Malaysia Airlines Flight Goes Missing En Route to China

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Peter King's theory doesn't make sense. Why go through all of the flying maneuvers he/they went through in order to simply land in the ocean to commit suicide? No, given what's being reported about eyewitnesses who observed the plane's flying maneuvers as it went low and off-course, the intent seems to have been to preserve the airplane.

God willing, the passengers are still alive and reasonably well, wherever they are.

Are you Muslim?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No PP. Go crawl back in your hole if you do not want to listen to speculation about what is probably the BIGGEST AVIATION MYSTERY EVER. If you haven't noticed, EVERYONE (including the media, who broadcasts to the WHOLE WORLD) is speculating about who the passengers, pilots and crew were/are. It's because a plane disappeared OUT OF THE AIR and normal people find that unusual and want to help solve this mystery.

Bigger than Amelia Earhart?

She was one person in a small plane who disappeared 75 years ago. This is 229 people who disappeared in a 777 in 2014. Big diff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No PP. Go crawl back in your hole if you do not want to listen to speculation about what is probably the BIGGEST AVIATION MYSTERY EVER. If you haven't noticed, EVERYONE (including the media, who broadcasts to the WHOLE WORLD) is speculating about who the passengers, pilots and crew were/are. It's because a plane disappeared OUT OF THE AIR and normal people find that unusual and want to help solve this mystery.

Bigger than Amelia Earhart?

She was one person in a small plane who disappeared 75 years ago. This is 229 people who disappeared in a 777 in 2014. Big diff.

Yes, my point. See if this lasts 75 years then get back to us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:FYI it is believed that the person who signed off "alright, good night" was the co-pilot.

Hadn't heard this. Link, please.

[Anonymous]

Let's avoid a pissing match about how terrible this is vs. other aviation accidents if at all possible, please.

when you stand back and consider the possibilities, its clear why there is so much idle speculation: so little has been confirmed. So:

Either it was an accident or on purpose.
If on purpose, it was either of the pilots, or some other (group) of passengers.
The plane either crashed or landed.
Some (or all) the passengers are alive or dead.

There is a lot of room in there for pet theories.

I happen to think other organizations or governments know MUCH more about this than they are letting on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is now been confirmed that the final words were from the copilot. Run with that.

What did he say?

It was the "alright, goodnight" signoff. Completely uneventful and not unusual in the slightest, UNLESS the transponder and other equipment were turned off prior to that bit of radio communication. From what I understand today, the information is changing, and the timeline of what was turned off, and when, has been somewhat retracted.

Please provide a link. "From what I understand today" means what? Where did you find this information? Who retracted what? I have not found this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is now been confirmed that the final words were from the copilot. Run with that.

What did he say?

It was the "alright, goodnight" signoff. Completely uneventful and not unusual in the slightest, UNLESS the transponder and other equipment were turned off prior to that bit of radio communication. From what I understand today, the information is changing, and the timeline of what was turned off, and when, has been somewhat retracted.

Please provide a link. "From what I understand today" means what? Where did you find this information? Who retracted what? I have not found this.

Not the PP, but this thread is discussing a news event and those items mentioned (co-pilot's voice and changed timeline) are all over the news. You may have to go outside this thread and read the news to get the details then come here to discuss it. This site doesn't require citations of everything happening in the news.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is now been confirmed that the final words were from the copilot. Run with that.

What did he say?

It was the "alright, goodnight" signoff. Completely uneventful and not unusual in the slightest, UNLESS the transponder and other equipment were turned off prior to that bit of radio communication. From what I understand today, the information is changing, and the timeline of what was turned off, and when, has been somewhat retracted.

Please provide a link. "From what I understand today" means what? Where did you find this information? Who retracted what? I have not found this.

Not the PP, but this thread is discussing a news event and those items mentioned (co-pilot's voice and changed timeline) are all over the news. You may have to go outside this thread and read the news to get the details then come here to discuss it. This site doesn't require citations of everything happening in the news.

+1

I'm pretty tired of this "please provide a link" request - a lot of posted information is WIDELY being reported in the mainstream media, and it changes. Whether you choose to accept or have skepticism about reports is another question, but the information is very easily available with turning on the news or a google.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is now been confirmed that the final words were from the copilot. Run with that.

What did he say?

It was the "alright, goodnight" signoff. Completely uneventful and not unusual in the slightest, UNLESS the transponder and other equipment were turned off prior to that bit of radio communication. From what I understand today, the information is changing, and the timeline of what was turned off, and when, has been somewhat retracted.

Please provide a link. "From what I understand today" means what? Where did you find this information? Who retracted what? I have not found this.

Use the "google" function.

[Anonymous]

By the way, if you don't think that the Chinese passages would have fought off any hijackers take a look at the attempted hijacking of a regional Chinese jet a few weeks ago by a number of Uighur nationalists. The passengers fought back, killed two of the hijackers and landed the plane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is now been confirmed that the final words were from the copilot. Run with that.

What did he say?

