This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 disappearance theories article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 91 days |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 disappearance theories. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 disappearance theories at the Reference desk. |
This article was nominated for deletion on 24 March 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
I eventually decided to mention the fake debris theory (which I referred to in an earlier comment) in one sentence at the end of the Diego Garcia section (the source conveniently connects the theory to Diego Garcia). Could anybody find an RS saying about this something like "Never let the facts get in the way of a good theory", as I guess it would improve the article, but I really don't want to go looking for such a RS myself, for fear of wasting yet more time on such a dubious subject. Tlhslobus ( talk) 11:29, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
I found this picture on google earth look at the numbers in the picture M8Rite ( talk) 21:56, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
It’s not that mate Georgebroadfield ( talk) 19:54, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
The heading "Acquisition of Freescale staff" does not reference the evidence that there were 20 Freescale staff upon the flight. Add comment and reference -> Freescale Semiconductor issued a statement expressing grief of loss of 20 Freescale employees. [1]
Heading content currently simply implies that snopes.com finds no evidence that the four inventors listed on the patent application were on the aircraft passenger list, because names do not match.
References
As discussed on WP:FTN, Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 conspiracy theories is the appropriate title for this article, because each individual "unofficial (i.e. fringe) theory" carries with it an unspoken assumption that the mainstream is suppressing/ignoring it in favor of the official explanation. - LuckyLouie ( talk) 15:13, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
Move was done without prior discussion" is not true:
I cannot think of a good replacement for the word, but it should be replaced with something. But not "conspiracy theories", since it does not fit all of the ideas in the article. How about "speculation"? -- Hob Gadling ( talk) 07:11, 20 April 2020 (UTC)– wbm1058 ( talk) 13:10, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
each individual "unofficial (i.e. fringe) theory" carries with it an unspoken assumption that the mainstream is suppressing/ignoring it in favor of the official explanation." So the "conspiracy theories" are theories that the mainstream media conspired to suppress reports about or ignore unofficial or fringe theories? Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 § Speculated causes of disappearance doesn't clearly state "the official explanation". It's not clear to me that there is any single official explanation. The lead of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 says "The disappearance of Flight 370 has been dubbed one of the greatest aviation mysteries of all time." and "In the absence of a definitive cause of disappearance"... in other words, there is no official explanation, only theories, some more plausible than others. – wbm1058 ( talk) 15:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
In the Cambodia section, the sentence containing "appears to be a plane about 70 m (230 ft) (ca 10% larger" seems incomplete. It is unclear if the "70 m" refers to length, width or something else of the aircraft's dimensions. The "ca" seems to be reference to an unfamiliar unit of measure or some unfinished wording. SquashEngineer ( talk) 13:37, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
It is difficult to understand why none of the articles evem mentioned the possibility of the flight landing at Gan Airport (on Addu Island), the Island to which local observers stated that the plane was heading. The plane would have no reason to fly so low over the Maldives if it planned to land on Diego Garcia - more than 1000 km from there.
2804:14D:32B2:3CED:FDC1:F04D:B0BA:4FF7 ( talk) 18:07, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
We do not really need to invent unsubstantiated, speculative causes for MH370's disappearance. About one week after the accident, Malaysia's Prime Minister Najib Razak announced (see YouTube) that the apparent cause was deliberate diversion. Razak's 2014 announcement was based on much assistance from the U.S. (NTSB. FBI, Boeing)and other governments (re: radar data) and other companies and organizations (Inmarsat satellite, AAIB, etc.). Seven years later, Razak's 2014 statement still stands the test of time. Furthermore, in 2020, Australia's former Prime Minister Tony Abbott told the press that the accident was believed to be apparent mass murder/suicide and that was what Malaysian officials privately advised Australia. George Bibel, air industry consultant, has said the industry believes MH370 was a criminal act (presumably apparent pijacking). We also know the USA is refusing to disclose MH370 data via FOIA act, citing apparent criminal act.
Logically and from data analysis, the pilot is implicated. Many experts consider the flight path shows a highly experienced pilot. There has been no non-pilot cockpit take-overs since the 9/11 hardening of the cockpit doors. The senior pilot is the one person with motive, means, and opportunity. There is no evidence whatsoever for any other cause of this accident, the plane seemed to operating perfectly, and as Razak mentioned early on, no signs of outside hijackers.
