The “We Will Never Find Flight 370″ Meme Has Begun

by Scott Creighton

Yeah, they’ve already started with the “what if” we don’t find Flight 370. Notice the scribe who penned this little offering tries to normalize the possibility by mentioning Amelia Earhart, the Bermuda Triangle and that Argentine military plane from 1965.

Never once does he mention the FACT that no commercial airliner has ever gone missing for as long as Flight 370 has and NEVER gone missing forever.

But that won’t stop the official conspiracy theory.

It has been nearly 50 years since a plane carrying more than two dozen people vanished without a trace, according to a list of unexplained aviation disappearances tracked by the Flight Safety Foundation. An Argentine military plane carrying 69 people disappeared in 1965 and has never been found.

Earhart, the first female pilot to cross the Atlantic Ocean, vanished over the Pacific with Fred Noonan during an attempt to circumnavigate the globe. Seven decades later, people are still transfixed. Theories range from her simply running out of fuel and crashing to her staging her own disappearance and secretly returning to the U.S. to live under another identity.

There is also an ongoing fascination with the Bermuda Triangle, where several ships and planes disappeared, including a squadron of five torpedo bombers in 1945. Studies have indicated the area is no more dangerous than any other stretch of ocean. AP

About these ads

45 Responses

  1. yes, because sources close to the investigation say that the plane most likely flew into the southern Indian Ocean.
    Thats where waters are vast and deep.

    “The working assumption is that it went south, and furthermore that it went to the southern end of that corridor,“ said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity.¨

    Yet, other sources ¨ involved in the investigation have voiced fears it could be drifting towards deadlock due to the reluctance of countries in the region to share militarily sensitive radar data or allow full access to their territory.¨

    Now that would really be a problem if unnamed countries in certain regions are just so damn reluctant to share – whats up with them, don’t they want to help? Do you think they have something to hide?

    If this plane is not found, unnamed sources did everything in their power, but if anonymous countries are not willing to open up in a global initiative – no wonder.

    I really hope the US gets that sensitive data to help those poor chinese families – you know that all of them only have one child due to chinese communist policies? And do you know that the chinese satellite pictures were most likely distorted, because they don’t want the free world to see… how china is plotting, ever plotting – poor people there, they look so much alike.

    And now there is terrorists too?! Maybe there are terrorists, or the co-pilot who was seen – has been photographed with whores – you know it was probably him, less likely the other guy who was bald, but early on I heard there where Iranians with fake passports, but they say it was not them, but Obama is a socialist so have you noticed that he is not saying anything – at all?

    You know I think without really wanting to think so much that it probably would be better if that plane was never found.. you know with all they say that could be wrong with it..?

    Whats a meme?

    • “Meme” idea was invented by Richard Dawkins , suggesting ideas are analogous to genes in that they are self replicating and spread.

      • Are you saying… that we will find the plane because we have more genes? Hmmm….
        Richard Dawkins is an american right?
        Look I started to think there are too many ¨ideas¨ already about this, but the way you put it.. that makes sense now.

        • Richard Dawkins is British.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins

          He’s the one who wrote “The Selfish Gene” (which became somewhat of a meme). He’s an evolutionary biologist to takes a hard-line reductionist view of the mechanisms of life that is probably beyond our ability to actually test, but he has intriguing ideas. He also likes to offend people who use religious faith as part of their lives (or he used to anyway) by openly debating with them and dismissing their faith in the same manner that they tend to dismiss his “facts”. It’s actually a little disturbing to watch one of those from either viewpoint. Here’s a probable example that I have not actually watched and do not plan to:

          • Yo, I was foolin around a bit up there : )

            I am not a devoted Dawkinian, but having all these rather creationist theories concerning flight 370 floating around, a ¨hard line reductionist view¨, is pretty much what we should be looking for, so maybe Dawkins is not the worst choice to have around this issue?

