistan, the region is watched closely by satellites and drones. It seems scarcely believable to think an airliner could get there unspotted.

Generic Singapore Airlines plane
7. The plane hid in the shadow of another airliner
Aviation blogger Keith Ledgerwood believes the missing plane hid in the radar shadow of Singapore Airlines flight 68. The Singaporean airliner was in the same vicinity as the Malaysian plane, he argues. "It became apparent as I inspected SIA68's flight path history that MH370 had manoeuvred itself directly behind SIA68 at approximately 18:00UTC and over the next 15 minutes had been following SIA68." He believes that the Singaporean airliner would have disguised the missing plane from radar controllers on the ground. "It is my belief that MH370 likely flew in the shadow of SIA68 through India and Afghanistan airspace. As MH370 was flying 'dark' without a transponder, SIA68 would have had no knowledge that MH370 was anywhere around, and as it entered Indian airspace, it would have shown up as one single blip on the radar with only the transponder information of SIA68 lighting up ATC and military radar screens." The Singapore Airlines plane flew on to Spain. The Malaysian jet could have branched off. "There are several locations along the flight path of SIA68 where it could have easily broken contact and flown and landed in Xinjiang, Kyrgyzstan, or Turkmenistan," Ledgerwood argues.

Prof Hugh Griffiths, radar expert at University College London, says it sounds feasible. But there is a difference between military and civilian radar. Civilian radar works by means of a transponder carried by the aircraft - a system known as secondary radar. The military use primary radar and this "ought to be higher resolution". So how close would the two planes need to be? He estimates about 1000m (3300ft). It is possible military radar would be able to pick up that there were two objects, he says. "It might be able to tell the difference, to know that there are two targets." If this happens, though, there's then the question of how this is interpreted on the ground. Is it a strange echo that would be discounted? When the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941, although the US radar operator detected the incoming aircraft, they were dismissed as US bombers arriving from the mainland.

8. There was a struggle
One of the hardest things to account for so far with an innocent explanation is the way the plane was flown erratically. It went far above its "ceiling", flying at 45,000ft (13,716m) before later flying very low. Big fluctuations in altitude suggest there might have been a struggle, says Buzdygan. Post-9/11, cockpit doors have been strengthened against the possibility of hijack but there are still scenarios where access could be gained. Pilots talk to each other "over a beer" about how they'd deal with hijackers, he says. Buzdygan would have had no qualms about flying aggressively to try to resist a hijack. "I'd try to disorientate and confuse the hijackers by throwing them around," he says.

9. The passengers were deliberately killed by decompression
Continue reading the main story

Start Quote

We are now at stage where very, very difficult things have to be considered as all sensible options seem to have dropped off”

Sean Maffett
Former RAF navigator
Another theory circulating is that the plane was taken up to 45,000ft to kill the passengers quickly, former RAF navigator Sean Maffett says. The supposed motive for this might have been primarily to stop the passengers using mobile phones, once the plane descended to a much lower altitude. At 45,000ft, the Boeing 777 is way above its normal operating height. And it is possible to depressurise the cabin, notes Maffett. Oxygen masks would automatically deploy. They would run out after 12-15 minutes. The passengers - as with carbon monoxide poisoning - would slip into unconsciousness and die, he argues. But whoever was in control of the plane would also perish in this scenario, unless they had access to some other form of oxygen supply.

10. The plane will take off again to be used in a terrorist attack
One of the more outlandish theories is that the plane has been stolen by terrorists to commit a 9/11 style atrocity. It has been landed safely, hidden or camouflaged, will be refuelled and fitted with a new transponder before taking off to attack a city. It would be very hard to land a plane, hide it and then take off again, Maffett suggested. But it can't be ruled out. "We are now at stage where very, very difficult things have to be considered as all sensible options seem to have dropped off," he says. It is not clear even whether a plane could be refitted with a new transponder and given a totally new identity in this way, he says. Others would say that while it is just about feasible the plane could be landed in secret, it is unlikely it would be in a fit state to take off again.

Map showing search area for MH370
The even more far-fetched
Many of the above theories might seem far-fetched but there are even more outlandish-sounding ones out there.

If the plane had flown up the northern corridor, experts maintain it would probably have triggered primary radar. Key countries whose airspace it might have crossed are Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, China, Myanmar, Laos, Vietnam, or Thailand. After 9/11, an unidentified airliner entering sovereign airspace is likely to lead to fighters being scrambled, says Maffett. "If the plane is in the northern arc it could easily have been shot down." It's a theory circulating on some forums. The notion is that no-one would want to admit shooting down an airliner full of passengers, Maffett says, and thus might currently be concealing the event.

But there are a host of holes in the theory. Firstly, the plane would still have had to avoid numerous radar systems before finally triggering one. And the nation responsible would be trying to keep secret the fate of the world's currently most-searched for object. Covering up the incident for so long would arguably make the shooting down look far worse.

