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.

 

How Crazy am I to think I know where MH370 is? Jeff Wise in NY Magazine

page: 12
58
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 01:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Psynic

Stop trying to confuse the topic.

MH17 was shot down by a BUK. As to why the other evidence has not been released has to do with the fact there is a criminal investigation. Releasing evidence in the manner some people demand be released would jeopardize any possible criminal prosecution.

The Dutch gave August of 2015 as the date where their investigation would be wrapped up.

Considering MH17 was shot down over land there is absolutely no comparison to MH370 aside from the airline itself.




posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 01:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Psynic

Shot down..... If the aircraft were in the US and it was confirmed its heading in that direction then sure.

However our policies don't apply to other nations. Considering the evidence thus far about the radar in the region its entirely possible it could make it to a building before being intercepted / shot down.

Assuming the aircraft was hijacked, assuming the hijacking became known to officials in the various countries, assuming the hijackers don't bother issuing demands, etc.


what we know for sure -
The aircraft is missing.

Aside from that there is no other evidence to support anyones claims.



Including that of INMARSATs doppler theory that the entire fake search is based on.



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 01:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Psynic

Provide evidence the search is fake. Last I checked there is video footage of the Search operations.



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 01:59 PM
link   
INMARSAT - Inmarsat partners with Australian aviation industry to boost global flight tracking




Inmarsat partners with Australian aviation industry to boost global flight tracking

1 March 2015, Canberra, Australia - Inmarsat, the leading provider of global mobile satellite communications and safety services, today announced that it is partnering with Airservices Australia and other key aviation industry stakeholders to trial improved flight tracking services on commercial airline flights to and from Australia.

The announcement follows a resolution on 6 February by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to adopt a new 15-minute tracking standard for commercial aircraft. ICAO is the United Nations body tasked with developing international civil aviation standards and recommended practices.

Inmarsat is working with industry partners, Airservices Australia, Qantas and Virgin Australia in developing the operational concept for the trial, using Automatic Dependent Surveillance – Contract (ADS-C) satellite technology in Australia’s oceanic regions.

Airservices Australia is the first Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP) to trial the ICAO standard, utilising Inmarsat’s global flight tracking ADS-C messaging service. ADS-C provides air traffic controllers with a constantly updated surveillance picture of their airspace, thereby allowing safe and efficient oceanic operations.

11,000 commercial passenger aircraft are already equipped with an Inmarsat satellite connection, representing over 90% of the world’s long haul commercial fleet. Airlines participating in the trial include Qantas and Virgin Australia.

Rupert Pearce, CEO of Inmarsat, said: “This is an important step in improving international airline safety and we are very pleased to be working with Airservices Australia and our industry partners to implement this enhanced flight tracking service.

“We applaud ICAO’s decision to announce the new tracking standard and believe that we are well placed to help implement the standard given our existing global satellite coverage and the time-frame proposed. Inmarsat’s heritage is in safety and we stand ready to coordinate normal and abnormal flight tracking services with the airlines and the ANSPs.”


ADS-C

Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Contract (ADS-C) is a function on an aircraft that broadcasts position, altitude, vector and other information for use by air traffic control facilities for surveillance and by airlines for tracking. The data is transmitted based on an explicit contract between an Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP) and an aircraft. This contract may be a demand contract, a periodic contract, an event contract and/or an emergency contract. ADS-C is most often employed in the provision of Air Traffic Services (ATS) over transcontinental or transoceanic areas.

ADS-C provides active aircraft position tracking as it transmits the current position and the next two positions as programmed into the aircraft’s flight management system. It is this contract ‘intent’ feature of ADS-C system that allows flight dispatchers and air traffic controllers to track the aircraft progress and predict its next position.

For further information

Jonathan Sinnatt
Director of Corporate Communications
jonathan.sinnatt@inmarsat.com
+44 (0)20 7728 1935 Katie Potts
Corporate Communications Manager
katie.potts@inmarsat.com
+44 (0)20 7728 1492

About Inmarsat

Inmarsat plc is the leading provider of global mobile satellite communications services. Since 1979, Inmarsat has been providing reliable voice and high-speed data communications to governments, enterprises and other organizations, with a range of services that can be used on land, at sea or in the air. Inmarsat employs around 1,600 staff in more than 60 locations around the world, with a presence in the major ports and centres of commerce on every continent. Inmarsat is listed on the London Stock Exchange (LSE:ISAT.L).

The Inmarsat press release newsfeed and corporate updates are on @InmarsatGlobal.








Media registration

Register with the press office to receive news releases and other announcements


Media Centre

Press releases
Newsroom
Events


edit on 6-3-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-3-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 02:00 PM
link   
we cant trust the government with 200 people on a commercial airplane, but they demand that we buy medical insurance from them.
edit on 6-3-2015 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 02:05 PM
link   
INMARSAT - MH370 Involvement

A search for MH370 on INMARSATS website.



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 02:07 PM
link   
The more controversial & headline-grabbing the theory, no matter how implausible it may be, the more of his ebook's suckers will buy. (he's hawking his ebook on Amazon). IMHO his theory is as credible as Don Lemon's plane-eating-black-hole theory.



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 09:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Psynic

Provide evidence the search is fake. Last I checked there is video footage of the Search operations.



The search area is based on a fictional mathematical equation that supposedly measured Doppler effect.

There is no proof of it ever working.

It has never been used before.

It is not part of any of the planned, heightened tracking measures, supposedly being implemented to prevent planes from disappearing in the future .

It was a one time magic trick that has nothing to do with "the latest technology".

A little bit of mumbo jumbo designed to fool the uninformed masses, which it apparently has been successful in doing.





posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 09:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Psynic

Stop trying to confuse the topic.

MH17 was shot down by a BUK.




Don't blame me for your confusion.

MH17 was shot down by a Ukranian fighter jet.

There is actual radar telemetry of it being in the immediate vicinity of MH17.

As opposed to the BUK story, for which there is no evidence whatsoever.

www.shoutwiki.com...

A BUK wouldn't have been able to target the area of the plane next to the pilot.






posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 10:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: FalafelBallz
The more controversial & headline-grabbing the theory, no matter how implausible it may be, the more of his ebook's suckers will buy. (he's hawking his ebook on Amazon). IMHO his theory is as credible as Don Lemon's plane-eating-black-hole theory.


I don't think that's the case.

The most successful deceptions are the ones based on a thread of truth.

Like the Satellite chart. The arcs are legit, the math favouring the southern of the two? Complete and utter BS!

What this guy is doing is trying to hijack the hijacking story by puttin' Putin in it.





posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 11:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Psynic

Lol.. The Russian version was debunked.

It was a BUK. A SAM will explode a distance from the aircraft, allowing the shrapnel to do its job. An air to air missile requires a specific target lock for a close skin kill. Considering the damage was in the front of the aircraft it rules out a air to air missile.


edit on 6-3-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2015 @ 06:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Psynic

Lol.. The Russian version was debunked.

It was a BUK. A SAM will explode a distance from the aircraft, allowing the shrapnel to do its job. An air to air missile requires a specific target lock for a close skin kill. Considering the damage was in the front of the aircraft it rules out a air to air missile.



LOL! The BUK story has been debunked. BUKs leave a smoke trail.

Who said anything about an Air to Air missile?

The aircraft is full of cannon holes in the exact area of the pilot.

Did you even look at the photograph?







posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 03:25 PM
link   
1)The government doesn't sell or provide insurance. It only helps you find an insurance company to suit your needs.
2) This plane wasn't under our government's jurisdiction n any way shape or form. I'm guessing you're just very young and don't understand such things.



a reply to: TzarChasm



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 07:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Psynic

Then you should explain that to the Dutch investigators, as well as the bulk of the people / countries on this planet then since you seem to be in a very very small group who buys into Russian propaganda.

