It’s not jumping to conclusions when the evidence is staring you right in the face.
It still is if there is no credible source. With all due respect, you as a member of the public, presumably thousands of miles away, know nothing. I know the current age allows for instantaneous results and data, but events like this don't follow that logic. ESPECIALLY in the fog of war.
I’m a professional pilot I know what causes aircraft to fall to the earth in a ball of fire......and it isn’t an overheated engine, it isn’t an in a un-contained engine failure.
How many Un-contained engine failures have we seen just in the last 2 years? Non have punctured the fuel tank and blew up an airliner.
Engine fires can be extinguished by the pilot. And in no case should an engine malfunction cause an airliner to fall 8,000 feet straight down in a ball of flames, I don’t care if both pilots on the flight deck were the worst at the airline.
The last plane I can think of that fell out of the sky in a ball of flames was TWA 800.....jury is still out on whether or not that was a missile or the empty center fuel tank.
Also there were pictures that showed shrapnel damage, people who were military can identify that.
So you may not know anything as a member of the public but there are members here that do know a lot.
As a pilot, you should also be aware that being circumspect and getting the facts straight are important. Uncontained engine failure can rupture fuel lines and tanks and can result in fires and even 'fireballs', not to mention cause catastrophic damage to flight controls. That is why they are categorised 'Catastrophic' and the boffin types do everything possible to protect and mitigate against them. Engine fires can be extinguished providing the suppression system is working and effective that can of course be disrupted by a failure in the first place. Engine fire can result in a further uncontained disk failure before the fire is extinguished or spread if not extinguished.
Any of these scenarios could result in the a/c failing out of the sky from 8kft, but this particular UIA event did not. Even if the event was engine related and not missile, as now seems most likely, the a/c flew on for several minutes with some apparent effort at crash landing.
There is only one picture that could show shrapnel damage, in my view. The cabin section cited clearly isn't showing such and the vertical stabiliser damage is far too large to be missile shrapnel and does not show on the port side leaving only the (what looks like) flap section and it is not clear that is not damage from uncontained engine failure or other impact damage. Does not mean it was not a missile, but these can not be used as evidence that it was.
More humility and consideration of the available information and less bluster please.