On Wednesday, March 19, 2014 11:10:11 AM UTC-4, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,

"Robert Green" wrote:



But I am not a news organization or even a journalist. I am allowed to

posit possibilities. (-:



--





Finally a great summation on MH370



The problem is, all of them start out with Å‚itÄ…s possible thatË› (rather

than Å‚the facts indicateË›), from which a thinking person could only

conclude what Å‚mightË› have happenedÂ*with no better chance of knowing

what actually did. Worse, once the boundaries are stretched to include

Å‚possibleË› and Å‚mightË› as operative terms, you no longer have an

investigation at all; rather, you have a piece of creative writing.



http://jethead.wordpress.com/2014/03...he-land-of-oz/

--



I agree that's a good article. There has been so much misinformation
and crazy speculation. But it's not just limited to the uninformed.
There is a 777 pilot who's also an aviation magazine columnist who's
been all over TV sticking to his theory that it could have been a fire
that explains it.

A fire? Really? Sure, we all know that fires have brought down
airliners before. But for a fire to have been the cause of this,
you'd have to believe it was a very magical fire from the start.
Everything was perfectly normal until just a few minutes before
all ATC contact was lost. So, you'd have to believe that a fire
somehow resulted in losing the transponders and voice communication
at the same time, without any ability to issue even a short mayday. And
curiously, that occurs at precisely the point where the plane is
handed off from Malaysian ATC to Vietnam ATC, over water, near the
limit of radar, ie the perfect spot to pull a planned disappearance.

Then he says they made that left turn to head to an airport
on the other coast of
Malaysia with a 13,000 ft runway? Other pilots have pointed out
that there were other runways that they would have passed by,
plenty long enough to land the 777, to fly 140 miles farther. Who
would do that with a plane on fire? And then we have radar images
of it at the Straits, performing a zig-zag to waypoints, ending
with it perfectly aligned to the flight paths toward India. That
sounds like a fire? And then said fire, which was so bad that it
incapacitated the crew, killed key communication systems, etc,
left the plane capable of flying on it's own for 6 more hours,
including obviously changing course yet again from the course it
was on when military radar contact was lost?

So, I think you have more than just random people making wild
speculation. You have opinions from experts that don't conform
to logic from the existing facts.