Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Media Transportation Science

Skepticism Grows Over Claims That MH370 Lies In the Bay of Bengal 126

Posted by timothy
from the homeopathic-jet-fuel dept.
Sockatume (732728) writes "The latest episode of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's Mediawatch program addresses GeoResonance's claims to have found the lost Malasia Airlines MH370 in the Bay of Bengal. They attribute the company's sudden prominence to increasing desperation amongst the press. Meanwhile, the Metabunk web site has been digging into the people and technology behind GeoResonance and its international siblings, finding noted pseudoscientist Vitaly Gokh and a dubious variation on Kirlian photography."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Skepticism Grows Over Claims That MH370 Lies In the Bay of Bengal

Comments Filter:
  • Where's Waldo? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by p51d007 (656414) on Tuesday May 06, 2014 @07:49AM (#46927503)
    The poor families of those that were on this airplane. If it wasn't for that aspect, the media "coverage" of this would be a huge joke.
    • Re:Where's Waldo? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by jerpyro (926071) on Tuesday May 06, 2014 @08:00AM (#46927591)

      Yeah I don't really understand what the big deal is. I realize that there are a lot of families that may be suffering but because they were on an airplane it is somehow more newsworthy than a cruise ship with 10 times as many people, or genocide in Malaysia or doctors being killed giving polio vaccines in Afghanistan? Oh it's an airplane, let's tap into the 9/11 terrorist fear mongering so that we can get ratings!

      *sigh*

      • by Anonymous Coward

        The deal is that CNN has become a massive piece of shit. I have no idea either why this plane has translated to huge ratings, but it's a sad state of affairs when the news, which is supposed to tell the public what it needs to know, instead tells it what it WANTS to know-- which is apparently pandering, sensationalist, exploitative bullshit.

        Bread and circuses. Watching these people who went to journalism school cover the missing plane, you can see their souls dying and the spark of integrity extinguished

        • by GameboyRMH (1153867) <gameboyrmh AT gmail DOT com> on Tuesday May 06, 2014 @08:23AM (#46927737) Journal

          The problem is 24 hour news stations. It would take a global army of non-lazy old-school journalists to get enough fresh content for a 24 hour news station (costing tens of millions of dollars in salaries alone - coming straight out of some exec's megayacht fund!), and then a lot of people wouldn't care about news of what's happening in some place that has no relevance to their lives so it wouldn't pay off.

          So news stations are always hungry for generic filler content (human interest stories, or intense discussion over inconsequential BS such as almost everything on MH370), and when they're not, they spend their time trying to whip up interest over something people don't currently care about one iota - the Blackfish movie is a perfect example. Funded by and premiered on CNN. They throw these things at the wall often but most don't stick, and amount to nothing but more filler content, which is OK for them.

          • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

            by Anonymous Coward

            But the plane wasn't filler-- it dominated their 24-hour network for months. They sold it as a thriller mystery. It pushed out all kinds of real news-- the invasion in Ukraine, for example.

            The plane episode to me really was the symbolic death rattle for mainstream American news media, a clear message that it is completely dead. We deserve much better-- as the last superpower (at least for another few years) it should be the citizen's duty to stay well-informed, but we're so ill-served by the mass media an

            • you keep blaming your american news services of reporting crap,so stop using them,do what others do,look else where and try to get news from as many different sources as possible,most folk can afford internet access
          • by Anonymous Coward

            The problem is 24 hour news stations. It would take a global army of non-lazy old-school journalists to get enough fresh content for a 24 hour news station (costing tens of millions of dollars in salaries alone - coming straight out of some exec's megayacht fund!), and then a lot of people wouldn't care about news of what's happening in some place that has no relevance to their lives so it wouldn't pay off.

            So news stations are always hungry for generic filler content (human interest stories, or intense discussion over inconsequential BS such as almost everything on MH370), and when they're not, they spend their time trying to whip up interest over something people don't currently care about one iota - the Blackfish movie is a perfect example. Funded by and premiered on CNN. They throw these things at the wall often but most don't stick, and amount to nothing but more filler content, which is OK for them.

            Typical of the Liberal Press.

            They should have been devoting all that coverage to something that people really care about: Benghazi.

