Boeing MH370 disappears in flight with 239 passengers

[Atlas]

Posted by Roisin (here)
Supposing the Malaysian authorities [...] were not lying and were, in fact, telling the truth.

What !!? How could this man possibly tell the truth...?

[Flash]

Please describe, i do not understand the comment Buares, we must be looking at the pictures with different cultural lenses, because I do not see what you probably see from the comments - what is it?

Posted by buares (here)

Posted by Roisin (here)
Supposing the Malaysian authorities [...] were not lying and were, in fact, telling the truth.

What !!? How could this man possibly tell the truth...?

[Atlas]

No one seems to believe the "official version" of the Malaysian authorities. This is the minister of defence, he is the 'Malaysian authority' (in case of a terrorist/hijacking plot) and he is willingly and obviously lying to us and keeping us in the dark... (Forget about it, I was just kidding. )

[Operator]

Posted by panopticon (here)

Posted by Tesseract (here)
Was just watching the press conference with Angus Houston, he repeatedly tried to compare the difficulty in verifying an audio signal with that of verifying a visual signal - which is a complete nonsense. When asked what else could present a 37.5 kHz signal he refused to answer the question. When asked what was the frequency of the signal detected by the Australian ship he refused to answer the question, he was then asked again by someone else and admitted he didn't know that yet, and didn't even acknowledge that the frequency was of importance.

Yeah, saw the same report. My interpretation of what Houston was saying when it came to comparing the visual and audio was to let the media know to back off and let the search teams do their job. The comparison was not meant, I don't think, to relate any similarity between the visual search and the signals detected other than there could be false leads that need to be treated carefully. He repeated a number of times that he would like unconfirmed reports to not be reported as fact so as to not harm the family & friends of those missing.

I agree that he didn't answer the question about what else could produce a signal @ 37.5 kHz (I thought that frequency was chosen because there wasn't anything else that uses it [natural or not]) however saying he refused to answer what frequency the signal was detected by Ocean Shield I think misrepresents what he said. He said he hadn't been advised what the frequency was however re-iterated that the signal detected was viewed as a potential lead. He also said that the information had only just been reported to him and he was relating it so as to explain why the Ocean Shield wasn't moving straight away to the Haixun 01's position.

-- Pan

Please keep in mind that the 'reception' of an underwater pinger is similar to receiving a radio signal but then even more
complex. Radio signals fade-in and out because of propagation alterations especially when they are not received via
'line of sight'.

Radio signals bounce against all kind of objects, even layers in our atmosphere. Alterations in (some of) the propagation
paths may cause variation in the phase shifted components of the total sum signal that is picked up by the receiver. So at
1 point in time 2 components can amplify each other while at another moment 2 contra-phase components yield a 'no-signal'
result.

Acoustic propagation in sea water is even more complex. The waves on the surface will act as a very unpredictable reflection
screen. But there are lots of other influences too like change in salinity, temperature differences (inversions), currents,
difference in bottom composition etc. that change speed and direction of the signal. Perhaps this will give a better
indication why it could be heard over unexpected great distances, why the frequency might not be 'perceived' as exactly
37.5 Khz (changes in propagation speed) and why it is pretty difficult to get the direction where it is coming from.

That's why registering the signal with one hydrophone isn't sufficient you need an array with correlating circuitry and
software to make something out of it .... guess what's hidden in that big nose of those submarines ...
Drop off buoys are great to determine a search area but won't be able to locate the pinger exactly. Fading in/out signals
are an indication that they are not real close to the pinger.

[Roisin]

Did anyone even try to analyze (no pun intended) that black image? Because if they did that they probably would not have gone through all of the trouble to find out any more about it. Here's my analysis of it:

[araucaria]

@Roisin #1180

You are still taking slippery language at face value. Ambiguity (and/or trickery) is the hallmark of the notion of fakery with regard to passports and other things. There is nothing easier to fake than a fake passport because normally speaking there will be only one real passport, but there can be as many fakes as you like – you can change any and all the details just as long as the photo bears some resemblance. Multiple passports imply multiple ‘realities’. You can travel with your real passport in one pocket, and with a fake passport you got made for yourself in another. You can even change nationalities at every stopover. But whichever passport you happen to be using, it can all come to nought if the frontier police later declare that you were using another fake manufactured by the Mossad or some such to frame you. It would be easy enough for the border police to scan the inside of this other (fake) passport without the client even knowing of its existence, or alternatively alter the scan file (I’m not sure of the details).

