Update: Malaysian military now reveals that the plane reappeared elsewhere

Press conference

In his brief statement Hussein said: “We will spare no effort to find the missing plane.” He revealed that 27,000 square nautical miles are now being search. Hussein said he could not answer speculative questions until the plane’s black box has been found.

Source

edit on 12-3-2014 by Jennyfrenzy because: (no reason given)

reply to post by Jennyfrenzy


During press conference, Military confirm the presence of an Unidetified Flying Object above the Strait of Mallacca right in that period of time, but they don't know what it was....

Arken
reply to post by Jennyfrenzy

 

During press conference, Military confirm the presence of an Unidetified Flying Object above the Strait of Mallacca right in that period of time, but they don't know what it was....

wow, I missed that part.
Watch the video I posted on the previous page.

Arken
reply to post by Jennyfrenzy

 

During press conference, Military confirm the presence of an Unidetified Flying Object above the Strait of Mallacca right in that period of time, but they don't know what it was....

What exactly was said?

Read about Airline Pilot's Bruce Cathie's theory about Energy Grid that could explain how Flight MH370 vanished:
bizjetway.blogspot.co.uk...

Skyfloating

Arken
reply to post by Jennyfrenzy

 

During press conference, Military confirm the presence of an Unidetified Flying Object above the Strait of Mallacca right in that period of time, but they don't know what it was....

What exactly was said?

They picked a "plot" on the radar above Strait of Malacca but without trasponder.
This is why they have sended other vessels in that area.
Very very confused people there...

A huge mistery.

reply to post by obiwankirk


The connection with the world energy grid shouldn't be ruled out but will be.

obiwankirk
Read about Airline Pilot's Bruce Cathie's theory about Energy Grid that could explain how Flight MH370 vanished:
bizjetway.blogspot.co.uk...

Ominous coincidence...

Flatwoods
My one issue with the hijacking theory is this - when 911 happened, there were numerous instances where passengers used their own phones to call emergency services, family members, etc. I'd expect the same thing to happen in this case, but we have no reports of any passengers making calls. Unless, of course, the plane was completely out of range the entire time, but I find this doubtful.

I suppose it would depend on the range of the wireless coverage over the sea. But if the plane flew over land, wouldn't the passengers get at least one bar at some point?

that is actually one of the issues with the 9-11 story we were fed. cellphones DON'T WORK when flying (forget about silly rules about turning cellphones off). don't believe me? try it for yourself. you only get signal when you are about to touch down on landing. and that is because the aircraft is out of "cellphone range" almost the entire flight. you are too high and too fast to be able to "connect" with cellphone towers.

i suppose if the aircraft was "skimming the trees" flying so low to avoid radar, then i guess there would be a chance of getting some signal on your phone, but with the speed of the aircraft you would likely loose said signal before a call could be made.

generik
that is actually one of the issues with the 9-11 story we were fed. cellphones DON'T WORK when flying (forget about silly rules about turning cellphones off). don't believe me? try it for yourself. you only get signal when you are about to touch down on landing. and that is because the aircraft is out of "cellphone range" almost the entire flight. you are too high and too fast to be able to "connect" with cellphone towers.

The rule to turn the cellphone off isn't silly and you are right that you won't get a signal in flight. A cell phone signal has a max. range of about 5 km if you have direct sight to the cell tower. With metal layers (aircraft hull) between the phone and the tower this will be reduced. So in flight at about 11km height it's impossible to reach any cell tower with mobile phone.

But exactly due to this fact the rule to turn the phone of (or use airplane mode) makes sense. Your phone still tries to reach a tower and sends request with max. power to establish a connection. These high frequency burst can (and really do as I have seen myself) interfere with the wiring of the aircraft and lead to incorrect data displayed in the cockpit. So please turn your phone off or use the airplane mode. You won't get a signal either if you leave it on so why risk a crash and drain your battery for nothing.

generik

Flatwoods

i suppose if the aircraft was "skimming the trees" flying so low to avoid radar, then i guess there would be a chance of getting some signal on your phone, but with the speed of the aircraft you would likely loose said signal before a call could be made.

I guess, the aircraft would have landed already at some location, by when the relatives were trying to call the cell phones of the travelers.

I still smell a Hijack line...like Flight 714.

AthlonSavage


The connection with the world energy grid shouldn't be ruled out but will be.

Thousands of airplanes pass through there without problems every day, thats why its not a workable theory for now.

Arken
reply to post by Jennyfrenzy

 

During press conference, Military confirm the presence of an Unidetified Flying Object above the Strait of Mallacca right in that period of time, but they don't know what it was....

interesting how our mainstream news outlets never talk the other possibles on what could have happened to the plane expect for it was probably terrorism gone wrong.

How can the MSM even suggest that it was terrorism?

Agent_USA_Supporter

Arken
reply to post by Jennyfrenzy

 

During press conference, Military confirm the presence of an Unidetified Flying Object above the Strait of Mallacca right in that period of time, but they don't know what it was....

interesting how our mainstream news outlets never talk the other possibles on what could have happened to the plane expect for it was probably terrorism gone wrong.

How can the MSM even suggest that it was terrorism?

Agree , But they have to take it into consideration , but Terrorism leaves traces , if the plane would have been detonated it would have been vaporised including the black box , wich they build to withstand this , because how can they not find wreckage nor a black box signal.

I doubt conventional terrorists have the ability or know how to vaporise a 777.

TheGreazel

Personally, I suspect that "THINGS ARE WORST THAN WE CAN IMAGINE..."

So if they announced the discovery of wreckage somewhere after all this time, would we actually believe it?

The more time that passes with all these loose-ends the more compelled authorities will be to wrap this up. I don't know how long it takes to find a debris-field in the ocean, but is seems like with all the help they are receiving that something would have been found by now. Eventually they will need to give the public a consensus because people are following this very closely. I fear that even if they don't find the plane, they will still tell us they found the crash-site or debris. We would never know the difference.

So if they announced the discovery of wreckage somewhere after all this time, would we actually believe it?

Edit: you phrased differently, but I kinda feel like you beat me to it

Quote -
"Doan Huu Gia, deputy general director of Vietnam's air traffic management, said: "We received an email from a New Zealander who works on one of the oil rigs off Vung Tau."

"He said he spotted a burning [object] at that location, some 300 km (200 miles) southeast of Vung Tau."

andy1972
Quote -
"Doan Huu Gia, deputy general director of Vietnam's air traffic management, said: "We received an email from a New Zealander who works on one of the oil rigs off Vung Tau."

"He said he spotted a burning [object] at that location, some 300 km (200 miles) southeast of Vung Tau."

200 miles SE of Vung Tau would be quite a distance and seems to be way off course for the flight.

reply to post by McGinty


Yes, we could possibly believe it. Otherwise you would be affirming that a plane cannot possibly crash as a result of an accident, which of course is not true.

I suppose it depends on what is eventually found and the 'facts' presented to us.