There are some, shall we say, cultural and denial problems. After Razak got voted out of office, the next Malaysian admin absolved the pilot of blame, and claimed no known cause of the accident. In that part of the world, pilot suicide is an anathema and a socially unacceptable accusation. Another other major source of denial (I feel) are those wanting to protect pilot integrity and aircraft design. Per the Wiki article on pilot suicide, the public wants to see a suicide note before they accept pilot suicide. This is the quandary we have here.
Also, the official rule seems to be (from FAA/NTSB) if there is no wreck found with black boxes, then there can be no official establishment of probable cause. But what we can say, until the wreck is ever found, pilot hijacking is the almost obvious suspected cause. And we have to observe some people are extremely opposed that that realization. But the opposition is political in nature: a culture war, but there is zero evidence for any other cause at this point. TBILLT ( talk)TBillT
On 6 March 2024 the BBC documentary Why Planes Vanish: The Hunt for MH370 examined the claims of retired British aviation engineer Richard Godfrey that the flight path of the aircraft could be plotted by analysis of the disruption to Weak Signal Propagation Reporter signals on the day in question. Scientists at the University of Liverpool are undertaking a major new study to verify how viable the technology is, and what this could mean for locating the aircraft. Martinevans123 ( talk) 21:23, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
"Boeing expert" and former 777 senior pilot Simon Hardy, who worked with the Australian Transport Safety Bureau during the search in 2015, says that the technical logs, just published 5 days ago for the first time, reveal that an additional 3,000kg of fuel and extra crew oxygen were added so that the pilot could glide his way into the ocean and "bury" the aircraft in the Geelvinck Fracture Zone. Hardy is already mentioned in this article, but should these additional details now be added. Quite a few UK media outlets have reported this, e.g. Standard, Independent, Express, LBC and Straights Times, plus others. Hardy calls the AAIB report "scandalous". The Geelvinck Fracture Zone is mentioned at List of fracture zones 86.176.145.112 ( talk) 19:17, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 disappearance theories article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 91 days |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 disappearance theories. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 disappearance theories at the Reference desk. |
This article was nominated for deletion on 24 March 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
I eventually decided to mention the fake debris theory (which I referred to in an earlier comment) in one sentence at the end of the Diego Garcia section (the source conveniently connects the theory to Diego Garcia). Could anybody find an RS saying about this something like "Never let the facts get in the way of a good theory", as I guess it would improve the article, but I really don't want to go looking for such a RS myself, for fear of wasting yet more time on such a dubious subject. Tlhslobus ( talk) 11:29, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
I found this picture on google earth look at the numbers in the picture M8Rite ( talk) 21:56, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
It’s not that mate Georgebroadfield ( talk) 19:54, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
The heading "Acquisition of Freescale staff" does not reference the evidence that there were 20 Freescale staff upon the flight. Add comment and reference -> Freescale Semiconductor issued a statement expressing grief of loss of 20 Freescale employees. [1]
Heading content currently simply implies that snopes.com finds no evidence that the four inventors listed on the patent application were on the aircraft passenger list, because names do not match.
References
As discussed on WP:FTN, Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 conspiracy theories is the appropriate title for this article, because each individual "unofficial (i.e. fringe) theory" carries with it an unspoken assumption that the mainstream is suppressing/ignoring it in favor of the official explanation. - LuckyLouie ( talk) 15:13, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
Move was done without prior discussion" is not true:
I cannot think of a good replacement for the word, but it should be replaced with something. But not "conspiracy theories", since it does not fit all of the ideas in the article. How about "speculation"? -- Hob Gadling ( talk) 07:11, 20 April 2020 (UTC)– wbm1058 ( talk) 13:10, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
each individual "unofficial (i.e. fringe) theory" carries with it an unspoken assumption that the mainstream is suppressing/ignoring it in favor of the official explanation." So the "conspiracy theories" are theories that the mainstream media conspired to suppress reports about or ignore unofficial or fringe theories? Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 § Speculated causes of disappearance doesn't clearly state "the official explanation". It's not clear to me that there is any single official explanation. The lead of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 says "The disappearance of Flight 370 has been dubbed one of the greatest aviation mysteries of all time." and "In the absence of a definitive cause of disappearance"... in other words, there is no official explanation, only theories, some more plausible than others. – wbm1058 ( talk) 15:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
In the Cambodia section, the sentence containing "appears to be a plane about 70 m (230 ft) (ca 10% larger" seems incomplete. It is unclear if the "70 m" refers to length, width or something else of the aircraft's dimensions. The "ca" seems to be reference to an unfamiliar unit of measure or some unfinished wording. SquashEngineer ( talk) 13:37, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
It is difficult to understand why none of the articles evem mentioned the possibility of the flight landing at Gan Airport (on Addu Island), the Island to which local observers stated that the plane was heading. The plane would have no reason to fly so low over the Maldives if it planned to land on Diego Garcia - more than 1000 km from there.
