• MH370 speculation has become excessive recently. Metabunk is not a forum for creating theories by speculation. It's a forum for examining claims, and seeing if they hold up. Please respect this and keep threads on-topic. There are many other forums where speculation is welcome.

Need 3/8/14 Andaman Sea Sat Photos to Verify Malaysia Woman Saw Downed MH370

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Here's a practical illustration. I stuck a 1" white cross on a fence that I stood 15 feet from, and 10 feet to the side. If you size this image so it's about a extended handspan (8" at arms length) wide on screen, then that's what I saw:

It stands out starkly on the dark fence, but we have no haze or the scintillating ocean, or clouds, and this is the best case distance. Here's a more realistic offset:

And here it is with simulated haze: The "plane" is still there in the center of the image.


And here is a photo of a nearby plane, taken at the exact same focal length. This is a 737 at around 35,000 feet, maybe 20 miles away.


Here's the same plane with a much bigger magnification:
 
Last edited:

Bill

Senior Member.
a 200 foot object at 35,000 feet is the same as a 1 inch object at 175 inches (one inch at 15 feet). Quite recognizable.

However you'll notice that most planes you see at the head of contrails (meaning they are at a similar altitudeto 35,000 feet) look a lot smaller than that - and are often invisible, which is because most planes are not flying directly over your head. But if a 777 does fly over your head at 35,000 feet, then you can see that it is a plane quite well, weather depending.

So yes, it's possible to see a plane that is 35,000 feet, or even 50,000 feet away. However you need to factor in:
  1. Haze, which makes it harder to see
  2. Clouds
  3. Reflections off the sea, waves, etc.
  4. Other things like oil tankers, cargo boats, garbage
  5. She might have made it up
  6. She might have dreamed it
  7. It's highly unlikely that the plane would have gone over the exact location.
  8. Those are busy waters, so it's highly unlikely that nobody else saw anything.
While it it possible to see a plane, it seem vastly more likely that she did not.
One thing you left off your list that makes a big difference is individual visual acuity. We always assume that the people making these claims have 20/20 vision or are wearing their glasses at the time.
 

zebra100

Member
a 200 foot object at 35,000 feet is the same as a 1 inch object at 175 inches (one inch at 15 feet). Quite recognizable.

However you'll notice that most planes you see at the head of contrails (meaning they are at a similar altitudeto 35,000 feet) look a lot smaller than that - and are often invisible, which is because most planes are not flying directly over your head. But if a 777 does fly over your head at 35,000 feet, then you can see that it is a plane quite well, weather depending.

So yes, it's possible to see a plane that is 35,000 feet, or even 50,000 feet away. However you need to factor in:
  1. Haze, which makes it harder to see
  2. Clouds
  3. Reflections off the sea, waves, etc.
  4. Other things like oil tankers, cargo boats, garbage
  5. She might have made it up
  6. She might have dreamed it
  7. It's highly unlikely that the plane would have gone over the exact location.
  8. Those are busy waters, so it's highly unlikely that nobody else saw anything.
While it it possible to see a plane, it seem vastly more likely that she did not.

That's the exact things I want to hear. It depends on credibility of the woman. According to the Low Definition Image above that day, visibility was quite well ( the Sat images were taken during the day, I suppose). The woman claimed saw some ships and boats before she saw the plane. She claimed she never sleep during flights ( maybe scared) always gazing out of windows. And she didn't know (and no one on the plane knew) the MH370 was missing). She had witnesses proved that she woke them up to see the airplane and they all laughed her off. And she called Flight Attendant she told her to shut the window and get some sleep. She told his son(policeman) the story after landing at Kuala Lumpur at 7 pm that's when he urged her to file police report, and then her friends on the plane starting to believe her, most importantly, that time no one revealed the military radar data, all the rescue teams were in South China Sea searching and no one ever mentioned Adanman Sea and how about that. And this woman has ten children. She said she just came back from pilgrim and would never lie. That's why I think her story is quite convincing and need to check out.

Anyone has sources on the map?
 