            Thanks Y

            • I like the way you think Brian. If not creationist, some of the ideas floating around about the magical disappearance of an airplane are at least creative. Don’t know if Richard’s ideas would affect this thing one way or another actually. I’d suggest Darryl Dawkins might be a better choice here – the backboard shattering would have more impact on the average joe than debates about God, atheism, creation or evolution.

    • This is pretty funny. Made me laugh. You can throw in that one of the pilots “may be a muslim” and … wait … wait … it’s coming … yes they smoked and talked to TEENAGE girls in the cockpit. Oh, and they had PSYCHological problems.

      Memes are ideas, fragment of ideas, or collections of ideas that, for whatever reason, easily communicate between people in such a way that they spread quickly and remain relatively intact. Sort of like certain tunes that easily get stuck in the mind. Our wonderful propagandists are trying to plant memes left and right to occupy peoples’ minds (and waste their time, apparently). I see most news today as intentionally muddying the water. Little more, little less. Since our and other governments appear to be turning somewhat into a giant crime scene, what better way to cover up forensic evidence than plant an order of magnitude or two more fake evidence over the real trail left behind? If you don’t want DNA evidence to be deciphered for example, what do you do? Throw blood from 20 or 50 donors all over the place. Modern profiling technology won’t know what to do with it. For the average researcher following a story, just dump 20 to 50 conflicting stories on him and all reasonable leads become confused.

  2. I have seen some media bullshit in my time but this is insane.

    Look at this set of theories based on the BBC’s timeline and then even more far out theories after

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-18/did-missing-flight-mh370-land-maldives-or-diego-garcia-full-updated-summary

    I still suggest that the whole hijack idea has been authenticated by this 7 hour ping news, which is then being ignored throughout these theories, and also suggests there must be 6 other pings which would tell us a great deal more OR (more likely) suggest the plane went down when radio contact was lost.

    • the problem with the 7 hour ping theory is that its based on the say-so of unnamed sources while the CEOs of both Rolls Royce and Boeing have clearly distanced themselves from it. Also, it puts the plane at the same distance from the satellite for the entire time which means they had to fly on that arc for 7 hours. why would they do that? more likely, just like the arc suggests, the pinging was done from the same location, which if you look at the arc, goes right through the location of where the plane looks to have been downed and the debris field that the Chinese satellite found. seems pretty straight forward… the plane was sitting at the bottom of the South China Sea pinging away for a couple hours in shallow water. Makes more sense that pilots flying with a cloaking devise on a constant arc for no apparent reason.

      • Sorry if my writing is ambiguous but this is exactly what i have been suggesting for days. Adding that the 7 hour ping is deception and self contradictory unless the arcs of the other 5/6 pings are revealed.

        BTW The Chinese sat image that was released seemed to show the plane fairly intact ? FLOATING , In daylight (8.11am last ping) so it did not have to be underwater even and still pinging?

        • they are revealed. they stayed on the same arc. that’s why the NTSB has Australia searching off the coast near Perth. It’s on the arc.

          the Chinese sat images showed parts of the plane. one sat image analyst on CNN said he didn’t think it was Flight 370 even though he and his team thought the middle piece of those three looked like “a conical section with what appeared to be two windows on the front which made me think it was the nose cone” the other pieces, who knows what it was. possibly wing sections. the engines however, 9 tons of them, wouldn’t likely be floating around. but again, I don’t know. and of course you know it’s the engines these pings are supposedly coming from.

          • I have never seen one word that suggests they were all on the same arc, and have been asking for that info all along. The only statements about the arc I have seen are relating to the final 8.11am ping.

            If for example the first ping after transponder was off was made 1 hour later (2.11 am) and is still on the same arc as the last ping, then it disproves the Military radar suggesting the plane was over the Andoman sea and undermines the whole plane changed direction idea.

            If you could link to a statement where all pings were on the same arc then I would be grateful, and can finally shut up about it !

        • I know early on Rolls Royce and Boeing distanced themselves ( maybe national or trade secrets ?) but once the Malaysian PM said
          “After much forensic work and deliberation, the FAA, NTSB, AAIB and the Malaysian authorities, working separately on the same data, concur.”

          then we are asked take the pings to be of primarily importance, OR there is a massive escalation in deception being added to the myth .