I still have a problem when a version of what happened whereby Iranians of terrorism are suspected involves doesn’t hold water, when there is a much more plausible explanation that assumes that Iranians are probably innocent travelers like nearly everyone else.

This is just one example. Every other statement has to be treated with the same circumspection. You have at least two layers in the description of the video: things that can be seen – they ignore each other, they shake hands; and interpretations of them – they appear to ignore, they pretend to bump into each other. I personally am not defending any particular interpretation, I am merely pointing out some of the difficulties. It is typical of these events (cf. JFK, 9/11 etc.) to spawn myriads of different theories, and this is how it is done.

[Roisin]

Presently there are plenty of possibilities having to do with the demise of this plane that fall into the mainstream dept. And if 9/11 never happened then it would be much easier to go with one of those ones but we live in a different world today where information on the way the world really operates and who and what is running it is so much more accessible than ever before. What was only known by the privileged few is now common knowledge for anyone who seeks it.

In this thread, we are talking about those other alternative theories too but just because one talks about something, does not mean, unless they say so, that that's the theory they are going with wrt to that plane. So don't pin me down on the Iranian theory because as far as I'm concerned, any information that we've been getting from not only the Malaysians but everyone else too cannot be trusted as the correct version of what's been happening. There have been too many changes in the daily update dept. for me to accept that everything they say is true where it's clearly evident that something fishy is going on and that they are hiding something. something BIG.

[Cidersomerset]

MH370: Second pulse detected in hunt for missing Malaysia Airlines plane

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=jbn-LVsHF04

Published on 6 Apr 2014


A Chinese ship searching for the missing Malaysia Airlines plane has detected a
pulse signal for a second time, Australian co-ordinators say.Air Chief Marshal Angus
Houston called the discovery in the southern Indian Ocean an "important and
encouraging lead" but warned that there was no confirmation of a link to flight
MH370.He told reporters that the second signal was monitored for about 90
seconds and was detected less than 2 km (1.2 miles) from the original.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



6 April 2014 Last updated at 17:40

Malaysia flight MH370: Search ships to verify signals

A UK ship with sophisticated detection equipment, HMS Echo, has arrived in an area
where a Chinese vessel searching for the missing Malaysian plane has twice
detected a pulse signal.Australia's HMS Shield is first investigating a possible third
signal elsewhere in the massive search zone. None have been confirmed as coming
from the flight recorders of MH370.

Meanwhile families of the missing passengers have attended a prayer service in
Kuala Lumpur.The plane disappeared four weeks ago with 239 people on board.
Investigators believe it crashed in the Indian Ocean although no confirmed debris
has been found.

Australian co-ordinators said on Sunday that new analysis of satellite data meant
efforts would now focus on the southern part of the search zone, near where China's vessel is located.

'Some promise'

Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston said China's Haixan 01 had redetected a signal for
about 90 seconds on Saturday, within hours of it being heard earlier.



HMS Echo is is expected to arrive in the area where the Haixun 01 is located within hours

Read more....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26912064

[Roisin]

I've retracted and deleted my comments about the US technological capabilities that I stated earlier in another post and that it's no better than China's. That is incorrect because the US is far more advanced than China is in all area's of technology. I strongly suspect that if they (the US) truly wanted to find that plane, they could have done that but for unknown reasons, they have intentionally maintained a distance in the search of this plane that has resulted in it not being found yet and that alone raises so many red flags, it's been difficult for me to wrap my mind around that. Like most Americans, I'm still clinging to the notion that we are the most humane and charitable nation in the world. Always willing to step in to help out in any catastrophic event that happens in any area of the world. But because the US has intentionally delayed and withheld information with regards to the location of this plane including information on what may have happened to it, it's very surreal to have to come to grips with the fact that this is the country that I live in where we are no longer the good guys and maybe we never were. I shudder to think what our national karma is like but if the case of this missing plane is the "normal" then we're all in deep, deep trouble.