Last edited:

zebra100

Member
One thing you left off your list that makes a big difference is individual visual acuity. We always assume that the people making these claims have 20/20 vision or are wearing their glasses at the time.
I believe most old people are far sighted (means they can see quite clear in far distance.) I myself is short-sighted, but I always see all kinds of ships, boats very clearly at 35000 ft level with glasses--- and I assume this woman has a very good sight----otherwise she would even not interested to watch out of the window because she would see nothing interesting
 

zebra100

Member
I hate Tomnod is that they assign you to do whatever. You even don't know where are you look at and what date the image was from. They think that will bring the candid view which is not. And by that they kill a lot of curiosity, incentive and enthusiasm ( which are the foundation of any endeavor ).
 

zebra100

Member
Here's a practical illustration. I stuck a 1" white cross on a fence that I stood 15 feet from, and 10 feet to the side. If you size this image so it's about a extended handspan (8" at arms length) wide on screen, then that's what I saw:

It stands out starkly on the dark fence, but we have no haze or the scintillating ocean, or clouds, and this is the best case distance. Here's a more realistic offset:

And here it is with simulated haze: The "plane" is still there in the center of the image.


And here is a photo of a nearby plane, taken at the exact same focal length. This is a 737 at around 35,000 feet, maybe 20 miles away.


Here's the same plane with a much bigger magnification:



According to these tests, I pretty sure this woman could have seen a plane big as 777 size like MH370 and the contrast of dark blue sea would be better than the light blue sky with sun light direct on to the plane and reflect to the eye above.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
She said she just came back from pilgrim and would never lie.

It depends on credibility of the woman.
It's not so much about her and her credibility or that she may be lying, it's more about human perception and how good it is at filling in gaps in information, or being fooled by simple arrangements and shades of light and dark objects, especially at a large distance.
It seems really unlikely given Mick's demonstration that she was able to distinguish the shape of a tail and wing and floats on the side and also determine it to be submerged in the water at six miles. Much more likely she was tricked by arrangements of reflected light, perhaps around a legitimate object. She also doesn't metnion how long she was looking at it, was it a second out of the corner of her eye, three seconds, thirty?
It would be negligent not to have some form of follow up searching in that area, but I think it has been and nothing was found, so it must be reasonable to assume it was a false impression.
 

Balance

Senior Member.
She had witnesses proved that she woke them up to see the airplane and they all laughed her off. And she called Flight Attendant she told her to shut the window and get some sleep
Sorry if it was previously mentioned, but have these other witnesses since verified these events? It would give her story more credence if they now portray some doubt in what they originally dismissed as delusion If, however, they still maintain she was "seeing things", then I think we can be pretty sure she was mistaken.
 

Bill

Senior Member.
I believe most old people are far sighted (means they can see quite clear in far distance.) I myself is short-sighted, but I always see all kinds of ships, boats very clearly at 35000 ft level with glasses--- and I assume this woman has a very good sight----otherwise she would even not interested to watch out of the window because she would see nothing interesting
You can't generalize like that. As I've aged my major problem has been astigmatism. You also can't make that assumption about her motives for looking out the window, she just may believe that looking at blurry objects is better than looking at nothing at all.
 

NoParty

Senior Member.
As usual, Mick's "practical illustration" is spot on, providing some useful perspective (literally)
in a format that is accessible and easy to understand. Kudos, Mr. West.

On the other hand, his overt use of the cross is just example #561 of his relentless campaign to convert everyone here to Christianity! ;)
 

zebra100

Member
I know, I know. Everyone here is sure this woman is short sighted, blurring sights, illusions maybe drunk-- oh I forgot, she couldn't drink, well hallucinations---(though I'm not sure why she hallucinating an airplane instead of an angel, a bird, an elephant or even a wise guy). So everyone is heading to Indian Ocean--good luck!

Well, you know what, I'm heading Andaman Sea until I'm sure this is bogus.
 
Last edited:

zebra100

Member
And I will interview this woman and check out her sights and ask her what she really saw. Fact is more powerful than 1,000 wise guys sitting there hallucinating:)
 

zebra100

Member
She said she saw a wing and tail, not a plane.

And her honesty is not the only question here, it's her skill as a plane-in-the-sea spotter.

