Slashdot Mirror
Skepticism Grows Over Claims That MH370 Lies In the Bay of Bengal
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."
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.
Tell me when they find an actual piece of the aircraft. Until then, shut the fuck up.
Where is WALDO?
Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
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 from their eyes.
The line differentiating magazine tabloids and CNN has blurred so badly in the last oh, 2 years (coinciding with this waste of space, btw), and CNN has completely trashed its brand, but does news have to be this slimy and gross to survive?
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".
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
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?
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.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
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.
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 from their eyes.
The line differentiating magazine tabloids and CNN has blurred so badly in the last oh, 2 years (coinciding with this waste of space, btw), and CNN has completely trashed its brand, but does news have to be this slimy and gross to survive?
Why are you limiting this to just CNN?
MSNBC isn't a massive pieces of shit?
FOX isn't a massive piece of shit?
The New York Times isn't a massive piece of shit?
They're ALL massive pieces of shit.
The shit they shovel might just match the shit your brain likes to feed on, though.
I've already posted that 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
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 results their algorithms spit out when given the anomalous data point. The real question is how much actual data there is, and how much of it is being extrapolated by what probably amounts to not much more than image processing type filters.
Better known as 318230.
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 and have accepted/embraced this cartoonish excuse for news-- it's setting the stage for serious and dramatic systemic problems in our democracy.
I remember the shock right after 9/11 when we heard how those "backwards" middle eastern countries like Saudi Arabia believed the attack was perpetrated by the Israelis. And everyone in the US was laughing at how uninformed and ignorant those fools were, but of course they're ruled by dictatorships and have no free media, not like us.
Then like 3 years later a huge majority of Americans thought 9/11 was Iraq's doing. So who are the fools?
This plane thing is an insult and an attack on the very notion of an informed public. The fact that CNN's ratings exploded is as much an indictment of the public itself-- if we wanted something close to actual news enough to watch it, they'd give it to us... So for me, this plane is the symbolic end of a free press in America in any kind of corporate, institutional form. Maybe it died a long time ago, but for me, this travesty really sealed CNN's reputation as just not giving any kind of fuck in the most apparent and sad way.
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".
I used CNN as an example because of the plane thing.
I actually think NYT is still okay, but maybe only relatively speaking, given the alternatives. You can't compare it to CNN or FOX or MSNBC. It has a variety of articles with SOME depth. Not perfect, but not at the level of depravity of the others
NYTimes talks to us like we're in maybe 8th grade. CNN talks to us like we're in preschool. That's not to say NYTimes is without HUGE problems, the worst that comes to mind being its negligence in the ramp up to Iraq war- Judy Miller, who really is a bloody stain on the history of journalism. But relatively speaking, the NYTimes is still the best of what's out there in the larger mass media organizations.
Check the fuselage
so are you honestly trying to tell us that there are folk out there who actualy thought these reports had some kind of weight to them.we realy are screwed long term if there were,it reads like b.s,the company sound like a bunch of shysters and idiot media help circulate crap like this,can we not start fineing press,blogs etc for knowingly circulating b.s ?
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
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.
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.
"So news stations are always hungry for generic filler content (human interest stories, or intense discussion over inconsequential BS"
There are +-200.000 rapes and sexual assaults per year over 500 a day, if they need some "human interest" stories.
And those have 'sex' in it.
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.
The plane is getting the ratings - thats the explaination.
Just as with Fox's obsession with Benghazi. All the old people watching Fox News need something that "proves" Obama stinks and considering the fialings in his admin (NSA spying for one), it kind gives you an idea the values of that generation.
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.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Fact 1. There were two people on the plane headed to Europe. You don't go to Europe via China. . .
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
. .
.
Fact 2. They were flying under assumed names, stolen/purchase passports. They had money and connections..
Fact 3. The airplane made an unscheduled turn off of the flight path via the pilot. Possibly under duress possibly not..
Fact 4. The two people going to Europe were cleared from terroristic activity.
