Malaysian Airline plane disappears

[Uncle Peter]

Two vessels to survey the ocean floor*, expected to take 3 months.

http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Natio...ct-with-Fugro/

Projected search area is 60,000 square KM which is why they were never going to find anything soon.



*survey, not look for any wreckage

Originally Posted by idi banashapan

I think you are correct for the main part (it's at the bottom of the ocean). How it came to be there I don't know - neither do any of us here.

That said, my opinion does not mean fact or that other theories are not possible and I'm very open to be proven otherwise. as Tizmeinit says, unless you were actually there, you simply won't know.

however, I don't think that ideas that try to explain away what may have happened should all be classed as 'stupid' or irrelevant or just be dismissed outright, just because they don't fit what most people deem as the most 'likely' of causes or results. 'most likely' does not equal 'actually happened'.

i believe it would be closed minded to think anyone here 'knows' what happened. at present, every opinion that anyone here presents is purely speculative and is therefore no less a theory than the next person's opinion

No because there is more evidence for one theory than another. Not every theory is equally valid. Some people think it was hijacked by Aliens. We don't have to entertain every theory someone has just because we don't have definitive evidence as to which theory is true. We'll likely never have all the facts since we weren't there so we need to ascertain what happened via the evidence presented to us.

With the 'everyone's opinion is equal' route then even if they find the plane in the South Indian Ocean the conspiracy people will tell us it was planted there by the Government who hijacked it and we'll have to treat that as equally plausible too.

At the moment the best evidence we have points towards the ditching in the Indian Ocean. Maybe someone hijacked it, flew over Indian airspace without the Indians noticing, and landed on a airstrip big enough but remote enough to land a 777 and then hide it but there is no evidence that happened.

[Qtx]

Originally Posted by Damien

At the moment the best evidence we have points towards the ditching in the Indian Ocean. Maybe someone hijacked it, flew over Indian airspace without the Indians noticing, and landed on a airstrip big enough but remote enough to land a 777 and then hide it but there is no evidence that happened.

There is no more evidence that it crashed in to the sea than there is evidence of it being landed somewhere. So if you want to base it on evidence both theories are equal.

Say for example a government agency somewhere hijacked the plane, they would have planned to turn off tracking and have another plane or boat send identifying signals and other radio signals instead, giving the appearance the plane continuing a certain direction.

We could say that is far fetched but a year ago if someone told you government agencies had servers ready to race responses back to individuals before the actual facebook/linkedin/other servers so they could serve up malware, most people would have said that is a conspiracy nut theory. Now we know they have been doing that among many other things.

Originally Posted by Damien

With the 'everyone's opinion is equal' route then even if they find the plane in the South Indian Ocean the conspiracy people will tell us it was planted there by the Government who hijacked it and we'll have to treat that as equally plausible too.

Not the government, aliens! Plausible is based on current understandings and different from likely. We wouldn't put it past some governments or agencies to shoot the plane out of the sky or hijack some of the engineers from the flight, so it's not easily dismissed. As there is currently no proof aliens have visited Earth, the theory of alien abduction is easily dismissed before you even get to asking questions such as why they would do it.

So somebody created a system to fool the Inmarsat ping tracking, which hadn't been used in that way before? (they had to write new software to get the tracks and direction they did).

http://www.inmarsat.com/news/malaysi...tails-uk-aaib/

http://www.slate.com/articles/techno..._effect.2.html

[Qtx]

Originally Posted by Hugh

So somebody created a system to fool the Inmarsat ping tracking, which hadn't been used in that way before? (they had to write new software to get the tracks and direction they did).

I just gave a random idea to give an example. Someone has to be the first to do something, if it hasn't already been done before. I can't see anywhere if the handshake is encrypted but if not, it would be trivial to create it from another source. Probably just as trivial to replay a recorded previous handshake. Some computer attacks allow logins without knowing the password, simply by sending a previously sent hashed version again that was previously sniffed. Remember the actual pings or handshakes contained no location data themselves but these pings and the change in frequency due to distance from origin to the satellite were used to calculate a position later.

There is no doubt that military and other agencies fake transmitted data from planes when they need to, to hide what they are doing or to be more discreet. It's simple to change the call sign of a plane/jumbojet that even a pilot can do it apparently. When it comes to military they are going to go much more in depth to complete an illusion they want to convey.

Until the last few years we wasn't aware there were listening bugs which couldn't be found due to not giving off any signals or power, beyond ones that only switched on from time to time with a timer. Now we are aware of intelligence agencies using a type of wave to remotely activate and read their bugs. When people were saying a UFO spotted couldn't be a plane as it was flying too high, 10 or 20 years later they find out it was a secret military plane. I expect a few more will be disappointed when they learn in the future that the strange non-earth plane like manoeuvres reported in UFO sightings turns out to be military TR3-B's that can actually move like that. The point being, just because we don't think we have a capability, doesn't mean we don't and also doesn't mean it's not likely.