[Gardener]

I have to say Roisin, I did think the satelite capability was better than it appears to be in this instance, which begs a question or three. Those grieving people need closure.

[mosquito]

Posted by Roisin (here)
...

That they both arrived at that airport at the same time in separate cars like that automatically raises some red flags ...

Does it ? Given that all of the passengers knew the departure time of the flight and given that they were all aware of the need to check-in 2 hours before hand (or whatever), I would say there is a pretty good chance that all 239 passengers arrived at the airport withing 30 minutes of each other. This isn't the first post on this thread which leads me to question whether some of our members have ever travelled by plane.

[Roisin]

Posted by Gardener (here)
I have to say Roisin, I did think the satelite capability was better than it appears to be in this instance, which begs a question or three. Those grieving people need closure.

Closure... right. That's what's eating away at not only the heart, minds and soul of their loved ones but for people like you and I and so many others in the world over who are like us too. We are all experiencing it. The uncertainty, the frustration and a deep rooted "something" that occurs when closure is not achieved in the event of the abrupt departure or disappearance or death of a loved one or even a stranger. It's something that reaches deep into the primordial ocean of the unconscious mind on a very collective level hence why so many of us inexplicably connect on a very instinctual level to all of those ancient architectural monuments out there, most of which directly dealt with the transition of man from our physical world into other realms... and most of all, closure. We understand why they were built and why they still remain ... even though thousands of years have passed. There's a reason why that is and we know why. It's all about closure and those structures serve as a metaphor for that in a very tangible and eloquent way.

Those who are responsible for this horrific act of unconscionable violence are dead to that reality. In short, they are not human, they are something else.

[Tesseract]

Posted by Operator (here)

Posted by panopticon (here)

Posted by Tesseract (here)
Was just watching the press conference with Angus Houston, he repeatedly tried to compare the difficulty in verifying an audio signal with that of verifying a visual signal - which is a complete nonsense. When asked what else could present a 37.5 kHz signal he refused to answer the question. When asked what was the frequency of the signal detected by the Australian ship he refused to answer the question, he was then asked again by someone else and admitted he didn't know that yet, and didn't even acknowledge that the frequency was of importance.

Yeah, saw the same report. My interpretation of what Houston was saying when it came to comparing the visual and audio was to let the media know to back off and let the search teams do their job. The comparison was not meant, I don't think, to relate any similarity between the visual search and the signals detected other than there could be false leads that need to be treated carefully. He repeated a number of times that he would like unconfirmed reports to not be reported as fact so as to not harm the family & friends of those missing.

I agree that he didn't answer the question about what else could produce a signal @ 37.5 kHz (I thought that frequency was chosen because there wasn't anything else that uses it [natural or not]) however saying he refused to answer what frequency the signal was detected by Ocean Shield I think misrepresents what he said. He said he hadn't been advised what the frequency was however re-iterated that the signal detected was viewed as a potential lead. He also said that the information had only just been reported to him and he was relating it so as to explain why the Ocean Shield wasn't moving straight away to the Haixun 01's position.

-- Pan

Please keep in mind that the 'reception' of an underwater pinger is similar to receiving a radio signal but then even more
complex. Radio signals fade-in and out because of propagation alterations especially when they are not received via
'line of sight'.

Radio signals bounce against all kind of objects, even layers in our atmosphere. Alterations in (some of) the propagation
paths may cause variation in the phase shifted components of the total sum signal that is picked up by the receiver. So at
1 point in time 2 components can amplify each other while at another moment 2 contra-phase components yield a 'no-signal'
result.

Acoustic propagation in sea water is even more complex. The waves on the surface will act as a very unpredictable refection
screen. But there are lots of other influences too like change in salinity, temperature differences (inversions), currents,
difference in bottom composition etc. that change speed and direction of the signal. Perhaps this will give a better
indication why it could be heard over unexpected great distances, why the frequency might not be 'perceived' as exactly
37.5 Khz (changes in propagation speed) and why it is pretty difficult to get the direction where it is coming from.