Fact 5. The plane flew for another 5 to 7 hours after the unscheduled turn off of flight path..
Fact 6. The only people capable of flying the brand new aircraft where the pilot and co-pilot. Further course corrections verifies that the pilot survived to the end..
Fact 7. The only people capable of knowing the correct sequence of what to turn off to avoid being detected were the pilot and or co-pilot. Under duress that sequence would not have happened. And this is the most important fact, the pilot was not under duress..
Fact 8. For the plane to make it to Europe even if being hijacked, it would need to be refueled.
Simplest answer to all the facts:.
Pilot was paid to make the unscheduled change in flight. The pilot after years and years of flying was going after his final payday. And it was probably an offer he couldn't refuse..
The pilot knowing that the plane needs to be refueled would know the best places to refuel. The middle east is not the best place to obtain fuel undetected, especially with the presents of military forces and all radar use in the area. They were trying to avoid radar just after takeoff..
Best places to land and refuel, Africa. It is only slightly out of the way to Europe. The one problem, The plane didn't have the range that the pilot thought it had.
The plane was ditched 100 or so miles off the coast of Tanzania, or Madagascar. They ran out of fuel..
You don't go flying an airplane for 5 to 7 hours just to ditch the plane the farthest place from all human existence. 5 to 7 hours is a long time to contemplate your death. Flying for 5 to 7 hours more, there was a destination to get to. Who knows the final destination but they were flying to get somewhere..
If the intention was to commit suicide and take all passengers with you, you do it as quick as you can. People that blow themselves up in a market square, don't walk in order coffee and sit there for 5 to 7 hours waiting for the best time to blow themselves up. You walk in look for the best place and get the job done..
Also why do it out over open water when you can do it near land or on land and make a statement too?
I also said this on April 7th... http://slashdot.org/comments.p....
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 swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
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?
My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
> cruise ship with 10 times as many people
2390 people died on a cruise ship? Which one?
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...
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?
More music, fewer hits
Read the article about out the same scam artist here.
My point again. There was at least one person alive that knew how to fly the airplane that made the course corrections to avoid radar.
You don't avoid radar if you are under duress of a hijacking or looking for an airport to land at because of fire. You are avoiding radar because you don't want to be found. Then again, (as the parent states and the grandparent see differently) maybe the pilot was taking the plane to Africa to sell for parts, and the two people aboard had nothing to do with it.
It will still be found off the coast of Africa because it ran out of fuel.
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.
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 story. Then they added the loud but unstable talk show hosts, like Nancy Grace. And today there's nothing left of it. For a while it was still almost worth the effort to turn on the TV _only_ to watch the scrolling text that had some news (enough to tell you to use the internet to get more info), but even that scrolling bar turned into fluff.
The question is, does cable news merely pander to what the average American wants from news, so that the fault lies with the viewers, or are the news outlets genuinely stupid?
Don't be silly. Most Americans don't even know who Ben Ghazi is.
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.
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 that is a requirement of true journalism. If the company refuses to provide any evidence, the journalist should report the claims as being highly suspicious and call attention to the fact that the company has been unwilling to provide evidence of their claims. Unfortunately, this kind of basic work has been replaced by reporters taking claims made by scammers like this at face value and reporting them as fact.
Nobody. Not even the few African airlines that own 777s buy spare parts without a paper trail documenting every hour of the parts' existence after they've left the factory. That's just how strict the industry is - even in the third world because it (1) is international and (2) only something for the wealthy, anyway. So unless somebody there really badly wants a special tree house or something, the plane has not been stolen. A stolen commercial airliner is a laughable idea, in fact. You cannot do anything with one since you require constant cooperation from a myriad of international agencies to fly it. You could probably not even refuel it. Aviation kerosene is regulated and even if you were able to somehow get your hands on enough of it and trust the quality, your next problem would be getting it onto the tarmac so you could refuel.