Let's record what exactly the news said: "But mother of 10 Mrs Latife Dalelah, 53, insisted she saw a silver object in the shape of an aircraft on the water as she was flying from Jeddah to Kuala Lumpur." Raja Dalelah said she took another look and was sure it was an aircraft in the ocean.

And then, "I know what I saw. I am convinced that I saw the aircraft."

So it was a shape of plane, not only wing and tail.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...an-Islands-day-disappeared.html#ixzz2xnafEO9S
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
 
Last edited:

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
 

Balance

Senior Member.
 

zebra100

Member
The FBI has completed of review of the in-home flight simulator that belonged to the captain of the missing Malaysia Airlines passenger jet and found “nothing suspicious whatsoever.”
And the fleet of ships and planes plowed Indian Ocean from the scientific analysis for a week and yet to find one single piece of debris. "It could take months, it could take years." "At the end of the investigations, we may not even know the real cause".....

That's great. I'm going to Kuala Lumpur this weekend.
 
Last edited:

zebra100

Member
More detailed analysis here: http://skyjuiceiswater.blogspot.com/2014/03/i-saw-missing-malaysia-airlines-flight.html

And apparently the blogger didn't notice that boarding pass picture actually showed the boarding pass of the woman seat was 40A, which is on left hind side,so the only direction she could see was left (north) side of the route--and we can eliminate the blogger's south side Tomnod spotting assumption. Also, the woman said she saw islands before seeing the plane. There were only those Andaman Islands there so it narrows down quite bit of the searching area. Any maps that day there? 2:30PM time seemed a bit early but who knows which local time she was looking at?

Also, the Lanzhou air photo took there is one of the most polluted city in China --I stayed there for times and air above Andaman Sea should have been much cleaner
 
Last edited:

zebra100

Member

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Do you know what areas were actually searched there? They were looking as far as I know, so they would likely have spotted something if there was something there, unless they were in a different area.
 

zebra100

Member
I believed they searched the area like 3 maybe 4 days later, and by that time if there had been MH370, it had long sunk into the deep water. No report that they used the FDR ping finder to tow through the region, though. If it was a perfect ditch like "Hudson Miracle" US Airway flight 1549, then there would be hardly any debris left then.
 
Last edited:

zebra100

Member
The funny thing in this incident is that the only eye witnesses (even extremely few) ali didn't account. One had a New Zealander showed his passport number to report of sighting of mid air fire. We had Malaysians saw a low flying jet in the middle of that night. We have several witnesses seeing Jet flying over Maldives Island Kudahuvadhoo, then we have this woman saw a downed plane lying in Andaman Sea. All we depend on is the damned "scientific analysis" of pinging response. Nobody would think this ping thing could have gone total wrong or manipulated?

Now if we assume all these witnesses accounts are solid, what the picture we have? First, there was a fire or explosion occurred, but didn't destroy the plane (the guy said something fell as a whole but didn't say it reached the ground or water): then we have military radar spotted erratic flying patterns turning, low altitude, then high over limit altitude, then lower again---if this was caused by uncontrollable or half controllable plane? And we have Malaysia locals heard low flying airplane mid night over Malaysian Peninsula. Then 9:15 am Malaysian time showed up at Maldives Island Kudahuvadhoo-- we assume that military radars didn't pick up an extremely low flying jumbo, then 2:30 pm some woman spotted it at Andaman Sea.

What this whole picture tell us? Is this telling us this plane was circling in an irregular untrollable pattern and not as these experts assumed it was flying out of a straight line?
 
Last edited:

zebra100

Member
Unless they locate the wreckage or find the black box, the remote possibility of this clue still can't be deserted.
 

zebra100

Member
Just came back from Europe, taking almost a dozen flights. Tried to see if possible to detect an airplane on sea at 33,000 feet high. Luckily, I didn't see any airplane on the water, but I saw a lot of wind mills at sea level---you know what: with the white color, I could easily see the blades clearly turning lazily. And normal commercial windmill blades are from 65-150 feet--- there were a few as long as 300 feet, but I don't believe I saw those and my flight height mostly at 36,000 feet. Angles normally within 45 degrees----Conclusion: Sighting an airplane at sea level from 33,000 feet is not that difficult with normal sight ( I mentioned before: I'm very short-sighted with correct glasses) and normal weather conditions ( I actually saw those often in light haze weather) especially if it painted white.

