Conspiracy Theory: MH370 was shot down by the US

[john.phil]

Ross Coulthart invited French Journalist Florence de Changy to discuss her new book "The Disappearance Act: The Impossible Case of MH370".

He also held an interview with the Canadian former transportation investigator, Larry Vance (09:12 - 39:04) about his new book "MH370: Mystery Solved" (his claim is that the pilot planned the act, ditched the plane in a controlled manner, and in a specific location, to make it very hard to find).

The interview starts at (39:54) and lasts all the way to the end. Claims from her book and from the interview:

1. (40:45 - 40:53) - Main claim: the plane didn't disappear, it was disappeared (the US did it, including hiding the debris because it was shot down);
2. (41:24 - 45:55) - The plane was en route to Beijing. The US did it because it could. Barack Obama looked guilty (collusion with China);
3. (45:55 - 46:36) - There was a US military exercise around the South China Sea, an AWACS blocked the MH370 signals, and it was possibly shot down with prototype lasers;
4. (46:36 - 47:34) - Code Tango was emitted to signal the plane was hijacked; therefore, both pilot and co-pilot are in the clear;
5. (47:55 - 51:24) - The pilot didn't do it because he was a good person;
6. (51:24 - 52:05) - The Chinese government shared satellite images of the debris, but later dismissed it (at the US request, to hide the existence of debris);
7. (52:05 - 53:21) - There were a lot of witnesses on the East coast of Malaysia claiming to have heard strange noises, and seen fragments on fire falling from the sky;
8. (53:22 - 56:21) - Reunion Island flaperon was planted because it was found too far (~5000km) and too late (~500days), the waves should have sunk any debris within 50 days. Debris cannot drift 7 to 10 miles/day (net distance) towards a specific destination;
9. (56:21 - 57:10) - The flaperon was planted because Australian researchers claim the barnacle growth on the flaperon is consistent with 4 months at sea, not over 16 months;
10. (57:11 - 58:38) - The flaperon was planted because French researchers claim the barnacles grew on the wrong side of the presumed waterline;
11. (58:38 - 01:02:28) - The US did it to prevent a precious cargo (US drone shot down in Afghanistan) from being delivered to China, but the plan was to intercept the flight, quickly take the cargo, and let the plane resume the flight. However, the pilot refused to cooperate.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lW2PWwRM3MA

 

[Mendel]

hmmm

• AWACS blocked all transmissions, but
• MH370 sent a "code Tango" to the company, but
• other pilots heard it (couldn't have been a company call then), and
• the "hijacked" aircraft was shot down

That's what I listened to, but presumably there was an operation in the South China Sea to find and clear any remaining debris that was hidden from Russians and Chinese; INMARSAT is in on it, as well as the providers of the data that initially put the aircraft on the Indian ocean; and the African debris is all planted including the stuff that local people built into their huts until a private investigator found it later.

She also seems to think that the barnacles had to have started growing the moment the debris hit the water, when the analysis explains that that only happens when the debris drifts through a specific marine environment.

And she apparently believes that lightweight material with a beehive structure should sink.

I don't believe her.

 

[jarlrmai]

Ross should invite her and Ashton Forbes on to the same show to discuss MH370

https://xkcd.com/966/

 

[Duke]

Ross Coulthart invited French Journalist Florence de Changy to discuss her new book "The Disappearance Act: The Impossible Case of MH370".

He also held an interview with the Canadian former transportation investigator, Larry Vance (09:12 - 39:04) about his new book "MH370: Mystery Solved" (his claim is that the pilot planned the act, ditched the plane in a controlled manner, and in a specific location, to make it very hard to find).

The interview starts at (39:54) and lasts all the way to the end. Claims from her book and from the interview:

1. (40:45 - 40:53) - Main claim: the plane didn't disappear, it was disappeared (the US did it, including hiding the debris because it was shot down);
2. (41:24 - 45:55) - The plane was en route to Beijing. The US did it because it could. Barack Obama looked guilty (collusion with China);
3. (45:55 - 46:36) - There was a US military exercise around the South China Sea, an AWACS blocked the MH370 signals, and it was possibly shot down with prototype lasers;
4. (46:36 - 47:34) - Code Tango was emitted to signal the plane was hijacked; therefore, both pilot and co-pilot are in the clear;
5. (47:55 - 51:24) - The pilot didn't do it because he was a good person;
6. (51:24 - 52:05) - The Chinese government shared satellite images of the debris, but later dismissed it (at the US request, to hide the existence of debris);
7. (52:05 - 53:21) - There were a lot of witnesses on the East coast of Malaysia claiming to have heard strange noises, and seen fragments on fire falling from the sky;
8. (53:22 - 56:21) - Reunion Island flaperon was planted because it was found too far (~5000km) and too late (~500days), the waves should have sunk any debris within 50 days. Debris cannot drift 7 to 10 miles/day (net distance) towards a specific destination;
9. (56:21 - 57:10) - The flaperon was planted because Australian researchers claim the barnacle growth on the flaperon is consistent with 4 months at sea, not over 16 months;
10. (57:11 - 58:38) - The flaperon was planted because French researchers claim the barnacles grew on the wrong side of the presumed waterline;
11. (58:38 - 01:02:28) - The US did it to prevent a precious cargo (US drone shot down in Afghanistan) from being delivered to China, but the plan was to intercept the flight, quickly take the cargo, and let the plane resume the flight. However, the pilot refused to cooperate.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lW2PWwRM3MA

I wonder how this is explained? AWACS (E-3) aircraft have no jamming capabilities, not their mission.