That's why registering the signal with one hydrophone isn't sufficient you need an array with correlating circuitry and
software to make something out of it .... guess what's hidden in that big nose of those submarines ...
Drop off buoys are great to determine a search area but won't be able to locate the pinger exactly. Fading in/out signals
are an indication that they are not real close to the pinger.

I don't disagree with any of that in principle - but I wouldn't talk ourselves out of the importance of this ultrasound detection either. No matter how you look at it, this detection narrows down the zone to what is, in relative terms, an extremely small area, and it should be tackled with confidence because the frequency was an exact match. Before this, even the very large search zones were only vague guesses - everyone knew the plane could have been well and truly outside of those zones. This detection changes the odds dramatically to the favour of the search teams, and if the provenance of the signal is genuine, should turn out to be the clue that leads to the plane being found.

Now, it may turn out that the detection was somehow false - stranger things have happened, but these guys have to go with what information they have, and to me this trumps everything else at the current time.

[Roisin]

Posted by mariposafe (here)

Posted by Roisin (here)
...

That they both arrived at that airport at the same time in separate cars like that automatically raises some red flags ...

Does it ? Given that all of the passengers knew the departure time of the flight and given that they were all aware of the need to check-in 2 hours before hand (or whatever), I would say there is a pretty good chance that all 239 passengers arrived at the airport withing 30 minutes of each other. This isn't the first post on this thread which leads me to question whether some of our members have ever travelled by plane.

My reply.....

Posted by Roisin (here)
araucaria,

Supposing the Malaysian authorities who made those observations about those 2 young men were not lying and were, in fact, telling the truth. Supposing there's even a video showing each one getting out of a separate car when they arrived at the airport even though BBC news interviewed a close friend of theirs who said that he went to that airport with them in ONE car. So who's lying and who's telling the truth?

The friend who said they all arrived at the airport in one car or those investigators who stated that each passenger arrived in a separate car as indicated by a surveillance video showing each one exiting a separate car at the door of that airport?

And if that friend was lying about that, what else was he lying about?

But in this case, we have 2 people who are using fake passports. So for that reason it would be understandable why they would be streetwise and act like they don't know each other... at least not until they are in the small waiting area where they are waiting to board the plane. By then they will have already gone through the hurdle of checking-in using their fake passports so there would not have been any reason for them to carry on the charade that they didn't know each other anymore -- though they did it in such a way to make it seem like they were surprised to see each other getting ready to board the same plane. Yes, that was all an act and it's one that I'm sure any professional intelligence officer would pick up on right away. lol

At any rate, based on this most recent update that the plane was hijacked, for all we know, there may be others who have orchestrated this hijacking who hired those Iranian men to divert our attention from the real culprits having to do with the hijacking and disappearance of this plane. But at least on the surface, that we have 2 people with fake passports from a hostile country that pumps out terrorists is something that all investigator's are going to be looking at. Sometimes the culprit is in plain sight and for all we know, those 2 may have hijacked that plane. We don't know any more about that than what any of those other theories are saying but in this case, we at least have something more tangible than nothing at all; a video indicating that their friend had lied to the authorities about them arriving in one car when in fact they each arrived in a separate car.

That's something that they will have definitely taken note of.

And prior to that I wrote:

PS -- that friend said that he took them to the airport but now we are finding out that each one arrived in a separate car. That's another red flag too.

"An unnamed Iranian, who met both passengers in Malaysia and went with them to the airport, has spoken to the BBC's Persian service about the days before their departure. "One of the two was my friend from high school," he told BBC Persian on Monday by phone from Malaysia, apparently referring to Nour Mohammad."

"I accompanied them to the airport. It was almost 8pm that we headed to the airport, and we arrived around 9pm to 9.15pm at the airport and we stayed in the car for few minutes and chatted."