          • by interkin3tic (1469267) on Tuesday May 06, 2014 @09:11AM (#46928267)
            That doesn't really explain CNN's obsession with mh370 though: CNN's nonstop coverage of "A plane is missing" has been going on for months. In that time, Ebola has broken out, some celebrity somewhere has undoubtedly died, and Russia invaded Ukraine. Yet CNN KEEPS coming back to "BREAKING FUCKING NEWS, HOLD ON TO YOUR SEAT: THE PLANE!!! IT'S STILL MISSING!!!" It's clearly not about filler. Ebola would have made a much sexier story. Since it's all pundits, they wouldn't need to change anything, just ask the people in front of the camera to speculate on whether we're all going to die of Ebola rather than where they think the plane crashed.

            At this point, I think CNN is staying with the flight because they think anyone still watching CNN is actually hooked on the dizzying highs that come along with watching yet another computer generated line over the indian ocean while some self-proclaimed expert on airplanes guesses about what was going on when the plane hit the water. Meanwhile people who actually want to know the news have switched over to the internet. It's the same approach other specialized cable channels are taking: The Learning Channel has realized that anyone who wants to learn anything tuned out long ago, but they can cling to some viewers with stupid shows like Honey Boo Boo. Not just filling time: addictive to some moron with eyeballs.
            • Perhaps reporters don't want to go on location to cover an ebola outbreak.

              Second thing is, speculation and computer graphics probably cost less than actual investigative reporting.

              Aside: a couple of months ago I was called to be in a jury pool and I sat in the jury room with CNN on the TV. It was absolute torture. I could try to read, or look at the floor or at the other potential jurors, but I just couldn't block out the audio. People watch that voluntarily?

              • by Darinbob (1142669)

                I thought that once when stuck in a waiting room with Fox with the constant interspersion of editorial comments when reporting news. But then in the meantime all the cable channels have followed them down to lowest level. Now I can't think of any modern American news channel I'd want to be forced to listen to in a waiting room, they're all essentially crap.

          • I was with you until your Blackfish comment. That IMO is *exactly* what CNN should be focusing on. If I want breaking news nowadays I'm not getting it from CNN scroller. TV news networks have the ability to take on long form documentaries that can go indepth and be visual and appealing. Blackfish and Pandora's Promise were fantastic and a hell of a lot of people cared about the former.

            • I havent seen Pandora's Promise, but it really sickened me that Blackfish had the headlines and the world's attention for a few weeks while there were 1 or 2 genocides going on and NK's prison camps were just getting UN attention. This has nothing to do with the merit of Blackfish as a documentary, it's that CNN thought a discussion over the ethics of whale captivity was the most newsworthy thing going on at the time.

          • by Darinbob (1142669)

            The thing is, CNN made it big initially because of this format. However what they did was repeat the main news of the day continuously rather than only at 5pm and 11pm. So it was good for travellers in hotels, or if you wanted to get caught up in the news in the morning, and so forth. Even better for genuine stories that take lots of time to tell, such as breakout of war in Iraq or 9/11. But over time CNN and other stations kept trying to recreate the big story format out of stuff that wasn't a big stor

        • by Darinbob (1142669)

          CNN hasn't had news for about 8 years now. Or at least on "headline news" there's no news and only talking heads and you had to head to main CNN site to get headlines, but even that has declined. Somebody high in CNN management seems to want to recreate a tabloid style of journalism, and believes that this missing plane story is the next OJ Trial.

      • Re:Where's Waldo? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by DrXym (126579) on Tuesday May 06, 2014 @08:30AM (#46927783)
        The big deal is it's a story which lends itself perfectly to endless speculation. CNN can waste hours of its news cycle wheeling out pundits to explain how aircraft work, how transponders work, how accidents happen, how terrorists hijack planes, how the planes crash, how planes are found, how blackboxes work, how debris fields spread etc. In the absence of hard information, they and their guests can prattle on for days or weeks like this.
        • by TWX (665546)
          it also doesn't help that the news organizations have managed to frame it as a classic, "whodunit," with bad-actors in the forms of the regional governments that wouldn't disclose what they knew, the failure of cooperation by the airline and its poor behavior regarding the families of the passengers, the contrary evidence for what happened, and the rather large number of employees of Freescale.

          The problem isn't that the questions are being asked, the problem is that conclusions are being drawn, which are
          • We know that a plane disappeared when transitioning between airspaces controlled by different, somewhat antagonistic governments. We know that the plane's transponder was shut off at just this moment, requiring knowledge of the route and the procedures to turn off the transponder. We know that the plane continued to fly for some time based on the engine reporting systems the parties disabling the transponder neglected to turn off.

            That's all we know.

            We know an approximate distance from the satellite that the engine reporting systems reached before not reporting anymore. We think that, several days later, indications of the cockpit voice and data recorders were picked up in the vicinity of a very, very deep part of the ocean, a place that is close to, but not exactly where the engine reporting systems last reported the plane's position.

            This is more conjecture based on data from the system - possibly accurate, possibly not - as they invented a whole new method of interpretting the data to determine this information. It has yet to be proven a valid method of interpretation.

            For all we know, it could (i) be at the bottom of the ocean, or (ii) be shutdown, hidden by a nefrarious force (f.e Al Quaida or similar group; or even a not-so-nefrarious force - North Korea, etc.). Problem is, we won't know until it shows up agai

        • For at least 5-10 yrs, I don't "watch" the news. I get my fix from new.google.com, slashdot, nytimes, reddit, and several other blogs.

          This allows me to allocate my own time to coverage of events.

          I assume that most younger people do this these days? Who even watches CNN/FOX/etc for news and not entertainment?

          • by Darinbob (1142669)

            Well, I cut my satellite and now use Roku. And apparently there are no news channels I can get there worth watching (just waiting for the bbc channel to start working). I can get Fox though, or RK, or other innately biased channels. What's surprising though is that I'm not really missing the news channels because their quality had diminished so much. I can read the paper at work, read the bbc RSS feeds, and so on.

        • by Darinbob (1142669)

          Yes, but the problem is that this displaces actual news that matters. Use the prattling as the filler instead of as the main story.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Yeah I don't really understand what the big deal is. I realize that there are a lot of families that may be suffering but because they were on an airplane it is somehow more newsworthy than a cruise ship with 10 times as many people, or genocide in Malaysia or doctors being killed giving polio vaccines in Afghanistan? Oh it's an airplane, let's tap into the 9/11 terrorist fear mongering so that we can get ratings!

        *sigh*

        To an extent I can agree with you, but there is one very large fundamental difference between genocide in Malaysia or a cruise ship with shitters that won't flush.

        In those cases, we know what the fuck happened. We know where it is happening regardless if it is ignored or not by the first world.

        In the case of one of the largest airliners ever built flying over a planet who's global telecommunications infrastructure is nothing sort of remarkable, we have no fucking clue how it simply vanished.

        Tin-foil hat o

        • by jerpyro (926071)

          I disagree that it's newsworthy. It has nothing to do with being a sheep -- turn your energy to the education, disease (due to anti-vaxxers) or net neutrality issues we're having domestically. We have such larger problems to fix that a missing airplane halfway across the world shouldn't even register on the scale. But it's a convenient distraction from our own problems so it's good 'infotainment'.

          If you think I'm a sheep because I don't give a shit about an electrical fire [wired.com] in an airplane, you're amazingl

          • Re:Where's Waldo? (Score:4, Insightful)

            by Will.Woodhull (1038600) <wwoodhull@gmail.com> on Tuesday May 06, 2014 @10:19AM (#46929063) Homepage Journal

            The missing plane story IS newsworthy.

            I don't watch CNN so I have no idea how sensationalized their coverage has been. HOWEVER any time you have several nations devoting so much of their resources in a joint effort that was cobbled together as rapidly as their response has been, that IS a major story. CNN was definitely doing the right thing in getting on this, and in following it.

            That said, so far they may have missed much of the significance of what was happening. When elements of the USA armed forces and the Chinese armed forces act jointly under the direction of Australia, yes, there are definitely stories there. It might be that CNN missed the boat on where the focus should be. Or it might be that they have been preparing documentary coverage behind the scenes, while using the day to day "infotainment" coverage to pay the enormous daily costs of developing the larger, more noteworthy, stories.

            I expect that in the upcoming months we will see a documentary or two describing how a multinational search effort was thrown together on a moment's notice. I think there must have been some fancy dancing going on between Generals and Admirals of different nations, and CNN has-- probably deliberately-- positioned its news-gathering assets where they can document the events as they were happening.

            • by Darinbob (1142669)

              The coverage is non-stop is part of the problem. Even if there is nothing new to report in one day about MH370, CNN will spend 20 hours talking about it. I could understand if they spend 5 minutes in every hour talking about the plane, instead they spend 55 minutes every hour talking about it, with 45 minutes of that being speculation and the remaining 10 minutes reviewing the few things we already know.

              There are more important things happening than talking about this missing plane. What about Syria, Ukr

              • What about Fox, BBC, and all the other news shows?

                So CNN is trying something new and risky by focusing all its assets on one story? Can you not just change the channel every now and then to get the other news of the day?

                Let's see where this goes rather than bitching and moaning because CNN has broken free from the herd and is doing something the other news companies aren't doing. Maybe CNN is pioneering a new and better approach. Maybe they are just another pioneer that dies lost in the desert. Either way

        • by MaWeiTao (908546)

          It is newsworthy, but not to the extent that is merits the constant coverage CNN has been giving it.

          But it's easy to see why they're stuck on this particular story. It garners ratings but requires minimal financial and personnel commitment on CNN's part. There's nowhere to send reporters but the local harbor to pointlessly demonstrate some bit of tech. They could send reporters to Malaysia, but why bother when other news agencies are doing the real work for them? The fact that it's politically neutral is an

        • by Darinbob (1142669)

          Is it 24 hours worth of newsworthy? Is it newsworthy enough that it is worth focusing exclusively on that one story while ignoring everything else that's happening in the world? If they can spend all their time on this mystery, then should they also spend all their time on other more mundane mysteries? Can't they just spend 10 seconds every day saying "sorry, no new information on MH370 today, we now return you to our WWIII coverage"?

      • by unimacs (597299)
        It's newsworthy because in this age of constant surveillance it's amazing that anything like a commercial airliner can just disappear.
    • Re:Where's Waldo? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Ceriel Nosforit (682174) on Tuesday May 06, 2014 @08:05AM (#46927637)

      According to the Australians I talk to, all of Australian politics is a bad joke right now.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        According to the Australians I talk to, all of Australian politics is a bad joke right now.

        Australian Politics have always been a bad joke, except for Aboriginals for whom Australian politics have long been a very cruel one.

    • by rossdee (243626)

      Where's Waldo?

      He had an orbital habitat called Freehold (according to R A Heinlein)

      The book "Waldo & Magic Inc is available as an Ebook from Baen

      • by ah.clem (147626)

        He had an orbital habitat called Freehold (according to R A Heinlein)

        Or "Wheelchair", if being disparaging. Great read - "Waldo & Magic, Inc." has been a constant re-read of mine every 3-4 years since I was a kid.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Tell me when they find an actual piece of the aircraft. Until then, shut the fuck up.

  • Where is WALDO?

  • by Megane (129182) on Tuesday May 06, 2014 @08:13AM (#46927675) Homepage
    Seriously, how can "skepticism grow" about something that had almost no basis for belief in the first place? It's more like "miniscule belief evaporates".
    • by jythie (914043)
      Having gotten involved in arguments about it on multiple mainstream news sites, yeah, people really bought into them. Some because they were establishment, some because they described themselves as pro-science, many because they pointed to the company already making money with their technology, etc. The voices saying 'this is bullshit' were mostly drowned out or shouted down.
      • The company hasn't released enough information for you to know it's bullshit. Scientists aren't supposed to debunk things by saying "well I've never heard of anything like that so it must be impossible." Science has a hard time advancing in a climate like that.

        That said, they haven't proven any of their claims. If they had done any of the things they said they've done on their website, they would tell you who their customer was so you could look them up and ask them if it was true. Basic fact-checking like

        • by Sockatume (732728)

          Actually, their web site lists the Ukrainian patent numbers for their technique. Now, you can't just look that up online, but various other surveying firms from Eastern Europe - many of them with the same staff as Georesonance - have included images of the same patents in their presentations and web sites. They describe a form of remote sensing that is categorically bullshit. If you look up the names of some of the people involved with Georesonance's sister companies using the same patents, you will find th

          • I've mentioned [slashdot.org] that remote sensing of this kind would be a spectacular leap forward, if it existed. Of course, the default in absence of any evidence of their methods working (which I doubted from the beginning would ever emerge) is this whole thing being a fraud.
    • True words. It might be easier to believe the Korean ferry sank when it struck the wreckage of MH370.
      And that it was done on purpose to conceal the jet under the ferry.
      This will probably anger Gamera.
      You won't like Gamera when he's angry.

    • Seriously, how can "skepticism grow" about something that had almost no basis for belief in the first place?

      I don't understand it either. It is a fact whether or not the plane is where they claim it is. Either it is there, or it is not (or both, depending on who you ask ). Instead of trying to convince people or being skeptical or whatever, how about someone just look? There's not a free sub or boat capable of scanning the ocean floor that can head out there and look? Why bother having a debate about a fact when you can just verify what the actual fact is?