          • its not deception. even though Malaysian Airlines didn’t subscribe to the service, the engines still have the transmitter built into them. so they still send out the pings, they just don’t do anything with them. what they are doing is trying to take any relevant data they can and twist it to say something it doesn’t. you would have to be a fool to think the flight would fly on a constant arc while evading radar detection. it’s just stupid. It also conflicts with the early stories about the Malaysian Air Force tracking that ghost blip in the Strait. What? They went to the strait, turned around, flew back over the country and all the radar coverage, just to get back on the arc and go south? it’s stupid beyond belief. but at least this time, they aren’t making shit up. those engines sat there in shallow water, pinging for a couple of hours and they know they can report that information and then twist it to mean something else.

            it’s like the deleted files on that flight simulator. Everyone’s talking about “deleted files”… ooooooo…. ahhhhhh… that proves it, right? It’s game files which must be MASSIVE for a game like Flight Simulator (which is what they were)… so the guy deleted his old games back in early Feb.

            it’s not deception, they are just taking what they can and presenting it in such a way as to make the innocuous seem damning.

            … so I guess in that sense it is deception.

            ah, never mind

            • Sorry Willy but I seem to have confused you so much over what I have been saying. FIRSTLY I believe all along the plane went down at the point of transponder loss, and that if it did ping for 6 hours then it would have been from the same point.

              I completely understand that the arc is based on timing from when the acars made the ping and when it is received ONLY. It contains no gps position. However the timing of the last 8.11 am ping has given rise to the Arc, and I hve never seen it said that other hourly pings were on the same arc. Everything is about one final ping at 8.11.am

              Of course it is preposterous that the plane flew on an arc for 6 hours maintaining the same distance from the satellite. That is why the information of the other 6 pings is crucial and I have not seen it said that they were all on the same Arc or any information about them except for the last one.

              • i know. we’re just chatting.

                oh, the arc is not based on the ACARS system. That sent it’s last transmission at 1:07am and the next was scheduled for 1:37am but did not happen.

                they tried to lie and say it was “shut off” (which it can’t be) at a different time than the transponder, but of course, I and others dispelled that bullshit rather quickly.

                the arc is based on the supposed data from the Boeing and Rolls Royce engine monitoring system. and to be factual, the first and last “ping” are on that same arc which is solely based on the distance from the satellite that received it. we don’t know what the distance was the others registered, but from the material we have been given, no other arcs mentioned, it would seem they were all on that same arc.

                now, if you have anything different to suggest they weren’t I would be glad to see that.

                • The article you just posted titled the Acars System cannot be turned off is suggesting the further pings we are talking about were Acars. I also know about the statements saying they were from the Rolls Royce engines or Boeing. I Dont know which is correct as there seem to be a lot of references from both sides that are contradicting /confusing but it does not negate my point.

                  Not knowing exactly what these pings are I am calling them Post transponder off pings PTO pings for short.

                  The last transponder on ping was 1.07 am.
                  We have been told that after the plane failed to make its next scheduled Acars transmission 1.37am , the satellite would be sending contacts to the system and would receive pings back , and this would happen every hour. These are my PTO pings.

                  There is no info on any of these hourly PTO pings except the last at 8.11 am giving rise to the arc. The distance (arc) is calculated I presume by time difference between plane sending the ping and satellite receiving it .

                  Look at the maps 3/4 down this page

                  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26609687

                  Firstly , neither here nor anywhere else , have I seen any info about any PTO ping except the last one at 8.11am.

                  Note that the position of the last military radar contact at 2:15 am is over the Andoman sea , about one sixth closer to the sattelite as the 8.11am PTO ping and last known position.

                  This is one hour after last Acars Contact made 1.07 it is now 2.15 am. We are told there should have been a PTO ping here and others every hour. The PTO ping at this time would either confirm the last known radar position at 2.15 am which would be one sixth closer to the satellite than the final arc OR it would be on the same arc as the lst ping disproving the Military radar position and altered course thread.

