Reply to “Amy Bradley is Missing” Netflix

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "“Amy Bradley is Missing” Netflix"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]And they never found Amelia Earhardt either.

It doesn't mean she was abducted.

FFS people.[/quote]

Don’t be a moron. Obviously the technology had advanced significantly in over 100 years.[/quote]

Yeah? Flight MH370 disappeared in 2014 with 239 people on board while traveling from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing. Its disappearance is one of the world's greatest aviation mysteries, which continues to haunt the families of the passengers. Despite extensive searches in the years since it vanished, no wreckage has been found.

You are the moron, sadly.[/quote]
Aviation mysteries with no known survivors and wreck sites that haven’t been located are a totally different animal from a cruise ship that never lost communications and came into port on time with all crew members and passengers alive and accounted for except one. The search for Flight MH370 covered 2 seas and one ocean because no one knew for sure where it went down. Eventually, debris from the wreckage did wash ashore, unlike Amy Bradley’s body or personal effects, even though it was much easier to determine where she might wash ashore based on the ship’s known locations and course during the timeframe when she disappeared.[/quote]

follow the thread, don't deviate.
If you can't find an entire plane full of people, you're not going to find one body in the ocean.
that's the bottom line.[/quote]
It would have been EASIER to find her body because authorities knew where it should end up. It wasn’t like searching the vast expanse of water where a plane that’s disappeared from radar and is traveling much, much faster might have gone down.[/quote]

That's simply not true because the timeline was unconfirmed, resulting in a huge search area.[/quote]
But we’re not talking about searching the water where she disappeared; we’re talking about the shoreline where she should have washed ashore. That’s not a huge search area.[/quote]

If the ship were 30 miles out (ie much farther than the Bradleys are positing), not necessarily. Look at the case with the NOVA girl who drowned on spring break. She was one of 4 people who drowned at that location in the past year, and only one body was found. This was right offshore. Currents are not predictable like you and the heavily-skewed Netflix program are suggesting.[/quote]
I would agree with you if she’d only disappeared a year ago, but no remains have ever been found, no scrap of clothing, nothing in years and years.[/quote]

I don't understand your point. Nothing at all was found from those other bodies either, or from many other bodies that were never recovered. Once they're swept out to sea, they're gone. Period. Sometimes I think people just don't comprehend how vast the ocean is, and how quickly any surviving remnants sink, degrade, or are otherwise lost forever.[/quote]

Sometimes clothing items survive, but any scraps would be at the bottom of the ocean at this point. Or just disintegrated. Shoes are the most likely to survive, but it seems she wasn't wearing any. After 27 years, the odds of any remnant of her body surviving are slim to none.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics