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

originally posted by: hutch622
a reply to: thesmokingman

but I do believe that the US and Malaysia at the very least know where the plane is, no matter what happened to it. In fact, I guarantee it.

Interesting about the US angle . My brother in law has official dealings with the middle east . When i brought this up at Christmas while talking about ATS he said any theories about the plane headed at Guam and it was shot down . Will not verify his position nor try to prove it . Just throwing it out there .

Please rewrite this more clearly. I can't understand what you're trying to say.

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
a reply to: Psynic

You wouldn't even admit there's a bridge never mind crossing it. LOL.
Everything is a conspiracy.
Everything is a false flag.
Everything is Obama's fault....
It's the ATS mantra.
I live to debunk by sensibility.

But all you manage to do is clutter it with detritus.

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
a reply to: Arbitrageur

? ? ? how does a guy fake an orgasm?

Sensibility?

You flatter yourself.

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
a reply to: RP2SticksOfDynamite

And when they do what will you have to say then?

Let's cross that bridge if and when we come to it.

That no debris has been found up to now is a lot more relevant than your "what if?"

You keep saying that no debris was found as though it means something. If we look for debris from Earhart's plane in my back yard, we are not going to find any. Because we are looking in the wrong area. Clearly we have not been looking in the right area, meaning that we are almost certain to find no debris. Like I said earlier, planes disappear without a trace far more often that you seem to think. Mostly over land. Sometimes for a decade or longer before they are found. This plane will more likely than not turn up eventually in the southern Indian Ocean. It will not turn up anywhere else. Quite simply, if someone took it to use it for some nefarious purpose, they should have used it for that purpose by now. The fact that they haven't leads me to believe that the plane went down. I hope they find it so that the families can get closure.

a reply to: Psynic

Ooooo fancy words. Still you believe in this conspiracy.
I can comfortably call garbage garbage and recognize it when I see it.

originally posted by: Nochzwei
WoW amazing theory. But even the Iranians were able to take control of a us drone and land it in iran
a reply to: drock905

CRASHED into DESERT actually. the footage you saw of it landing was another location not in iran. i seen the pictures and it crash landed in the desert. They had to repair the wings too. check the video when they are examining it. look at the wings for mis matched coloring. Here is something else. the aircraft wasnt as secret as made out to be and the signals were not encrypted against hacking/laser interuption of the GPS.

a reply to: Psynic
Oh you cut so deep....Not...
I don't have to flatter myself. I know my abilities and I can tell $hit from shinola any day of the week. This theory is not shinola.

originally posted by: jaffo

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
a reply to: RP2SticksOfDynamite

And when they do what will you have to say then?

Let's cross that bridge if and when we come to it.

That no debris has been found up to now is a lot more relevant than your "what if?"

This plane will more likely than not turn up eventually in the southern Indian Ocean.

Due to the lack of any evidence whatsoever to indicate the Southern Indian Ocean, other than a conveniently invented mathematical theory called BTO, which has NEVER BEFORE BEEN USED and which Sir Timothy Clark says is nonsense, your continual assurances of the A/C being discovered there is really pointless.

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
a reply to: Psynic
Oh you cut so deep....Not...
I don't have to flatter myself. I know my abilities and I can tell $hit from shinola any day of the week. This theory is not shinola.

Yes your "abilities" are evident to all who must read them.

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: jaffo

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
a reply to: RP2SticksOfDynamite

And when they do what will you have to say then?

Let's cross that bridge if and when we come to it.

That no debris has been found up to now is a lot more relevant than your "what if?"

This plane will more likely than not turn up eventually in the southern Indian Ocean.

Due to the lack of any evidence whatsoever to indicate the Southern Indian Ocean, other than a conveniently invented mathematical theory called BTO, which has NEVER BEFORE BEEN USED and which Sir Timothy Clark says is nonsense, your continual assurances of the A/C being discovered there is really pointless.

