-
-
What?
I'm not saying that the plane is NOT in Diego García (although I really don't think so), but to say that this is PROVEN with by FACTS and then use things like:
- People in the Maldivians saw "this very plane" (uh?)
- That the time to go to Beijing was similar that the time to go to Diego García via Maldivias (so? It's similar to the distance to a lot of places, especially if you don't go straight but go via something, and then why it go via Maldivias where it's a longer path and would fly over populated zones? One would asume that the intention would be "no witnesses").
- That the plane kept transmitting to the satellites because of some feature with the engines (false).
- That it could not have landed anywhere else because you need a clearance for the tower so we would know (wouldn't that apply to Diego García too?)
At that point I stopped watching.
--- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
--- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---Comment
-
Not to mention that the Chinese have an interest in monitoring Diego García for military reasons. I'm sure they would have been very interested in the sudden unexpected arrival of a large 777 and mentioned it before the yanks could get a football stadium sized camouflage net over it.
Why is it difficult for people not see the simplest solution fits the available evidence and that the incremental evidence has both strengthened it whilst weakening or totally destroying the alternates?
It may still be wrong but its getting increasingly difficult to believe it so.Comment
-
Everybody who's not familiar with the concept, please read this:
... and then of all the theories floating around choose the one that requires the smallest number of "ifs" to make it come true. There is an extremely high chance, that this will be the correct theory.Comment
-
Peter, of course you are right in what you say. But what bugs me is that "if" statements generally follow and are dependent upon "givens". Accepting the "givens" that somebody doesn't know a whole lot more, and that the info being released is credible (inclusive of the inmarsat info & radar not-seen reports) prevent me from eliminating BoeingBobby's jungle crash and other conspiracist land/hide scenarios. I'm needing that one plastic cup with the airline logo on it before I can get with you on the rasor....and honestly at this late date...even the single boarding card (CNN) or one debris item might not be conclusive to me...I'm just saying...Comment
-
We all want that cup. But you missed Peter's whole point - while we do not know where the end of the flight was - then we have to go on theory.Originally posted by jfojoe View Post
We have a multiplicity of theories. Most can be dismissed because they don't even fit the few facts we know. Of the rest we use Occam's Razor to see which emerges as the strongest candidate. In the real word this allows us to look more closely and confirm or eliminate it. The little done so far supports it.
So if you were a betting man you would put your money on that cup wouldn't you? In fact if I gave odds better than evens you would probably still go for it. I think Peter was pushing the odds a bit too far but its going to be a mighty surprise if it doesn't work out that way.
It just the relatives believing their kin are going to end up appearing on some Australian survivor show eating worms is not going to happen.Comment
-
Silent Hijacking
For what it's worth, a psychic friend of mind said that it was a "Silent Hijacking". Designed to create mystery and cause the expenditure of million's of dollars, and resources trying to find the plane. Pilots not at fault. They forced pilots to fly over the ocean until fuel exhaustion, then crashed into the sea.Comment
-
What it's worth is nothing. If I were the pilot (in a post-9-11 world) and would get to a point to where a hijacker asks me to steer away from land, I would turn the aircraft toward the nearest runway as long as I still have fuel to reach it, no matter what he says. Now, the hijacker can kill me or try to take over controls from me, but chances are the plane will crash in the process, and the search area today would only be half way to where it is now. So this scenario needs too much tweaking to fit the facts we have.Originally posted by phoneman View PostComment
-
More 'untruths'
Now we get to hear that the pilots (or co-pilots) lasst communication wasn't 'goodnight'.
Looks like mismanagement 101 for the whole episode.
Even I'm starting to consider the conspiricy stuff now!!!Comment
-
-
I'd say that's the most effective terror since it cripples the ability to plan and defend. Terror just means intense fear. Sorry if terror isn't technical enough for the discussion. In many parts of the USA, children have just disappeared. The inability of law enforcement to explain how or why has petrified parents. They don't know what not to do or where not to go.Originally posted by pacoperez View PostComment
-
The Ethiopian one was the hijackers believed they could get to Australia, despite the pilots telling them that they didnt have enough fuel. So it crashed into the ocean, very close to land....Originally posted by phoneman View PostComment
-
Originally posted by Peter Kesternich View PostEverybody who's not familiar with the concept, please read this:
... and then of all the theories floating around choose the one that requires the smallest number of "ifs" to make it come true. There is an extremely high chance, that this will be the correct theory.
Is this the third or fourth time you have linked that in this very thread ?
We get it .
You have taken " Senior" member to a new level.
Eat some oatmeal.Comment
-
Sounds like you have some fantasies. None of them sane. Rambo.Originally posted by Peter Kesternich View PostComment
-
No need to be rude. I clearly posted "Everybody who's not familiar with the concept, please read this..." Since you claim to have been familiar with it, the post didn't mean you. And quite obviously SOME people conjuring up some weird scenarios (like "The plane went to Diego Garcia via the Maldives") and posting or linking them here DIDN'T get it, so I see no harm in reminding them.Originally posted by TheKiecker View PostLast edited by Peter Kesternich; 2014-04-01, 16:05.Comment
Tweet
Comment