 

[Ann K]

The show "Drain the Oceans" has an episode on the search for the plane. I cannot vouch for any of the details, except to say that I trust National Geographic more than I trust Coulthart and a guest with a book to sell.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myBmq87fJeQ&list=PLivjPDlt6ApQpHCvVSjHJ0rXoT4TJ0ZXh&index=14

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myBmq87fJeQ&list=PLivjPDlt6ApQpHCvVSjHJ0rXoT4TJ0ZXh&index=14

 

[Mendel]

I wonder how this is explained? AWACS (E-3) aircraft have no jamming capabilities, not their mission.

apparently she's peddled that story a year ago on netflix.

She's pulling that statement out of thin air based on a conversation she had with "someone in the military" that told her we were a big jamming platform.

Content from External Source

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/11m1nza/the_new_mh370_documentary_on_netflix_has_a_fair/

although in the netflix version of "MH370 — The Intercept", she claimed it was “poorly documented Motorola electronics equipment” that prompted the action. (See https://www.metabunk.org/threads/al...rtation-videos-hoax.13104/page-13#post-299111 )

 

[JMartJr]

Debris cannot drift 7 to 10 miles/day (net distance) towards a specific destination;

Content from External Source

This struck me as particularly silly. Ocean currents are generally several miles an hour, 7-10 miles a day seems very possible, even allowing for taking a circuitous route as currents tend to move in long curves...

(Image source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Ocean_Gyre#/media/File:Indian_Ocean_Gyre.png)

... rather than the straight line mentioned in the video.

Debris did not, of course, zoom along in a straight line to the point where it would be discovered, it drifted about, propelled by currents (and wind if it projected above the surface), until it happened to be found.

On a whim, I looked up info on "messages in a bottle," to see how far and fast such things have been known to travel. The article quoted below discusses both "kids throw a coke bottle with a note in it into the ocean," and "scientists release floats at a known dates and time and wait to see where they are recovered" type floating objects.

Floating objects may ride gyres (large circulating current systems) that are present in each ocean, and may be transferred from one ocean's gyre to another's.[24] Further, objects may be sidetracked by wind, storms, countercurrents, and ocean current variation.[24] Accordingly, drift bottles have traveled large distances,[17] with drifts of 4,000 to 6,000 miles and more—sometimes traveling 100 miles per day—not uncommon.

Content from External Source

(Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Message_in_a_bottle Emphasis added.)

 

[Ann K]

OT - My father got a wartime (WWII) letter from a friend whose ship paused at the Tonga Islands in the South Pacific. They were then known as the "Tin Can Islands" because that's how they sent the mail: stamped front and back with "please forward" in many languages, sealed in a can, and thrown into the ocean currents. His eventually arrived, but I don't know the percentage that actually made it to their destination.

 

[Ann K]

Debris cannot drift 7 to 10 miles/day (net distance) towards a specific destination;

(quoted)
That "specific destination" isn't "specified" either. There are some places that debris tends to accumulate more than others, but that's a function of the pattern of the ocean currents.

 

[MapperGuy]

As with all good conspiracy theories this one would have required a cast of tens of thousands of people, from multiple nations, all working together and all performing their tasks perfectly, and with perfect timing. All or whom have kept their mouths shut ever since. An impressive feat if this was an ad hoc spur-of-the-moment on-the-fly hastily planned thing, that went wrong from the start when the pilots did not cooperate.

How many fishing boats disappeared in the area where it was shot down? Certainly there would have been fishing vessels and merchants ships that might have seen the shoot-down or the debris field before it was cleaned up, that would have to be sunk and their crews/passengers killed. And why would the Chinese cooperate, if the shoot-down deprived them of an interesting intelligence opportunity, not to mention Chinese nationals on board?

And a cover-up involving planting evidence over a span of months/years? Involving yet more hundreds/thousands of potential witnesses who could spill the beans? Far easier to not plant evidence and not call further attention to the mystery.

 

[Mick West]

The US did it because it could.

I'm going to need a little more motive than that....

This is a ridiculous, specious, and error-riddle theory. I'm surprised that even Ross gave it time.

 

[Mendel]

I'm going to need a little more motive than that....

This is a ridiculous, specious, and error-riddle theory. I'm surprised that even Ross gave it time.

He's caught the "government coverup" mind virus which makes people not notice these errors.