So is your baseless theory. The whole "evade radar by flying near a border" thing is so stupid as to be beyond laughable.

I still say that in all likelihood, the plane is still waiting to be spotted in an uncharted spot deep under the waves. We do not have much under the water mapped in good detail yet worldwide.

Wish people would check the limited extent of sea floor mapping before spouting off like morons constantly. Here's a wake-up quote from an Scientific American article about it:

The entire ocean floor has now been mapped to a maximum resolution of around 5km, which means we can see most features larger than 5km across in those maps. That’s the resolution of a new global map of the seafloor published recently by David Sandwell of Scripps Institute of Oceanography in San Diego and colleagues, who used some nifty tricks with satellites to estimate the landscape of the sea floor and even reveal some features of the Earth’s crust lurking beneath sea-floor sediments.

Unlike mapping the land, we can’t measure the landscape of the sea floor directly from satellites using radar, because sea water blocks those radio waves. But satellites can use radar to measure the height of the sea’s surface very accurately. And if there are enough measurements to subtract the effects of waves and tides, satellites can actually measure bumps and dips in the sea surface that result from the underlying landscape of the ocean floor.

So we do actually have a map of 100% of the ocean floor to a resolution of around 5km. From that, we can see the main features of its hidden landscape, such as the mid-ocean ridges and ocean trenches – and, in that sense, the ocean floor is certainly not “95% unexplored”. But that global map of the ocean floor is admittedly less detailed than maps of Mars, the Moon, or Venus, because of our planet’s watery veil.

But if we want to detect things just a few meters in size on the ocean floor, such as the wreckage of missing aircraft or the mineral spires of undersea volcanic vents that my team investigates, we need to take our sonar systems much closer to the sea bed using underwater vehicles or towed instruments. So far, less than 0.05% of the ocean floor has been mapped to that highest level of detail by sonar, which is an area roughly equivalent in size to Tasmania.

Open mouth, enter foot, yo. The water's deep, and you kinda have to be a whole lot closer than the surface or a satellite to get any discernible detail for finding lost things.

I'm not saying the odds of it having been hijacked and stashed are non-existent, I'm saying those odds, compared to the oceans & our veritable blindness with them, are very low.

originally posted by: jaffo

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: jaffo

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
a reply to: RP2SticksOfDynamite

And when they do what will you have to say then?

Let's cross that bridge if and when we come to it.

That no debris has been found up to now is a lot more relevant than your "what if?"

This plane will more likely than not turn up eventually in the southern Indian Ocean.

Due to the lack of any evidence whatsoever to indicate the Southern Indian Ocean, other than a conveniently invented mathematical theory called BTO, which has NEVER BEFORE BEEN USED and which Sir Timothy Clark says is nonsense, your continual assurances of the A/C being discovered there is really pointless.

So is your baseless theory. The whole "evade radar by flying near a border" thing is so stupid as to be beyond laughable.

I didn't realize how deeply confused you truly are.

Please show me where I made any claim to the effect of "evading radar by flying near a border".

Take your time.

a reply to: Psynic

Thank you.

Who in hell in Timothy Clark and does putting sir in front of his name give his theories more weight?a reply to: Psynic

My god... It took me a while to go through the article, got lost in the comments, which sidetracked me into learning of Christopher Hitchens, and follow some other links.. Came back to the thread to find a page and a half of mudslinging.. Really? I guess I should not be expecting anything less from my highly esteemed ATS. 'Nuff bitching

Anyway, something interesting I never saw before, that I would like to share for those truly interrested:

GeoResonance Press Release

This Australian company operating from old soviet satellites said they found something like a plane just south of Bangladesh.. But I guess they feel like they are simply throwing pearls to pigs..

originally posted by: Nyiah
I still say that in all likelihood, the plane is still waiting to be spotted in an uncharted spot deep under the waves. We do not have much under the water mapped in good detail yet worldwide.