2804:14D:32B2:3CED:FDC1:F04D:B0BA:4FF7 ( talk) 18:07, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
We do not really need to invent unsubstantiated, speculative causes for MH370's disappearance. About one week after the accident, Malaysia's Prime Minister Najib Razak announced (see YouTube) that the apparent cause was deliberate diversion. Razak's 2014 announcement was based on much assistance from the U.S. (NTSB. FBI, Boeing)and other governments (re: radar data) and other companies and organizations (Inmarsat satellite, AAIB, etc.). Seven years later, Razak's 2014 statement still stands the test of time. Furthermore, in 2020, Australia's former Prime Minister Tony Abbott told the press that the accident was believed to be apparent mass murder/suicide and that was what Malaysian officials privately advised Australia. George Bibel, air industry consultant, has said the industry believes MH370 was a criminal act (presumably apparent pijacking). We also know the USA is refusing to disclose MH370 data via FOIA act, citing apparent criminal act.
Logically and from data analysis, the pilot is implicated. Many experts consider the flight path shows a highly experienced pilot. There has been no non-pilot cockpit take-overs since the 9/11 hardening of the cockpit doors. The senior pilot is the one person with motive, means, and opportunity. There is no evidence whatsoever for any other cause of this accident, the plane seemed to operating perfectly, and as Razak mentioned early on, no signs of outside hijackers.
There are some, shall we say, cultural and denial problems. After Razak got voted out of office, the next Malaysian admin absolved the pilot of blame, and claimed no known cause of the accident. In that part of the world, pilot suicide is an anathema and a socially unacceptable accusation. Another other major source of denial (I feel) are those wanting to protect pilot integrity and aircraft design. Per the Wiki article on pilot suicide, the public wants to see a suicide note before they accept pilot suicide. This is the quandary we have here.
Also, the official rule seems to be (from FAA/NTSB) if there is no wreck found with black boxes, then there can be no official establishment of probable cause. But what we can say, until the wreck is ever found, pilot hijacking is the almost obvious suspected cause. And we have to observe some people are extremely opposed that that realization. But the opposition is political in nature: a culture war, but there is zero evidence for any other cause at this point. TBILLT ( talk)TBillT
On 6 March 2024 the BBC documentary Why Planes Vanish: The Hunt for MH370 examined the claims of retired British aviation engineer Richard Godfrey that the flight path of the aircraft could be plotted by analysis of the disruption to Weak Signal Propagation Reporter signals on the day in question. Scientists at the University of Liverpool are undertaking a major new study to verify how viable the technology is, and what this could mean for locating the aircraft. Martinevans123 ( talk) 21:23, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
"Boeing expert" and former 777 senior pilot Simon Hardy, who worked with the Australian Transport Safety Bureau during the search in 2015, says that the technical logs, just published 5 days ago for the first time, reveal that an additional 3,000kg of fuel and extra crew oxygen were added so that the pilot could glide his way into the ocean and "bury" the aircraft in the Geelvinck Fracture Zone. Hardy is already mentioned in this article, but should these additional details now be added. Quite a few UK media outlets have reported this, e.g. Standard, Independent, Express, LBC and Straights Times, plus others. Hardy calls the AAIB report "scandalous". The Geelvinck Fracture Zone is mentioned at List of fracture zones 86.176.145.112 ( talk) 19:17, 13 March 2024 (UTC)