Then there are other conspiracy theories. Some forum postings have pointed to the US military base in the middle of the Indian Ocean, on the tropical atoll of Diego Garcia. The island is owned by the UK but leased to the US. One of the more extreme theories circulating online claims that the Kremlin believes that the US "captured" the plane and flew it to its base. With a conspiracy theory of this magnitude it is difficult even to know where to start with the rebuttals.

A completely different thread of conspiracy theory assumes a sympathetic regime. The scepticism about flying undetected through radar changes somewhat if the hijackers are in cahoots with a country's government. There are several authoritarian regimes within the aircraft's range, but the conspiracy theory doesn't even require a government's co-operation - the hijackers could just be in cahoots with radar operators. Again, this seems to be a conspiracy of incredible complexity to be kept secret for this length of time. And what would the motive be for those colluding?



Source: www.bbc.com...



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by game over man
 


I don't disagree with you at all!
The possibility of E.T. being involved MUST be considered.
Did E.T. take that filght elsewhere? Why can't we find a damn thing?

The FOURTH Dimension



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 06:08 PM
link   
This mystery smells fishy to me. If the plane was headed north, but unconfirmed, but possible debris found in the south Pacific Ocean off the coast of Australia. I won't let go of the ufo theory in this mystery until there are bodies or black boxes recovered or some identification of passengers and crew.
edit on 20-3-2014 by RossWellOldMexico because: added comment

edit on 20-3-2014 by RossWellOldMexico because: added comment



posted on Mar, 20 2014 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by RossWellOldMexico
 


I'm with you there, and the last couple days I'm becoming more intrigued about the passengers and cargo that I've read about on ATS.

There are theories some earth tech/secret government operations took control or took down the plane.

I'm honestly interested in all theories, but the dumbfoundedness of the world seems to hint at a UFO encounter.



posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 01:58 AM
link   
MH370 may not be a UFO mystery, but it does remind me a little bit of this at present time as we still don't really know (although of course, it's not doing what this plane was doing) - Captain Will Schaffner - another one possibly on a similar alien guest list like Valentich:



In September 1970, Captain Schaffner was an American exchange pilot flying BAC Lightnings with the RAF at RAF Binbrook in north-east Lincolnshire, England.

On the evening of September 8, 1970, an object was spotted over the North Sea by radar and he was on duty so took off to follow the object.

The object was then tracked by the early warning station at RAF Fylingdales and by the USAF radar station at Thule Air Base in Greenland and the Cheyenne Mountain radar base in Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA.

At 21.30, the object was picked up on radar again heading south-west over the north of Denmark.

The Strategic Air Command headquarters at Offutt Air Force Base near Omaha, Nebraska was informed of the incident as well as NORAD at Cheyenne Mountain.

Captain Schaffner, of 5 Squadron, took off from Binbrook in the Lightning plane XS894 at 22.06. The object was flying east of Whitby and parallel to the coast. It was tracked by RAF Staxton Wold in North Yorkshire.

Three weeks later, the plane was located on the sea bed. The canopy was closed but there was no sign of the body of Captain Schaffner.




A good example too, of how the possible reality of the incident is perverted over the years into nothing UFO related at all (or maybe it really never was, see here: www.abovetopsecret.com... ). Who knows!!

Source: en.wikipedia.org...

The ATS thread also suggests this case: www.ufoevidence.org...



On the night of November 23, 1953, an F-89 all-weather interceptor was scrambled at Kinross AFB, to check on a UFO flying over the Soo Locks. The jet had a crew of two – Lt. Felix Moncla, the pilot, and Lt. R. R. Wilson, the radar observer.

Guided by an AF GCI (Ground Control Intercept) radar station, Moncla followed the unknown machine out over Lake Superior, flying at 500 miles an hour. Minutes later, a GCI controller was startled to see the blips of the jet and the UFO suddenly merge on the radar-scope.

Whatever had happened, one thing was certain: The F-89 and the UFO were locked together. As the combined blip went off the scope the controller hurriedly radioed Search and Rescue. Moncla and Wilson might have bailed out before the collision.

Both had life jackets and self-inflating life rafts – even in the cold water they could survive for a while. All night, U.S. and Canadian search planes with flares circled low over the area. At daylight, a score of boats joined the hunt, as the pilots crisscrossed the lake for a hundred miles.

But no trace was found of the airmen, the jet or the UFO.

edit on 21-3-2014 by markymint because: second quote



posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 02:27 AM
link   

game over man
reply to post by RossWellOldMexico
 


I'm with you there, and the last couple days I'm becoming more intrigued about the passengers and cargo that I've read about on ATS.

There are theories some earth tech/secret government operations took control or took down the plane.

I'm honestly interested in all theories, but the dumbfoundedness of the world seems to hint at a UFO encounter.
I heard on a CBC newscast that the precious cargo was some exotic fruit called mangosteen. I also heard about the 20 Motorola/Semiconductor contractors that were working on cloaking technology for the U.S. military/DARPA. And can't forget about the pilot's political views being attached some former Malaysian politician that was to be released. This is definitely a riddle wrapped inside an enigma.



posted on Mar, 21 2014 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by RossWellOldMexico
 


Mangosteens aren't anything unusual... they're delicious actually.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join