On the other hand, now we have company claimed they could see the plane underwater; another Aussie businessman claimed he saw airplane underwater when he flew over eastern sea over Malaysia.... Oh, well, I definitely need to see this Malaysia woman---no one interviews her again? Or is she mysteriously vanished from public sights? I searched, not a word, not a single report ever since that report--wierd.

From the most recent Malaysia report:


and compare to this:



See how close the woman spot the downed airplane and the last radar detected MH370 locations were? As for the pings.... uhm, tell me about the pings, don't let me go into conspiracy theories...
 

MikeC

Closed Account

What this whole picture tell us? Is this telling us this plane was circling in an irregular untrollable pattern and not as these experts assumed it was flying out of a straight line?

possibly.

also possibly the witnesses saw other aircraft, or no aircraft at all and only illusions. Or a mix of the 2.

The only thing it tells us FOR CERTAIN is that the witnesses do not give us enough information to know what actually happened.
 

zebra100

Member
possibly.

also possibly the witnesses saw other aircraft, or no aircraft at all and only illusions. Or a mix of the 2.

The only thing it tells us FOR CERTAIN is that the witnesses do not give us enough information to know what actually happened.

That's true. There is no more follow up by either media, police and government. No more interviews, no lie detection test, no detailed questioning about the sight, where the location exactly, what kind of shape of the plane, what detailed color, what direction it faced, eye-sight of the woman-these are basics to determine the reliability of her story. And that's wierd.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
Because the witness statements do not actually tell us what happened.

"I saw an aircraft in the Andaman sea" does not tell us what happened.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
question was for @zebra100 for this statement...

There is no more follow up by either media, police and government. No more interviews, no lie detection test, no detailed questioning about the sight, where the location exactly, what kind of shape of the plane, what detailed color, what direction it faced, eye-sight of the woman-
How do you know there's been no follow-up? Has she said so?
 
is it possible that MH370 was travelling at a very low altitude and much lower speed than their plane when she saw it? That would explain how she could see it clearly (and still have impression it's standing in the water) and still fit Inmarsat pings.
 

zebra100

Member
is it possible that MH370 was travelling at a very low altitude and much lower speed than their plane when she saw it? That would explain how she could see it clearly (and still have impression it's standing in the water) and still fit Inmarsat pings.
Not possible. She saw it 3/8/14 abt 14:30 local time. By then, MH370 already total dead.
 

zebra100

Member
Newest analysis: here

"The next, and apparently normal standby signal exchange between MH370 and the satellite 73 minutes later occurs at a point calculated by the official investigation to be only 195 miles further northwest and immediately prior to the jet turning south.
However at the speed assumed by the official inquiry, MH370 would have covered that distance in a straight line in 21 minutes leaving 52 minutes of flight time unaccounted for."

52 minutes uncounted for such a jumbo plane within that 192 miles range is almost unbelievable: let me wonder the total authenity of the pings generated from then on was really from MH370 or else. And remember, a very short line to link the arc is also possible if you make the route much north than the Inmarsat drawn line

