There is this big fat red line in the sand and its name is 'Conspiracy Theory'..!
This line must not be crossed under any circumstances, by threat of being branded and ridiculed as a 'Conspiracy Theorist'.
These days, being called that is a big No-No and, in today's world, it might even mean the loss of someones job!
Imagine two aircraft mechanics working on the fuselage of a big aircraft. Because it needs two persons to fit this special 1/4" nut, a pretty fumbly job, it somehow fell behind a strut. Couldn't possibly get it out unless a whole big panel is taken out and that would take at least a day.
They both know that this nut, where it is, cannot do any harm or ever fall out again. They look at each other and without having to say a word they just leave it there... and keep working as if nothing happened.
That, by definition, is already a conspiracy.
Apart from a few facts that we all know by now, what has been provided here are simply theories - nothing more, nothing less. Some of these can easily be brushed aside by professionals, like Pihero and others, because aircraft have very specific performance limitations and various operational factors that also come into it.
Despite all the theories that have been put forward so far, here on these threads and by the search teams, not one of them has led to finding the aircraft. Yes, there have been detailed discussions on 'what might have happened' or 'possibly could have' but all of that is guessing, surmising and assuming.
It's all theory....
|Quoting nupogodi (Reply 264):|
The leaps and leaps through the realms of improbability you have to make, to somehow convince yourself the plane went down along its flight path while Inmarsat continued to communicate with 'it', even when the area has been extensively searched...
That is theory...
There is no guarantee that Inmarsat did in fact communicate with the aircraft. It is assumed it did, with a high degree of confidence (as they say), but there is no guarantee.
The Inmarsat company has provided the data they have in good faith but even they can only guarantee that they have passed it on correctly, not that the data was from 9M-RMO. There is a big difference ....
Most people on these threads probably want to stay on "..this side of the red line", where the explanation is mechanical failure or anything that can be explained in straight forward terms. In other words, they baulk at even considering the likelihood of conspiracies. Unfortunately the world is no longer an innocent place; conspiracies are just as likely as mechanical failures, fires, pilot suicide or whatever else.
It may go seriously against the grain here but maybe it is time to consider conspiracy theories on equal terms.
Why..? Because we wouldn't want 'them' to get away with it ....