I'm too lazy to dig up the link since the terms are too common to google but if you're interested, you should look up the story of how Iran Air bought an Airbus aircraft second hand. The sanctions imposed on Iran only affect trade with the West and they're a fucking government with friendly ties to non-Western governments but despite that they had to jump through hoops to buy an old Airbus. Just so that Iran Air would be able to fly to the handful of international destinations they have with it.
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.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Who would really want a plane anyhow. Unless it's among some of the concepts like "repaint and fly into building", I think that the passengers might be more useful as hostages for ransom or some other such thing.
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.
Monstar L
I will apply The Economic Argument. Countering Undocumented Phenomena (TEACUP)
Ok. Let me just put this 1 million dollars on the table.
Save me the word salad, about your nucleii and whathaveyou, I'm a busy man. I don't care how you say it works. Just do one thing for me.
Find me a seam of Gold or Diamonds or Oil, or whatever the hell you can. Worth more than the content of that large briefcase.
My associates will go there and dig that shit up pronto. Then you get the case.
If this venture is successful, my superiors have authorised me to pay you 50 Billion Dollars for the machine.
Then you won't have to run shitty web sites and wear cheap nasty suits. Ever again! ...In the real world, therefore, Bullshit. Since still wearing cheap suit = Yes.
My point again. There was at least one person alive that knew how to fly the airplane that made the course corrections to avoid radar. You don't avoid radar if you are under duress of a hijacking or looking for an airport to land at because of fire. You are avoiding radar because you don't want to be found. Then again, (as the parent states and the grandparent see differently) maybe the pilot was taking the plane to Africa to sell for parts, and the two people aboard had nothing to do with it. It will still be found off the coast of Africa because it ran out of fuel.
I don't think so. The change of heading could have been planned. The south heading would be similar to both the emergency destination runway's heading and their departing runway heading. Landing large aircraft takes advanced planning and a pilot who was planning to make an emergency landing would be planning for it. You want to land on a long runway, into the wind, and in an emergency you don't want to waste time, so you are going to be planning your flight path, so it's not unusual to get all that punched into the flight director. It could have been that they where planning two way-points or that they knew that from their last way-point the airport/runway would be on a south heading so that's what they set up.
Remember, these guys where professionals. These guys do this stuff in their sleep, the Captain apparently did it for fun when off duty. They knew that their best chance was to get on the ground ASAP and that as they approached their intended destination, things would get very busy. To do this safely it requires a plan and then when things get busy you follow the plan by loading it into the automation as far in advance as you can.
Not to mention that there is zero chance that they'd make it more than halfway from their last known comms point to Africa on the fuel they had left. They might have made southern India... But I measured the distances, the tanks run dry almost exactly halfway to your destination. No knowledgeable person would have attempted that if they intended to snatch the aircraft. But, SURPRISE, the search area North West of Perth is almost exactly the distance where I figure the fuel runs out on the southern heading....
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Surprise... Nothing was found..... Good guess though.
..... Nothing.
I can tell that you are highly knowledgeable about the subject. You may even be in the business. But, all the people searching for the aircraft are also in the business and have come up with
Sometimes being in the business prevents you from thinking outside the box. I'm not in the business. I'm not even that knowledgeable about the subject. To me as I see it, switching off equipment to avoid being tracked, in a certain sequence, not all at the same time, tells me it was planned.
True, pulling fuzes to avoid additional fires is common, but then you pull them all at once, every one of them. Not in a certain sequence. Even if you did start pulling them and it took time to find them all because of a fire, you don't go out of your way after that to avoid radar. If in a fire situation at that point, you are not concerned with radar, as you stated... you are flying the aircraft.
I know with you being in the business or even a pilot yourself, you probably think my theory is unimaginable. But place yourself outside of the box and an outside influence happened that is never likely to happen at all, like money being involved or something else, and the unimaginable happened.
You continue the think the most likely to happen as with everyone else, and nothing has been found at all. Now thinking the most unlikely and what do you get.... something like I am telling you.