The sister of the captain concerned stated:“He was just a man who took so much to aviation. He loved aviation, he spent a lot of his funds buying model airplanes...." makes really wonder
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Patrick Gonzalez Need help explaining: NASA images of Earth from 2017 eclipse show different shadow sizes Flat Earth 3
S Need help to identify an object in the sea Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 1
Pumpernickel Need Debunking: Foucault's Pendulum debunked through Mach's principle (the Earth is a static object in the center of the Universe) Science and Pseudoscience 16
H Need Debunking: Hernando County platforms from more than 10 miles Flat Earth 9
Qulaey Two problems need help debunking and debating tips? please. Flat Earth 9
mudr0 Why do spacesuit-wearing astronauts need blankets after returning to Earth? Science and Pseudoscience 5
mudr0 Need Debunking: Video claiming zigzaggin objects and movement prove EVA filmed in pool General Discussion 33
vooke Need debunking: Writings in the sky Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 11
Bunkmeister Need help with calculating vertical speed of ascending shadow at sunset Flat Earth 13
ConfusedHominid Need Debunking (Claim): Metabunk Curve Calculator Does Not Calculate for Angular Size Flat Earth 13
MikeG Police Don't Need HS Diploma General Discussion 1
Truthful New published physics article points out NIST limitations and need for new investigation. Conspiracy Theories 3
SabreSaint Need Debunking: CERN To Recreate Big Bang Science and Pseudoscience 26
vooke Need debunking:Ebola conspiracies video Conspiracy Theories 10
M Need help debunking this [Low Altitude Survey Flight] Contrails and Chemtrails 6
A Need explanation: What kind of plane was that? Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 6
derwoodii [Debunked] Jeff Rothschild. In order to finalize the New World Order we need a 3rd world war [Fake] Quotes Debunked 6
SabreSaint Need Debunking: Blackwater Deployed To Ukraine? Conspiracy Theories 37
Clock Debunked: "All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the NWO" Quotes Debunked 12
H Need someone savvy on the holocaust Conspiracy Theories 36
zebra100 Newest Sighting of MH370 in Bengal Bay & Andaman Sea Area Flight MH370 12
Pete Tar MH370: Debunked: Image of plane over Andaman Islands on Mapbox Map Flight MH370 36
P Debunked: 7 Alleged photos of aliens UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 1
DasKleineTeilchen 2,400 "new" unseen 9/11 photos found at estate sale, june 2019 9/11 12
Mick West "Golden Orb" Daytime Reflective Sphere UFOs in Photos UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 42
Mick West Infrared Photos of Clouds and Contrails Images and Videos: Contrails, Skies, and Aviation 17
chrono117 How to Debunk Flat Earth Without Relying on NASA or Photos Flat Earth 42
creatonez Explained: Why the Earth does not look oblate in photos from space Flat Earth 0
Mick West Strange Lights in Phone Photos - Flash Reflection from Window UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 0
Mick West Some New-ish WTC7 Photos (and video?) Corner Damage 9/11 6
tadaaa Debunked: Fake photos-Novichok attack Russian 'agents' (side by side gates) General Discussion 34
Priyadi Explained: Why We Don't See Satellites in Photos Taken From The ISS Flat Earth 1
Mick West WTC7 South Side Photos 9/11 2
George Tasker Using pin hole lenses to debunk CGI Rebuttals of Photos of Earth Curvature Flat Earth 7
Mick West Debunked: "FBI releases 27 classified photos of 9/11 Pentagon attacks" [Not New] 9/11 8
Mick West The P900 Rippling Orb Effect & Taking Photos of Venus Flat Earth 23
Mick West Contrails Hidden In 1950s and 1960s Family Photos Images and Videos: Contrails, Skies, and Aviation 2
Mick West Sunset Photos with "Angel Wings" Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 9
Mick West Explaining the Ghost Boy in the Back Seat Photo with Occam's Razor UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 99
Mick West P900 Plane and Contrails Photos and Video Images and Videos: Contrails, Skies, and Aviation 17
Mick West How Do You Take Good Photos of High Altitude Planes and Contrails? Images and Videos: Contrails, Skies, and Aviation 1
Mick West How to take Photos of the ISS (International Space Station) with a P900 Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
Jonathan Evans Explained: Jupiter Photos look the same [Composite photo] Flat Earth 5
Mick West Space Station Photos Disprove the "Flat Earth" Theory Flat Earth 110
Mick West Photos in Middelveen's & Stricker's Morgellons papers that look like Stellate Trichomes. General Discussion 8
Leifer Jet ID....the underside, from photos/videos Contrails and Chemtrails 3
G Are these old photos of contrails? Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 18
MikeG Debunked: Fukushima Causing Bloody Tumors in Fish [Old Photos] Science and Pseudoscience 15
deirdre Debunked: Police took photos before attending to wounded Sandy Hook 1
Trailblazer Cloud Forms, 1949, British Air Ministry Images and Videos: Contrails, Skies, and Aviation 2
Related Articles


















































Election 2020

Related Articles

Top