  • Put up a Deposit (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RichMan (8097) on Tuesday May 06, 2014 @08:19AM (#46927709)

    If the company is so sure they can put up a refundable deposit on the cost of exploring their location. If they are right then they get the deposit back. If they are not right no deposit refund.

    The deposit should cover the cost of putting one unmanned vehicle down on that location.

    Would any of the governments be willing to back that compromise?

  • by Charliemopps (1157495) on Tuesday May 06, 2014 @08:26AM (#46927759)

    Can you blame people for seeking alternative answers? Keep in mind, the agencies discrediting this company were the same agencies that didn't think it necessary to put a simple satellite GPS transponder on jets to keep track of where their quarter of a billion dollar plane is or put about $100 worth of batteries in their blackbox so it would ping for more than a few weeks. This entire mystery wouldn't exist if they'd spent an extra $1000 on a $261 million dollar piece of equipment. It's hard to discredit an idiot when you yourself are an idiot.

    • by jythie (914043) on Tuesday May 06, 2014 @08:32AM (#46927795)
      There is a difference between scammers shilling impossible technology and big companies that are too cheap, short sighted, or lazy to install additional equipment for rare situations. One is a lier, the other is playing the odds and just happened to loose this time.
    • by jittles (1613415)

      Can you blame people for seeking alternative answers? Keep in mind, the agencies discrediting this company were the same agencies that didn't think it necessary to put a simple satellite GPS transponder on jets to keep track of where their quarter of a billion dollar plane is or put about $100 worth of batteries in their blackbox so it would ping for more than a few weeks. This entire mystery wouldn't exist if they'd spent an extra $1000 on a $261 million dollar piece of equipment. It's hard to discredit an idiot when you yourself are an idiot.

      Extra batteries would increase the size and weight of the blackbox. The design costs, testing costs, and fuel costs of transporting a larger box would likely far exceed $1000 for every plane produced. I'm not saying you're being unreasonable, just that you are underestimating the costs involved. The 777 had all of the equipment it needed to report its location to a satellite on a regular basis. Older planes may not have all that equipment, however.

    • Can you blame people for seeking alternative answers?

      Yes. But then, unlike you, I'm dealing in facts rather than pulling nonsense out my my nether regions.

      • Can you blame people for seeking alternative answers?

        Yes. But then, unlike you, I'm dealing in facts rather than pulling nonsense out my my nether regions.

        I see no facts in your post. :-p

        Also, if you had a missing relative lost at sea, you might start dealing in lots of nonsense. Tragedy has that affect on people when they are left with little to no information about what's happening to them. Which was the point of my post.

        • I see no facts in your post.

          If you can't grasp what I implied about your statements, it becomes even easier to grasp why you posted such nonsense.

          Tragedy has that affect on people when they are left with little to no information about what's happening to them. Which was the point of my post.

          If that was your point - why did you say nothing whatsoever to indicate that was your point? Instead you relied on made up bullshit to throw baseless mud at the agencies.

    • $100 worth of batteries will cost several million dollars worth of fuel over the life of an aircraft. Plus a few hundred thousand for the added maintenance, testing, and engineering. It's not the unit cost of the equipment, it's the cost it takes to actually fly that equipment halfway around the world on a regular basis. There is a reason next day air shipping on a 50 lb box is a couple hundred dollars.

    • by bobbied (2522392)

      Can you blame people for seeking alternative answers? Keep in mind, the agencies discrediting this company were the same agencies that didn't think it necessary to put a simple satellite GPS transponder on jets to keep track of where their quarter of a billion dollar plane is or put about $100 worth of batteries in their blackbox so it would ping for more than a few weeks. This entire mystery wouldn't exist if they'd spent an extra $1000 on a $261 million dollar piece of equipment. It's hard to discredit an idiot when you yourself are an idiot.

      It's actually worse than that. ALL the stuff you need (except for the extra batteries for the black boxes) was already on the aircraft. The only thing they needed was to pay the $15K/year subscription fees so they could get the maintenance data from the aircraft in flight, anywhere in the world.

    • put about $100 worth of batteries in their blackbox so it would ping for more than a few weeks.