Can you provide a source stating it was not a BUK?

preliminary Dutch Safety Board Investigation - MH17 - **PDF LINK**

Starting on page 30 - Damage

Damage -

Damage observed on the forward fuselage and cockpit section of the aircraft appears to indicate that there were impacts from a large number of high-energy objects from outside the aircraft. The pattern of damage observed in the forward fuselage and cockpit section of the
aircraft was not consistent with the damage that would be expected from any known failure mode of the aircraft, its engines or systems.
The fact that there were many pieces of aircraft structure distributed over a large area, indicated that the aircraft broke up in the air.


The damage is concentrated in the forward fuselage and cockpit and was caused by high energy objects.

An air to air missile will not his in the area described based on the capabilities of an SU-25.
Bullets fired from a fighter jet will not cause high velocity damage as described in the report.
Bullets fired from an aircraft will not cause the instant loss of communications nor would it cause enough damage for the aircraft to breakup in midair as described.

It was a surface to air missile.
edit on 8-3-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2015 @ 12:42 AM
link   
The best bull#ters in the world can make any evidence look extremely convincing.

Don't believe him - he doesn't have any evidence which dozens of Governments around the world have already discounted.

Think about this - If he DID have proper evidence, why aren't multiple Government and News agencies beating down his door?



posted on Mar, 9 2015 @ 01:58 AM
link   
a reply to: babybunnies

Given your viewpoint then its completely possible for the Russian rebels to have shot the debris on the ground to make it look like the story Russia wanted.


MH370 on the other hand is goofy in that no debris has ever been found.



posted on Mar, 9 2015 @ 08:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Psynic

Provide evidence the search is fake. Last I checked there is video footage of the Search operations.



The search area is based on a fictional mathematical equation that supposedly measured Doppler effect.

There is no proof of it ever working.

It has never been used before.

It is not part of any of the planned, heightened tracking measures, supposedly being implemented to prevent planes from disappearing in the future .

It was a one time magic trick that has nothing to do with "the latest technology".

A little bit of mumbo jumbo designed to fool the uninformed masses, which it apparently has been successful in doing.




You are dodging the question. Saying the new method does not work is not the same thing as saying the search is fake. You're clearly trolling. Can we kill this thread, mods? The guy is just trolling and wasting everyone's time...



posted on Mar, 9 2015 @ 08:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: jaffo

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Psynic

Provide evidence the search is fake. Last I checked there is video footage of the Search operations.



The search area is based on a fictional mathematical equation that supposedly measured Doppler effect.

There is no proof of it ever working.

It has never been used before.

It is not part of any of the planned, heightened tracking measures, supposedly being implemented to prevent planes from disappearing in the future .

It was a one time magic trick that has nothing to do with "the latest technology".

A little bit of mumbo jumbo designed to fool the uninformed masses, which it apparently has been successful in doing.




You are dodging the question. Saying the new method does not work is not the same thing as saying the search is fake. You're clearly trolling. Can we kill this thread, mods? The guy is just trolling and wasting everyone's time...



If the Inmarsat data is fictional, which it is:

www.theatlantic.com...

Then the entire search of the Southern Indian Ocean is FAKE.




posted on Mar, 9 2015 @ 08:41 AM
link   
"Given the discrepancies and inaccuracies, it has proven impossible for independent observers to validate Inmarsat’s assertion that it can rule out a northern route for the airplane. “It’s really impossible to reproduce what the Inmarsat folks claim,” says Hans Kruse, a professor of telecommunications systems at Ohio University."

jeffwise.net...

No one has been able to reproduce the results Inmarsat claims to have deducted from the satellite pings.




posted on Mar, 9 2015 @ 09:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: babybunnies
The best bull#ters in the world can make any evidence look extremely convincing.



Yep.

In this case the Bullsh!tters are Inmarsat and Tony Abbott.

The only reason 30 million dollars was spent chartering search vessels (which spent more time in harbour than actually searching) was to purchase credibility for a cuckoo concept of number crunching that had NO basis in reality.

A huge Aqua Drama was staged in the Southern Indian Ocean to draw everyones attention away from the facts of the matter.

The cast were big, red, funny looking research vessels and bright yellow winged submarines that we are supposed to believe are capable of finding a needle in a haystack, a mile and a half below the surface of the sea.


Made for quite a show, but proved absolutely nothing.




new topics

top topics



 
58
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join