Talk:Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 disappearance theories/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

CAPTIO zone

Décrit en détail dans l'article francophone, résultat d'études des spécialistes français Jean-Marc Garot (membre de l'académie de l'air et de l'espace), Michel Delarche avec ingénieurs spécialistes d'Inmarsat:

1. 2016-08-11 publient un livre en français : Le détournement du MH370, ISBN 9791026206415. Je l'ai acheté à bon marché en version numérique chez Amazon. C'est donc bien après la remise du très long rapport malaysien.
2. 2017-10-03 Michel Delarche donne une conférence devant le groupe régional Côte d'Azur de la 3AF, donnant des illustrations publiées dans le livre, dont la zone de recherche réduite méritant d'être explorée, beaucoup plus au Nord que ce qui a été fait jusque là. J'étais à cette conférence.
3. En fin 2017, ils publient le site web CAPTIO détaillant leurs hypothèses et permettant de suivre le navire de recherches. Il contient plusieurs onglets dont l'un porte sur le document détaillé « A plausible trajectory for MH370 ». je l'ai consulté dès cette période, mais celui-ci a évolué au fur et a mesure de résultats plus précis de leur étude avec Inmarsat, d'où la version 3.4 actuelle de janvier 2018.

Par ailleurs, c'est dit dans la version francophone, ils ont eu des interviews dans les medias français dont des émissions de télévision.--Friendly, Kasos_fr (talk) 13:54, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

This is en.wiki. Could you provide a translation? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:09, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Described in detail in the article francophone, result of studies of French specialists Jean-Marc Garot (member of the academy of air and space), Michel Delarche with engineers specialists of Inmarsat:

1. 2016-08-11 publish a book in French: The misappropriation of the MH370, ISBN 9791026206415. I bought it cheaply in digital version at Amazon. It is thus well after the delivery of the very long malaysien report .
2. 2017-10-03 Michel Delarche gives a lecture in front of the regional group Côte d'Azur of the 3AF, giving illustrations published in the book, whose reduced area of ​​research deserves to be explored, much more to the North than what has been done so far. I was at this conference, and had a private diner with him after.
3. At the end of 2017, they published the CAPTIO website detailing their hypotheses and making it possible to follow the research vessel. It contains several tabs, one of which is on the detailed document "A plausible trajectory for MH370". I consulted it at this time, but it has evolved as more accurate results of their study with Inmarsat, hence the current version 3.4 of January 2018.

Moreover, it is said in the French version, they had interviews in French media including TV shows .-- Friendly, Kasos_fr (talk) 13:54, 11 May 2018 (UTC)--Friendly, Kasos_fr (talk) 07:09, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Merci beaucoup, Friendly, Kasos_fr, j'étais trop paresseux. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:08, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

La Reunion and Diego Garcia

It's 24 to 48 hours since the announcement that a large piece of apparent Boeing 777 debris washed up in La Reunion is being sent to France for analysis. 24 to 48 hours seems more than enough time for various allegedly RS media sources to report on conclusions being drawn about this on the Internet. I would expect the obvious one is that, per the maps in our Ocean circulation article, Indian Ocean currents tend to flow from around Diego Garcia (with its American base) towards La Reunion, and do not tend to flow from where everybody was told to search (off Australia) towards La Reunion (or at least it takes a lot longer for them to reach La Reunion from off Australia after circling round about half the Indian Ocean), thus presumably fuelling the Diego Garcia and Shootdown theories. I'm not sufficiently interested to want to go looking for the relevant RS sources myself, but other editors might be, and finding such RS sources would quite likely help them to improve this article, so I just thought I'd mention it here in case any editor is interested. Tlhslobus (talk) 05:40, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Indian Ocean Gyre displays the current flows in the Indian Ocean, and is therefore more specific than the site you quoted. The flow is circular, as in a whirlpool, and it's not inconceivable that debris near the south-western coast of Australia might be carried in a semicircular fashion north and then west to Reunion. It seems incorrect to postulate that the aircraft part could have come only from the Diego Garcia area. Akld guy (talk) 06:59, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the useful Indian Ocean Gyre link. Apart from that, what you said is roughly what I more or less said myself, when I wrote "(or at least it takes a lot longer for them to reach La Reunion from off Australia after circling round about half the Indian Ocean)". And, incidentally, without a knowledge of how fast the currents flow we can't know whether the debris would have had time to reach Reunion from Diego Garcia, let alone Australia (though knowledge of the speeds might also be able to rule in Diego Garcia and rule out Australia, or vice versa if the debris arrived too late to be from Diego Garcia - a further complication is that the gyre reverses direction in winter, so correct calculations would need a lot of expertise). But that's not really the point, which is that Internet theories can be expected to crop up and be reported on in RS media on the basis of information which may or may not be adequate, and if the theory gets mentioned in RS media then it becomes a potential candidate for inclusion in this article. (It is not really our job to try to decide whether a theory is correct or not - we don't do Original Research). Tlhslobus (talk) 07:41, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

In the end I decided to find and add one such RS myself, though that one RS could probably be quoted in relation to several theories, and there are more RS out there. Tlhslobus (talk) 05:25, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Don't forget that surface winds since the time of the crash will also influence the debris flow. It's not a simple matter of getting the ocean currents right. Dcs002 (talk) 10:36, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

The flight was quite obviously shot down en route to Diego Garcia and the subsequent coverup and all information has been classified for national security reasons. (logic) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.207.166.255 (talk) 02:47, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Facts vs. Fiction

The official report from Malaysia basically says apparent intentional diversion as cause of the accident. That implies hijacking by either third party or crew (Malaysia says they feel it was not the crew, but nobody really feels Malaysia is being totally truthful about this accident). There is *no* evidence of fire or equip malfunction, but there is indeed radar tracking evidence that the aircraft was piloted on a diliberate path, with no apparent attempt to land due to malfunction, and no normal communications that would be expected for a malfunction. The Inmarsat satellite data shows the plane went to the Southern Indian Ocean most likely somewhere from 10 South to 40 South on Arc7. The debris of the crash, some three dozen pieces, are being found in Madagascar and Africa as expected for an aircraft crash in the Southern Indian Ocean.