It was the "alright, goodnight" signoff. Completely uneventful and not unusual in the slightest, UNLESS the transponder and other equipment were turned off prior to that bit of radio communication. From what I understand today, the information is changing, and the timeline of what was turned off, and when, has been somewhat retracted.

Please provide a link. "From what I understand today" means what? Where did you find this information? Who retracted what? I have not found this.

Not the PP, but this thread is discussing a news event and those items mentioned (co-pilot's voice and changed timeline) are all over the news. You may have to go outside this thread and read the news to get the details then come here to discuss it. This site doesn't require citations of everything happening in the news.

+1

I'm pretty tired of this "please provide a link" request - a lot of posted information is WIDELY being reported in the mainstream media, and it changes. Whether you choose to accept or have skepticism about reports is another question, but the information is very easily available with turning on the news or a google.

Agreed. This info was on CNN and on the Washington post website this morning. No need to link. Or if you must - cnn.com

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:By the way, if you don't think that the Chinese passages would have fought off any hijackers take a look at the attempted hijacking of a regional Chinese jet a few weeks ago by a number of Uighur nationalists. The passengers fought back, killed two of the hijackers and landed the plane.

Why would anyone think that? Chinese can be an aggressive bunch just like any other people. They didn't get to be a world super power by being polite and quiet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is now been confirmed that the final words were from the copilot. Run with that.

What did he say?

It was the "alright, goodnight" signoff. Completely uneventful and not unusual in the slightest, UNLESS the transponder and other equipment were turned off prior to that bit of radio communication. From what I understand today, the information is changing, and the timeline of what was turned off, and when, has been somewhat retracted.

Please provide a link. "From what I understand today" means what? Where did you find this information? Who retracted what? I have not found this.

Use the "google" function.

Are you the DCUM police? It's reasonable to ask for links. People are posting links all over this thread, some of them pretty redundant and old. But to someone new to the thread, it's nice of people to provide links to get them up to date quickly. If you've read something recent, why not link to it? Unless you're a troll, in which case, points to you.

There is information flying all over about this event -- much of it wild speculation. Facts are pretty scarce. I read on reddit that Malaysian authorities believe ACARS was turned off sometime after 1:07 a.m., but they don't know exactly when. This is a significant development, and it undermines the idea that this was a deliberate act, since they no longer can assume that the transponder and ACARS were turned off at different times. If there was a malfunction they might have turned off at the same time. And they suspect the co-pilot signed off, but I have not seen that confirmed anywhere. If you have time to post, surely you have time to post a link.

Snark on DCUM even when posting about a tragedy involving the deaths of more than 200 people -- this is a new low.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does occalm's razor say about all this?

Occam's. if you're going to try to sound erudite, at least get the correct reference. That wasn't a typo or a keystroke error -- you don't know what you're talking about.

And the answer is: Occam's Razor stipulates that it crashed in the ocean.

How is this the simplest explanation when evidence shows no debris and indicated hours of pinging after disappearance? Plus we know a person intentionally turned off communications systems.

Given those things I think the simplest explanation is someone stole the plane - which does NOT necessarily suggest that it is in the ocean.

That would be the Occams razor assumption -- someone, probably the pilot (leaving out assuming someone else could fly the plane) continued to fly the plane. Also, if assuming the pilot, could also land the plane. Fewest assumptions.

They are not assumptions. They have been reported as facts. Someone turned off the communications systems. The aircraft flew for HOURS after that. It is a fact, not an assumption, that within that 7 hour range there is not only ocean, but land.

You are assuming an awful lot to conclude an ocean crash. You are assuming one or some of the following: Mechanical problem, pilot error, pilot suicide, none of which we have specific evidence for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is now been confirmed that the final words were from the copilot. Run with that.

What did he say?

It was the "alright, goodnight" signoff. Completely uneventful and not unusual in the slightest, UNLESS the transponder and other equipment were turned off prior to that bit of radio communication. From what I understand today, the information is changing, and the timeline of what was turned off, and when, has been somewhat retracted.

Please provide a link. "From what I understand today" means what? Where did you find this information? Who retracted what? I have not found this.

Use the "google" function.

Are you the DCUM police? It's reasonable to ask for links. People are posting links all over this thread, some of them pretty redundant and old. But to someone new to the thread, it's nice of people to provide links to get them up to date quickly. If you've read something recent, why not link to it? Unless you're a troll, in which case, points to you.

There is information flying all over about this event -- much of it wild speculation. Facts are pretty scarce. I read on reddit that Malaysian authorities believe ACARS was turned off sometime after 1:07 a.m., but they don't know exactly when. This is a significant development, and it undermines the idea that this was a deliberate act, since they no longer can assume that the transponder and ACARS were turned off at different times. If there was a malfunction they might have turned off at the same time. And they suspect the co-pilot signed off, but I have not seen that confirmed anywhere. If you have time to post, surely you have time to post a link.

Snark on DCUM even when posting about a tragedy involving the deaths of more than 200 people -- this is a new low.

Melodramatic much? You have a very tiring personality.