\

And that in reference to this:

Posted by buares (here)

Posted by araucaria (here)

Posted by buares (here)
They were trying hard to appear as if they didn't know each other at the airport. It was only much later that they pretended to bump into each other and shook hands

If I read this in a piece of fiction I would put the book straight down. It is utter gibberish. If this is they best they can do to incriminate Iran(ians), it is pitifully inadequate.

Their school friend said they were changing their hair colors before the flight to match the passports. It seems logical they would try not to appear together and stick to their phones so that no one would notice them.

See my post: https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post807786

[panopticon]

Latest media release from the Australian JACC on the search for MH370.

###

Search and recovery continues for Malaysian flight MH370
Media Release, 7 April 2014—am

Up to nine military planes, three civil planes and 14 ships will assist in today's search for missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370.

The search area is expected to be approximately 234,000 square kilometres.

Good weather is expected throughout the day with showers in the afternoon although this is not expected to affect the search.

ADV Ocean Shield is continuing investigations in its own area.

HMS Echo is en route to assist the Chinese vessel Haixun 01, which detected pulse signals in the Indian Ocean.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau continues to refine the area where the aircraft entered the water based on continuing ground-breaking and multi-disciplinary technical analysis of satellite communication and aircraft performance, passed from the international air crash investigative team comprising analysts from Malaysia, the United States, the UK, China and Australia.



Source

[Selene]

Posted by Roisin (here)
. I strongly suspect that if they (the US) truly wanted to find that plane, they could have done that but for unknown reasons, they have intentionally maintained a distance in the search of this plane that has resulted in it not being found yet and that alone raises so many red flags, it's been difficult for me to wrap my mind around that. Like most Americans, I'm still clinging to the notion that we are the most humane and charitable nation in the world. Always willing to step in to help out in any catastrophic event that happens in any area of the world. But because the US has intentionally delayed and withheld information with regards to the location of this plane including information on what may have happened to it, it's very surreal to have to come to grips with the fact that this is the country that I live in where we are no longer the good guys and maybe we never were. I shudder to think what our national karma is like but if the case of this missing plane is the "normal" then we're all in deep, deep trouble.

I think the calculation here is a much darker and more cynical one than that of the US simply being seen as The Good Guys. It is in the realm of high stakes political poker, in that Machiavellian stream of “never letting a good crisis go to waste.”

Herewith:

• Let’s assume the plane actually went down catastrophically, for whatever reason: mechanical failure, failed hijacking, suicide, it was Thursday. Whatever.

• The US spy-in-the-sky system, calibrated to watch weapons movements, explosions of any type, UFO arrivals and departures, golf balls in motion, etc is by far one of the secret government’s most closely held secrets. They saw the plane go down; they know exactly where and when.

However:

• All 239 lives have already been lost;

• At no time must this US secret space program be exposed or compromised. 239 casualties aren’t worth admitting to the level of surveillance we are under. That’s a non-starter.

• There is no true upside to leading a rescue, there’s only recovery of the remains to be had, but a big downside in exposing the secret program.


But an opportunity presents itself:


• Given the present superior position of China as the world’s largest holder of US Dollar Treasury bonds there’s much more upside for the secret government/cabal in using assistance in the recovery process to gain some much-needed political leverage with the Chinese.

• Beijing’s toes are not to be stepped on lightly by cavalierly denying them a prominent role in recovering their own citizens. Bigfooting it here would breed resentment and loss of face. This would be a serious tactical error and the Chinese have long memories. On the other hand, letting the Chinese be the heroes....

Therefore:

• Do you really think it’s “coincidence” that it was a Chinese vessel that made the lucky strike, hundreds of miles from the official search area?

• Or is it more likely that they were quietly pointed toward some “interesting coordinates” by “a friend”.....?

I know what I’d think...

Cheers,

Selene

[panopticon]

Posted by Operator (here)
Please keep in mind that the 'reception' of an underwater pinger is similar to receiving a radio signal but then even more complex. Radio signals fade-in and out because of propagation alterations especially when they are not received via 'line of sight'.