So those are the basic facts. Based on that a (1) Hijacking is possible, (2) a crew Hijacking is possible, the (3) MH370-Captio.net theory is a possibly true hijack story that seems to be corroborated by rumors within Malaysia (although the rumors from Malaysia say the crew was diverting to COCOS or XMAS Islands).

An innocent cause such as unknown fire, unknown mechanical problem, or depessurization/hypoxia is still remotely possible, but not very likely based on the facts. There is zero supporting evidence. Admittedly some books have been written citing such events, but those books are not highly regarded by the experts.

Then we get into the wild conspiracy theories based on not-accepting the evidence. That includes the spoofing or electronic faking of satellite data to fake a flight path to the south, the Maldives theories, the shoot-down theories, Diego Garcia theories, northern flight route theories, alien black hole theories, Cambodia etc.

But what we should be communicating to the public is that the MH370 was a likely criminal act of hijacking, by the someone or some group, possibly including the crew. The introductory comments in this article are out-dated. I think now we do have facts to squelch just about everything except hijacking, unless somebody has some new evidence to disclose. I question the direction and need for this article because I see no merit or need to further confuse the public on MH370. TBILLT (talk) 01:10, 2 December 2018 (UTC)TBILLT

The article is on unofficial theories so even conspiracy theories, if notable, will are listed. If you have a source saying a listed "theory" is not possible/probable for some reasons, or if the source adresses it in some other way (no evidence found etc.), feel free to add such info into the respective sections of the article. WikiHannibal (talk) 18:05, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Merge together satire sections, or delete all together

The sections "Satire about pilot reappearing" and "Pitbull and Shakira" are rather trivial. I don't see how this is in any way relevant or significant.

• So some random tabloid wrote a hoax article about the pilot reappearing. Gives no theory as to why the plane disappeared.
• There was a song that vaguely referenced Malaysia, a plane, and names of people who weren't even on the plane. Okay so...

I would personally delete both - WP:DON'T PRESERVE - but I could abide merging the two together into a new section, titled "Satirical theories" or something. And perhaps fleshing out the pilot reappearance hoax if it was actually significant. Hughpac (talk) 17:10, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Emil Enchev's new theory

Probably some of you know who this guy is. In a recent conversation he suggested the hypothesis that not Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah is the culprit of the disappearance, but the co-pilot, 27-year-old First Officer Fariq Abdul Hamid. He was hijacked MH370 plane in the same way as Andreas Lubitz Germanwings Flight 9525. Scandal with the his fiancé Nadira Ramli probably was the reason for his destructive behavior. Emil Enchev suggests that this woman be subjected to a Polygraph detector with only two question: 1. Did they have problems with her fiance Fariq Abdul Hamid before flight MH370? 2. Did she have sexual relations with the Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah?

Emil Enchev also suggest investigators to question any of the employees, who knew the flight attendants more closely - "Can one of the air hostesses have had sexual contacts with both pilots?" This may also to be the reason Fariq to close himself in the cockpit while Zaharie was in the toilet, and to take control over the plane.

So if he is right - this is the woman which was the reason for MH370 disappearance. And this woman with arrogance and without shame, is silencing what she knows about this case: http://satwinhans.blogspot.com/2009/11/female-pilot-gender-is-not-problem-in.html 79.100.143.139 (talk) 14:22, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Who is Emil Enchev? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:49, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Too much speculation and accusations even for this type of an article, sorry. Any WP:RS? WikiHannibal (talk) 16:25, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Norman Davies

Theory of Norman Davies, Honeywell computer remote hijacking and hiding in Antarctica ice, must be present in this article because Davies is serious historian writing books like Rising '44: The Battle for Warsaw. Davies told his theory in a published book, interviews, and in media listings of conspiracy theories of MH370 he is always listed: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=12191656

https://www.deccanchronicle.com/lifestyle/viral-and-trending/040518/7-conspiracy-theories-malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370-disappearance.html

https://www.theweek.co.uk/mh370/58037/mh370-conspiracy-theories-what-happened-to-the-missing-plane

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-magazine-interview-the-historian-norman-davies-on-conspiracy-theories-the-cold-war-and-his-own-spy-novel-past-8s86qwnpm?wgu=270525_54264_15765170745608_5154128985&wgexpiry=1584293074&utm_source=planit&utm_medium=affiliate&utm_content=22278 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teutonic Mouse (talk • contribs) 06:39, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Electronic hijacking is already covered in the article, added a brief note about Norman Davies. WikiHannibal (talk) 09:02, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

My addition was reverted, which I do not mind, but perhaps it would be best to state the reasons here, so as to guide further possible edits concerning Davies. WikiHannibal (talk) 23:27, 17 December 2019 (UTC)