      When was the last time we lost a large commercial jetliner for so long that the batteries ran out before we picked up the ping? When was the last time we had one fly so far off its planned flight path, intentionally evading radar, and probably crashed half way around the globe from its intended destination? This case is so out of the ordinary, it wouldn't have made sense to plan for it (up until now). Sure, lets throw another $100 worth of batteries into it. But what if that wasn't enough? Lets throw anothe

    • by tompaulco (629533)

      This entire mystery wouldn't exist if they'd spent an extra $1000 on a $261 million dollar piece of equipment.

      That's not true. There are already several things on the plane and off that could have been used to determine where the plane was. On the plane, they were turned off. Who's to say they wouldn't have turned off another piece of installed equipment?
      Off the plane, nobody bothered to track it with information that was available. Probably because nobody thought it would disappear, and it wasn't about to run into somebody else's plane.

  • I've already posted that [slashdot.org] before, but anyway, I'll tell it again:

    A search on their patent refs leads nowhere except to their site.

    This remind me the Great Oil Sniffer Hoax [wikipedia.org]

    Besides, if they were able to do what they claim, they would better look for gold in sunken ships and tell no one.
    Their imaginary references are as old as 2003 with a site born in 2014... really ?

    Face it: this is a hoax, at best, and more likely a scam.

  • I found it odd that the plane's axis was on a perfect north / south line. To me it looks exactly like there is a few "pixel" (or whatever the individual data points are) anomaly in a vertical line, probably from whatever sensing instrument generated the raw data. It reminds me of the type of wildly divergent data points you see when a gamma ray hits a sensor type thing. Then all the various "shapes" they produce from the data that supposedly represent the different types of metal, etc, are merely the res

    • by Sockatume (732728)

      If the patents behind the technique are accurate, the "sensing instrument" is a print-out of satellite imagery that is then put in a bag with some blank film and subjected to abuse at a gamma-ray source. The previously-blank film is then developed.

      Posting this to prevent me from exercising mod points on an article I submitted. That's just too much power for one person.

    • I found it odd that the plane's axis was on a perfect north / south line.

      Yeah. That was a big "get real" indicator for me as well.

    • There's no data. It's a fraud.
  • Skepticism grows? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Given that I dismissed the original claim because it was so obviously bogus and a complete waste of effort to investigate any further, I don't see how anything has changed.

    More like "skepticism grows in the amazingly gullible mass media that originally gave this silly report any attention".

    • This is just "normal news cycle". First they tout some small report and describe it as an amazing new technology that can solve Mystery X. They bring on pundit after pundit describing the technology and wondering why the officials are ignoring such an obviously useful tool. When they've wrung all the airtime they can out of the story, they switch to "debunk mode" and show how the technology is garbage and the people behind it are scammers who are wasting our time and money. Then pundit after pundit come

  • Watch as CNN devotes a week of reporting to a company that specializes in clairvoyance and Remote Viewing to tell us where the plane went. Following that, an interview with the leader of the Raëlians to tell us exactly which aliens abducted them, as well as a special segment on lizard people.

  • by aepervius (535155) on Tuesday May 06, 2014 @09:46AM (#46928641)
    Skepticism was all high from those which took the extra step of *checking* what georesonnance pretended to be doing. We aren't speaking of P3C flying over the bengal bay and detecting something, we are speaking of a company pretending that magnetic field (as small as needing a P3C boom M.A.D. to be detected in normal usage) left enough trace on a photo to detect something (or heck a negative) that was BS from the start.
    • by Darinbob (1142669)

      The people who think this idea has some validity never actually read far enough to learn what the idea actually was.

  • A friend of mine, a former pilot, told me an interesting theory. There is no interest whatsoever in "finding" the plane, just for the reason that if not found, there are no compensations due to the family of the victims...
    • There was an article a couple of weeks back around the time the pings were supposedly detected where the Malaysian government wanted to start the process of declaring the passengers dead so the compensation process could start and the families threw their toys out of the cot.

      The decision to declare the passengers dead is independent of finding the wreckage and can be done without proof of death, although having the passengers show up alive later can be embarrassing and difficult to correct. There is an agr

  • If any government entity finds this plane I don't think they will tell anyone else. Wherever it is is the perfect hiding place.
  • Latest efforts are focusing in on 2 passengers, a Doctor "Doc" Brown and his apprentice, a Mr. Martin "Marty" McFly. Rumor has it the 2 carried on enough batteries to generate 1.21 gigowatts of electricity, and that the plane slowed to a dangerous 88 miles per hour just before it went missing.

"No job too big; no fee too big!" -- Dr. Peter Venkman, "Ghost-busters"

Working...