[Will21st]

Originally Posted by Derek

Well Tom Clancy had a hijacked 747 hitting the Capitol building as a major plot point in one of his books written in 1994 so it wasn't as if using planes as weapons against landmarks was first dreamt up in a cave somewhere.

and Stephen King writing as Richard Bachmann did it even earlier than that in his Novel 'The Running Man' .... 1985.

[Qtx]

Originally Posted by Will21st

and Stephen King writing as Richard Bachmann did it even earlier than that in his Novel 'The Running Man' .... 1985.

The CIA also had a paper that talked about crashing a plane in to a skyscraper to get political support for a war. Not sure what year that was but guessing it was after the twin towers were built as it had an image of two towers with a cross-hair over one of them. Google is failing me at the moment, so feel free to consider this as make believe until I can be bothered to have another look or someone else posts links

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Qtx

The CIA also had a paper that talked about crashing a plane in to a skyscraper to get political support for a war. Not sure what year that was but guessing it was after the twin towers were built as it had an image of two towers with a cross-hair over one of them. Google is failing me at the moment, so feel free to consider this as make believe until I can be bothered to have another look or someone else posts links

The American government also had an idea for blowing up a ship in hanava harbour as a pre text for war, the Maine conveniently blew up before such a plan was put into action.

tbf, that was nearly 120 years ago.......

[LondonRoad]

Originally Posted by Hugh

tbf, that was nearly 120 years ago.......

You've got a great memory Hugh

Originally Posted by LondonRoad

You've got a great memory Hugh

I remember my son telling me about it....

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Hugh

tbf, that was nearly 120 years ago.......

Which shows how long they've be planning such nefarious activities, tbh the one I always throw into the mix when people are deriding conspiracy theorists is the bay of pigs, who'd have thought that a super power would get into bed with organised crime to invade another country.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-n...-claim-3692247

'MH370 was no accident': Investigators claim disappearance of Malaysia Airlines jet was 'deliberate

ok its a misleading headline as they are not official investigators

[idi banashapan]

Originally Posted by Damien

No because there is more evidence for one theory than another. Not every theory is equally valid. Some people think it was hijacked by Aliens. We don't have to entertain every theory someone has just because we don't have definitive evidence as to which theory is true. We'll likely never have all the facts since we weren't there so we need to ascertain what happened via the evidence presented to us.

Correct that we will never likely know all the facts. However, this means we need to presume or theorise what happened based on the evidence we have. All we know is that the plane did not arrive at it's expected destination and that trace of the aircraft stopped over the ocean.

We can presume that it ditched. It's plausible. It's likely. It fits the result observed. But it is still a theory at this stage because as you rightly say, we can only work off the information we have.

Originally Posted by Damien

With the 'everyone's opinion is equal' route then even if they find the plane in the South Indian Ocean the conspiracy people will tell us it was planted there by the Government who hijacked it and we'll have to treat that as equally plausible too.

Be careful not to group too generally. A lot of people are simply open to the various theories that are, as stated, plausible, likely and fit the result observed.

Granted, some will always want to believe there is something more underhand and they will always get the attention from the media, so the masses have someone to point and laugh at and scream such statements as 'get the tin foil hats out' and so on - standard comments from those who blindly follow what they are told to believe by authoritative establishments without really looking into all the evidence available and making a fully balanced opinion. However, most are simple presenting theories which should be held up as being possible given the information we have.

Originally Posted by Damien

At the moment the best evidence we have points towards the ditching in the Indian Ocean. Maybe someone hijacked it, flew over Indian airspace without the Indians noticing, and landed on a airstrip big enough but remote enough to land a 777 and then hide it but there is no evidence that happened.

The evidence that is available allows both of these theories to be possible. One is more likely. However, we cannot call either of them fact until more evidence is uncovered. That said, let's not get stupid to make a point about entertaining every theory by saying that the plane might have vanished into a black hole and travelled through time, blah, blah. We have to at least be sensible and realistic with our judgements and presumptions. Saying that theories of aliens and black holes are as equal in likelihood as ditching or hijacking is just being facetious in order to elevate one's own opinion or person to the status of pedant. no-one likes pedants. Aliens, black holes, ditching and hijacking are equal as far as they are theories, but by no means, based on our experience of such events, are they equal in terms of likelihood or plausibility.

The most likely thing that happened to the aircraft, based on previous experience of similar circumstances, as that it crashed into the ocean. This conclusion will likely be backed up using inductive reasoning. however, saying that it definitely crashed into the ocean just because all previous similar circumstances resulted in that conclusion would be ill-advised in my opinion. people should be more open to the possibility that something else may have happened and until we have the evidence to say otherwise, I will remain to hold an opinion of likelihood but with and openness of mind for other conclusions.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Which shows how long they've be planning such nefarious activities, tbh the one I always throw into the mix when people are deriding conspiracy theorists is the bay of pigs, who'd have thought that a super power would get into bed with organised crime to invade another country.

Probably the people who knew they had done the same thing in WW2 with the Mafia and the invasion of Italy....