Radio signals bounce against all kind of objects, even layers in our atmosphere. Alterations in (some of) the propagation paths may cause variation in the phase shifted components of the total sum signal that is picked up by the receiver. So at 1 point in time 2 components can amplify each other while at another moment 2 contra-phase components yield a 'no-signal' result.

Acoustic propagation in sea water is even more complex. The waves on the surface will act as a very unpredictable reflection screen. But there are lots of other influences too like change in salinity, temperature differences (inversions), currents, difference in bottom composition etc. that change speed and direction of the signal. Perhaps this will give a better indication why it could be heard over unexpected great distances, why the frequency might not be 'perceived' as exactly 37.5 Khz (changes in propagation speed) and why it is pretty difficult to get the direction where it is coming from.

That's why registering the signal with one hydrophone isn't sufficient you need an array with correlating circuitry and software to make something out of it .... guess what's hidden in that big nose of those submarines ...
Drop off buoys are great to determine a search area but won't be able to locate the pinger exactly. Fading in/out signals are an indication that they are not real close to the pinger.

Thank you so much for that Operator. You've made some excellent points here and I for one hadn't made the intellectual link between the difference in acoustics/frequency between air and underwater environment. I knew it, but just had applied it to this for some unknown reason.

Of course you're right.

You've said there could be a difference in frequency due to the aquatic environment. How much of a difference could this make (not asking for a comprehensive analysis, the variations you pointed out make that ridiculous, rather just a general "lots", "not much" or "little")?

We know that whales communicate over vast distances (which is of course underwater ) so do you have any idea how far this sort of signal might be able to be detected from point of origin? In other words, could the 300 nm between the Ocean Shield and Haixun 01 be within that range?

-- Pan

[Roisin]

Selene,

Wow! Much food for thought on this one Selene and need time to chew on this for awhile. Thanks for your clarity! Very mind expanding to say the least!

[Tesseract]

Angus Houston announced at the press conference that the signal was detected for 2 h and 20 min by the Australian ship Ocean Shield, and detected again for another 13 minutes on a subsequent pass. The ship will make a number of additional passes to fix the location and, if they can do that, will send down an underwater vehicle.

One of the journalists asked if this signal could be from the same source as that detected by the Chinese ship 300 nm away, to which Houston indicated it was seemingly unlikely, but perhaps possible given the complexities involved such as mentioned by Operator above.

Great work by all involved!

[panopticon]

Posted by Tesseract (here)
Angus Houston announced at the press conference that the signal was detected for 2 h and 20 min by the Australian ship Ocean Shield, and detected again for another 13 minutes on a subsequent pass. The ship will make a number of additional passes to fix the location and, if they can do that, will send down an underwater vehicle.

One of the journalists asked if this signal could be from the same source as that detected by the Chinese ship 300 nm away, to which Houston indicated it was seemingly unlikely, but perhaps possible given the complexities involved such as mentioned by Operator above.

Great work by all involved!

G'day Tesseract,

Did you get the name of the bloke he introduced that explained the acoustic details and towed ping locator? (edit: found it, his name is Australian Navy Commodore Peter Leavy)

I also thought it was interesting that the only audio they have to analyse is from the Ocean Shield (which Houston said sounded like an emergency beacon to him). Evidently the Haixun 01 did not record what it detected.

Houston also expanded on why the search area has been isolated to this location (map of satellite detections of "pings" versus fuel and differing flight speed). Did it look a bit to you to like Houston was not convinced by some of the information he was announcing? It seemed a bit forced when he was giving credit to the Malaysian group of search experts, a bit like: 'we've detected "pings" here & here so that's where the satellite and Malaysian search team experts say we are supposed to be looking because blah, blah, blah...'

Anyway, the officials are saying it will take weeks to get any further, especially without wreckage. Some of the media here is asking why the Chinese search vessels were out of the official search area. Houston etc. has skirted around it and said they are communicating/coordinating with the Chinese Government over search area details...

Houston was pretty adamant when he said that while the signal/s detected by Ocean Shield are consistent with a black box recorders locator he was not willing to say that the detection confirmed the location of MH370. He said that without wreckage there could be no confirmation.

The media core sounded like they were about to freak out when he said that...

-- Pan