Wish people would check the limited extent of sea floor mapping before spouting off like morons constantly. Here's a wake-up quote from an Scientific American article about it:

The entire ocean floor has now been mapped to a maximum resolution of around 5km, which means we can see most features larger than 5km across in those maps. That’s the resolution of a new global map of the seafloor published recently by David Sandwell of Scripps Institute of Oceanography in San Diego and colleagues, who used some nifty tricks with satellites to estimate the landscape of the sea floor and even reveal some features of the Earth’s crust lurking beneath sea-floor sediments.

Unlike mapping the land, we can’t measure the landscape of the sea floor directly from satellites using radar, because sea water blocks those radio waves. But satellites can use radar to measure the height of the sea’s surface very accurately. And if there are enough measurements to subtract the effects of waves and tides, satellites can actually measure bumps and dips in the sea surface that result from the underlying landscape of the ocean floor.

So we do actually have a map of 100% of the ocean floor to a resolution of around 5km. From that, we can see the main features of its hidden landscape, such as the mid-ocean ridges and ocean trenches – and, in that sense, the ocean floor is certainly not “95% unexplored”. But that global map of the ocean floor is admittedly less detailed than maps of Mars, the Moon, or Venus, because of our planet’s watery veil.

But if we want to detect things just a few meters in size on the ocean floor, such as the wreckage of missing aircraft or the mineral spires of undersea volcanic vents that my team investigates, we need to take our sonar systems much closer to the sea bed using underwater vehicles or towed instruments. So far, less than 0.05% of the ocean floor has been mapped to that highest level of detail by sonar, which is an area roughly equivalent in size to Tasmania.

Open mouth, enter foot, yo. The water's deep, and you kinda have to be a whole lot closer than the surface or a satellite to get any discernible detail for finding lost things.

I'm not saying the odds of it having been hijacked and stashed are non-existent, I'm saying those odds, compared to the oceans & our veritable blindness with them, are very low.

I understand your reasoning. Basic common sense, really.

As a mariner from a long line of mariners, I agree with your assessment of our knowledge of the ocean's depths, but the odds you are using to calculate the "likelihood" of locating the plane fail to take in a growing preponderance of circumstantial factors and (unbiased) professional opinions.

Sir Timothy Clark, the man responsible for the single largest fleet of B777s in the world today (175+-); someone who is personally responsible for the safety of millions and millions of passengers flying aboard Emirates B777s; someone who needs to know the reasons for the accident to prevent it from ever happening again, has told the world there is a conspiracy to cover-up the event.

In light of such information one must think beyond "Thy sea is so great and my boat is so small".

BTW, I have personally chartered an aircraft to search for a brand new outboard motor that an employee lost on a test drive at our family marine business.

Like many other members here on ATS I believe that it in possible not to know where this plane is... certainly if it has not crashed. I bet satelites record their observations and that all square miles are covered by them. It is just a matter of playing back the recorded images and there you go...

Something very embaressing or shocking must have happened which made the involved authorities to decide not to reveal the faith of that plane...and her passengers.

originally posted by: zatara
Like many other members here on ATS I believe that it in possible not to know where this plane is... certainly if it has not crashed. I bet satelites record their observations and that all square miles are covered by them. It is just a matter of playing back the recorded images and there you go...

But it was at night. When a country wants to move something they don't want seen by satellite, they do it at night, when the satellites can't see, at least not in visible light.

There are satellites that can detect rocket launches which have a huge IR signature, but I don't know enough about the technical details of those to say if they can detect jet engine exhaust heat. They may purposely tune that out since it's too small a heat signature to be a rocket launch and they don't want all those distractions, or the satellite may just not be designed to be that sensitive as that kind of sensitivity isn't required to detect rocket launches.

Took the words right out of my mouth. You don't just "lose" a 500 million dollar aircraft, especially with today's technology. Anyone who thinks otherwise is living in crazy land and needs to stop watching CNN 12 hours a day.