MH370. They've been looking in the wrong place, seriously. Can this really get any more absurd.

It seems pretty obvious to me at this point that it landed somewhere. No debris at all.

I think this link from another post is interesting but the thread was closed as a duplicate of this one and was not posted here.

posted by: research100

blog.parakum.com...

fishermen caught what looks like an airplane wheel in their net
- See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Aazadan
It seems pretty obvious to me at this point that it landed somewhere. No debris at all.

No debris at all doesn't necessarily mean the plane didn't crash, it just means it didn't crash in an area that was searched.

The plane might have crashed elsewhere and while everyone was distracted to the Southern Indian Ocean the Glomar Explorer might have been collecting the wreckage and debris.

Magicians know how to draw the audiences attention away from the deception and so does the Certain Intel Agency.

The reason I don't think the plane crashed is because the last contact with the satellite occurred more than seven hours after the plane took off.

So if it was shot down, it couldn't have happened until the plane was running out of fuel, which is highly unlikely.

originally posted by: ausername
a reply to: Psynic

I didn't imply they were dead,only lost on a missing flight. Given the time that has passed, the odds are not good for survivors, but until, or if something, even a small identifiable piece of the plane or its contents is found no one can say anything with any certainty, one way or the other...

It is also likely that if it is ever found people will have difficulty ever believing any official explanations or conclusions afterward.

In the end, closure for those closest to those lost should be a top priority.

How will they tell them that they found their missing person, without explaining what happened?

If you're not saying they're dead, why would "closure" be your top priority?

Finding them should be the top priority!!!

It boils down to this, Inmarsat got it wrong.

"Even before the black-box search turned up empty, observers had begun to raise doubts about whether searchers were looking in the right place. Authorities have treated the conclusion that the plane crashed in the ocean west of Australia as definitive, owing to a much-vaunted mathematical analysis of satellite signals sent by the plane. But scientists and engineers outside of the investigation have been working to verify that analysis, and many say that it just doesn’t hold up."

Contributors to this analysis are, Ari Schulman, Thread author, Michael Exner, founder of the American Mobile Satellite Corporation. Duncan Steel, a physicist and visiting scientist at NASA’s Ames Research Center; and satellite technology consultant Tim Farrar.

More reading here, explained in a way most can understand,


qz.com...

originally posted by: smurfy

It boils down to this, Inmarsat got it wrong.

qz.com...

Just an innocent mistake eh?

No lies, or coverup.

Riiight.

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: smurfy

It boils down to this, Inmarsat got it wrong.

qz.com...

Just an innocent mistake eh?

No lies, or coverup.

Riiight.

I said Inmarsat got it wrong. If you read the link, the guys doing the recalculations from the root information found anomalies in the published information, including that the plane would have been whizzing around on the ground, rather than waiting for take-off.
They also say they can't understand why Inmarsat wasn't giving much out about the findings, why Inmarsat stuck to the same search areas, and that the North-South arcs were pretty much a wrong finding, so plenty of room there for lies and cover-ups. They also point out too, that the plane could have been flying any which way in between pings, the main information gleaned from the pings was knowing whether the plane was further away or nearer the satellite for each ping, so that each subsequent ping was putting the plane further away each time..that's all, what the direction was, was not known it was assumed, along with the earlier radar trackings.
That the satellite was not properly in geostationary orbit, and that the orbit had decayed was also something of a surprise..to me anyway, anything I read to date said it was in geostationary orbit, but in fact it actually decribes a circle around it's proper geostationary point, something to take into account when distancing the plane from the satellite.

So the people who are looking for MH370 are experts? Not one of them though knew the difference between plane pings anf their own equipment.
I find that so strange and stupid. Surely they must have noticed the difference..surely.

My own opinion of what happened. I think it landed somewhere. No idea where or why but I don't think it crashed in the sea.

originally posted by: rhynouk


My own opinion of what happened. I think it landed somewhere. No idea where or why but I don't think it crashed in the sea.

It's certainly possible the plane landed somewhere, it's possible that Mike McKay did see the plane on fire too.
That's what's wrong here, that information has been repeatedly ignored in favour of the satellites tentative information from Inmarsat, which I'm near sure is flawed.

only one place left were it could land save and secretly..... reply to: smurfy

originally posted by: ressiv
only one place left were it could land save and secretly..... reply to: smurfy

Like Kazakhstan? it's a big area alright..the size of Western Europe.

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: smurfy

It boils down to this, Inmarsat got it wrong.

qz.com...

Just an innocent mistake eh?

No lies, or coverup.

Riiight.

I said Inmarsat got it wrong.

I don't, for one second, believe Immarsat "Got it wrong".

They are not in the business of making errors.

They produced a made to order document, for a certain intelligence agency, designed to reinforce a fraudulent explanation of the hijacked airliner's position.

This tangled web makes no sense for one simple reason, it is a lie.

The denial of the existence of hijackers has produced these convoluted explanations for what happened to the plane and it's passengers.

originally posted by: Psynic

I don't, for one second, believe Immarsat "Got it wrong".

They are not in the business of making errors.

They produced a made to order document, for a certain intelligence agency, designed to reinforce a fraudulent explanation of the hijacked airliner's position.

This tangled web makes no sense for one simple reason, it is a lie.

The denial of the existence of hijackers has produced these convoluted explanations for what happened to the plane and it's passengers.

It's not about what you believe, nor for that matter what I believe. We already know about Inmarsat intel capers, what I am trying to say to you, is that Inmarsat got it WRONG, they erred big time, and IMHO proven wrong in a technical way, that's all that matters. Everything else, the whys or wherefores comes after.

A question occurred to me the other day - would an aircraft carrier be big enough to land a 777 on?

originally posted by: lostgirl
A question occurred to me the other day - would an aircraft carrier be big enough to land a 777 on?

Absolutely, if you want to destroy both the carrier and the aircraft.

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: Psynic

I don't, for one second, believe Immarsat "Got it wrong".

They are not in the business of making errors.

They produced a made to order document, for a certain intelligence agency, designed to reinforce a fraudulent explanation of the hijacked airliner's position.

This tangled web makes no sense for one simple reason, it is a lie.

The denial of the existence of hijackers has produced these convoluted explanations for what happened to the plane and it's passengers.

It's not about what you believe, nor for that matter what I believe. We already know about Inmarsat intel capers, what I am trying to say to you, is that Inmarsat got it WRONG, they erred big time, and IMHO proven wrong in a technical way, that's all that matters. Everything else, the whys or wherefores comes after.

And what I'm trying to say to you is they made NO ERRORS, they lied as part of the cover-up of a hijacking.

They did not "get it wrong". They did as they were told.

When it becomes known that this wasn't an accident there will be severe repercussions. The powers that be are attempting to mitigate the circumstances with a strategy of denying the existence of the hijackers and it has become idiotic.

Can you guys check the following location on Google Earth, you will see a plane. I'm not sure if it is MH370 though I personally feel that it must be the plane.

12°05'20.8"N 104°09'06.2"E (12.089111, 104.151722)
Google Map

Just to inform you that the location is a very dense forest in Cambodia which is below the flight route between Malaysia and China.

a reply to: ausername

Well, there goes that theory...

a reply to: ProphetZoroaster



You "personally feel it must be the plane".

Sheesh!