                  I have still seen No information at all about the positions of any PTO pings except the last one at 8.11 am

                  • “The article you just posted titled the Acars System cannot be turned off is suggesting the further pings we are talking about were Acars”

                    No. It does not.

                    It says that on-board you can only put the system into a kind of stand-by mode, but that it will continue to send signals on it’s own. Thus, it can’t be shut down as was previously and wrongly suggested by our mass media.

                    It does not state that the “pings” everyone says proves the plane was still in the air up to 7 hours after the crash, were from the ACARS system.

                    It is well established that the last communication received from the ACARS system was at 1:07am and the next scheduled one never happened.

                    considering the fact that you can’t turn it completely off, that should tell you something about how far it flew after the transponder link went down.

                    Here’s the truth about that “ping” data you seem to be confused about:

                    The automatic pings, or attempts to link up with satellites operated by Inmarsat PLC, occurred a number of times after Flight 370’s last verified position, the people briefed on the situation said, indicating that at least through those five hours, the Boeing Co. BA +0.42% 777 carrying 239 people remained intact and hadn’t been destroyed in a crash, act of sabotage or explosion.

                    Malaysia Airlines said it hadn’t received any such data. According to Boeing, the plane’s manufacturer, the airline didn’t purchase a package through Boeing to monitor its airplanes’ data through the satellite system.

                    and the source

                    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304185104579437573396580350

                    • All this says is that the aircraft was intact. It does not refer to the distance or arc of the plane from the other pings. It does not say they were on the last arc or not on it . Do you not see my point? IF they have these pings and can use the last to draw an arc, then they can also calculate and are ignoring the arc of the others they say they have which are likely to disprove the plane off course track, or at the very least add a lot to the possible flight path.

                    • I do see what you are saying, but don’t confuse ACARS with the Inmarsat satellite data with the transponder. of course I see the value of what you are saying and you are probably correct, if they come out and show us where those other pings came from, then the ghost blip is proven to be something else… in my opinion, the fighter jet that shot down flight 370

                      but let’s also make this clear…

                      “All this says is that the aircraft was intact.”

                      no. it doesn’t. it shows the devices on the ENGINES were still sending signals, not that the aircraft was intact. again, there is a difference.

                    • “the Boeing Co. BA +0.42% 777 carrying 239 people remained intact and hadn’t been destroyed in a crash, act of sabotage or explosion.”

                      This is what you just posted

                    • that is from the original WSJ disinformation article about those pings. The pings are from the engines. they don’t have to be attached to the plane to send them, from what I understand. the reason I posted that was to clear up your confusion about these communications with the satellite and the ACARS system and the transponder.

                      personally, I don’t care about the “pings” at all and I think it was made pretty clear by the head of Malaysian Airlines that he didn’t think much of them either.

                    • Yes I can ‘sense’ the pings are of little importance to you, however the day AFTER the head of Malaysian airlines made that statement the prime minister of Malaysia made a statement citing FAA, NTSB, AAIB and the Malaysian authorities and sent the world on a goose chase because of those pings. So they may be of relevance to others including anyone involved in the search.

                    • as I wrote a week ago, the Malaysian defense minister deliberately diverted the search away from the area where it should have been conducted. and as I wrote a while ago, this “ping” data is yet another distraction to expand the search area, practically ensuring Flight 370 is never found.

                    • Agreed, I never disagreed with you, I thought I was adding evidence to your/ general debunking argument and dont know why this became so adversary.

                    • don’t mean to be adversarial, just hashing out details.

                    • Cool. it is your job you need to be a lot more precise than us mere commenters, but I am learning and trying to get better at it !

                    • The WSJ article is the main one which explains the pings as Rolls Royce data Which you also class as disinfo.

                      http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/03/18/why-mh370-could-still-talk-to-satellites-after-its-other-comms-went-dark/

                      and many other sites are still calling the pings Acars including the article you posted saying the Acars cant be turned off

                      “So you can turn off the ACARS but not the connection, that is why you have the ‘ping’ indicating you have a connection and also the aircraft is flying,” he said, adding that the network connection will still be present.

                      This article seems to be clearer

                      http://theaviationist.com/2014/03/16/satcom-acars-explained/

                      But if I made inaccurate statements about the pings I am not the only one and the distinctions are not as clear as you insist , just depends on the source you pick.

                    • http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304914904579434653903086282

                      at bottom of page: Corrections & Amplifications
                      “An earlier version of this article and an accompanying graphic incorrectly said investigators based their suspicions on signals from monitoring systems embedded in the plane’s Rolls-Royce PLC engines and described that process.”

                  • My point is that the last PTO ping is being used to fuel this whole deviation, and so if it is as important and verifiable as suggested by leading the worlds media, the search teams, and the grieving families down this track. Then you cant omit the other PTO pings which must be of equal importance yet likely to be contradictory

                  • “The last transponder on ping was 1.07 am.”

                    NO!

                    that was the ACARS system communication which was not a “ping” it was a direct communication with the ground. The next one scheduled at 1:37 never took place. it never happened.

                    the last TRANSPONDER communication took place at 1:21am. Transponder communication is CONSTANT, not intermittant like the ACARS system (every 30 minutes) or the Inmarsat PLC data pings (every hour)

                  • “We have been told that after the plane failed to make its next scheduled Acars transmission 1.37am , the satellite would be sending contacts to the system and would receive pings back , and this would happen every hour. These are my PTO pings.”

                    wrong.

                    ACARS does not transmit through the Inmarsat PLC satellite. That’s the contract that company has with Boeing to offer the engine maintenance service. THEY are your “PTO pings” and not the ACARS system.

                    two … different… things

                    • FFS willy. stop nit picking my details can you not see the point I am making.
                      Ok so the 1.07 was not a ping That was not of any importance to my argument. I stand corrected.

                      Just Substitute PLC pings with what i got wrong and argue that premise.

                      I named them PTO Pings to avoid this confusion. Elsewhere the PTO pings are called Acars or PLC , there is much confusion, but I stand corrected.

                    • as I just said in another comment, if they were to release the distances for the other Inmarsat satellite pings and they are on the same arc as I figure they must be, then yes, you are correct, that proves that the ghost blip the Malaysian defense minster distracted everyone with was NOT flight 370 and probably whatever shot it down.

                      I understand that is what you are saying and I agree.

                      the fact is, that is probably exactly WHY they AREN’T releasing that data.

                      so yes, I do understand what you are saying and I agree completely.

                  • look, if that pilot is correct and you can’t simply turn off the ACARS system in flight, then it’s already proven that the plane had to have gone down before the missed 1:37am report from ACARS that never happened.

                    also, did you know that ghost blip reported by the Malaysian defense minister actually shows that the blip was at 45,000 feet for a while? The Boeing 777-200 can’t fly that high. its well over their certified maximum altitude rating.

                    just saying…

                    • My point is that what this pilot is saying has not led the world on a wild goose chase. The last PTO ping has.
                      I thought it was important to debunk this PTO ping issue , and I believe I have.

                      Does not detract from other debunking in other areas or your points!

                    • Allende Admirer is making a 100% valid, key point.

                      The Innmarsat ping “arc” is based on the projected location of the last ping based on the assumed height of the plane when that ping was sent. It has never been suggested that the plane was flying along that arc, just that the ping was somewhere along that arc.

                      If the earlier Innmarsat pings were released, it would theoretically show smaller concentric arcs based on the earlier locations of the plane. Of course, if the plane had crashed due to being shot down (which both Allende Admirer, you and I all agree on), the earlier pings would all be on the same arc as the final ping, and it would be apparent to all that the plane crashed somewhere along the Innmarsat arc, most likely in the South China Sea (the original search location).

                      Hopefully that helps Allende Admirer!

  3. Is anybody still talking about the Chinese satellite images at all?
    Are there maps showing EXACTLY which parts of the globe have been searched? If not, why not – especially from a standpoint of the relatives?
    Just as a hunch, could maritime regional disputes in the south china sea have muddled search efforts there?
    If Malaysia by theory shot down that plane, why would the US want to be complicit in the cover up?

    Not having followed this story much, due to its unparalleled idiocy, these questions maybe out of naivete still linger…

    Of course there would be a barrage of theories, juggling around so that not one of them can effectively be shot down by one of the countries with an inherent interest, but this is going on and on and on!

    Thanks for keeping up with this BS tough, even if only for posterity.

    • “If Malaysia by theory shot down that plane, why would the US want to be complicit in the cover up?”

      well, in the first place, it now makes the Malaysian government basically slaves to whatever policies the U.S. dictates. all they have to do is threaten to expose the current government for the cover-up and “poof” they are gone. So, the government and the military are instantly in the pockets of US intelligence officials and we all know who’s pockets they reside in

      second, who says it was the Malaysian military that did it? The ghost blip they reported tracking back to the straits flew directly to Butterworth Air Force Base which has a joint military presence there with 5 countries including the UK and Australia.

      • first place doesn’t make much sense as the US was perceivably complicit, although they of course would be exempt of blame…

        second one, yeah that has to be the case.. most probably and thats why the search maps are not forthcoming, I have not seen any really conclusive maps showing covered terrain and by exactly whom the terrain was searched and so forth.
        Also that expensive surveillance plane the US had to show off to the world, what did it see there? They packed that one back up in hurry, wrong machinery cause the search expanded – or some other damned reason.
        Any chance the US might get another military base from out of this?
        You know they are expanding east on those, might get an opportunity somewhere in the cracks of this story for that…

  4. SHANGHAI, March 8 (Xinhua)

    ¨In line with international custom, an airline should publish information 30 seconds after losing contact with any flight, according to Zhang Qihuai, associate chairman of the Aerial Law Study Institution of Beijing Legal Study Association.

    The Boeing 777-200 aircraft left the Malaysian capital at 12:41 a.m. (Beijing Time) on Saturday, and was expected to land in Beijing at 6:30 a.m. the same day. It was carrying 227 passengers, 154 of them Chinese.

    Contact was lost with the plane at around 2:40 a.m. (Beijing Time) but it wasn’t until 7:30 a.m. that Malaysia Airlines announced the plane as missing, according to Zhang.

    Meanwhile, planes release alert signals in accidents and their black boxes will send radar signals asking for help. But it is curious this time that no progress was made after such a long time, the expert said.

    “It is a rare case,” said a senior administration officer from the industry, speaking on condition of anonymity.

    He explained that a plane is equipped with several sets of communication devices, which function simultaneously. Even if all of them fail to work, the plane can be located through radar code.

    “Only under extreme conditions will a flight be out of contact,” he said, adding that it is unlikely such a scenario would occur even if the plane was hijacked or went through a natural disaster.¨

    Of course I thought that Mr. Zhang Qihuai, could offer me an explanation what ¨unlikely scenario¨ could have occurred now that this ¨unlikely scenario¨ is allegedly occurring.
    Looks like Mr. Zhang Qihuai, is censored nothing to be found of his views on this anywhere at least not in english and the german sites that I am able to read, reported last 3 days ago, that Qihuai said he still believes the plane crashed and that it would have been detected by military at least over land somewhere 100%.
    Point is, Qihuai is censored, the expert is gagged on this and he is surely not the only one.

  5. Finally I have found a lot of info regarding the ping/ pings

    http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2014/03/17/locating-satellite-pings/

    and

    http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2014/03/15/understanding-satellite-pings/

    Seems like many others share my interest in the implications./ lack of info on other pings

    Seems like the amplitude of the ping should indeed give an indication of altitude or angle of the plane to satellite and suggest further information, and the absence of data from the other pings is infuriating because it could disprove so many theories being bandied.

    Interestingly it does suggest that the last two pings Were used in the Southern track search area, refining the area, but interestingly no similar data is applied to the northern track.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 933 other followers

%d bloggers like this: