Analysis: Flight 370 Mystery

On March, 8, 2014, Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 (MH370), a Boeing 777, carrying 239 people and twelve tons of cargo, vanished without a trace over the South China Sea less than an hour after takeoff from Kuala Lumpur International Airport. Although there was no indication of a problem during the last pilot communication, all contact was lost a few minutes later. The disappearance from air traffic control radar, and then military radar, remains an unsolved mystery despite the recent discovery—sixteen months later—of a single small wing component (flaperon) that has been confirmed as a Boeing part manufactured for a 777. A Boeing 777 has about three million parts, not to mention the passengers, luggage and other cargo, much of which would be buoyant. Even if the flaperon proves to be from MH370, it may be a red herring or complete fabrication designed to appease relatives of missing MH370 passengers.

The primary questions are:

• What, or who, caused MH370 to go off course?
• How could it go off radar, stay off radar, and also elude satellites?
• Why did no emergency devices activate?
• Where is the plane or its provable wreckage now?

Several books have been published that present and assess all available apparent facts and/or offer one reasonable argument or another for the various theories that have been posed. Did weather play a role? Was it hijacked by terrorists or a drug cartel? Did the pilot commit suicide? Was it a mechanical malfunction? Was it shot down by a missile? Was it sabotaged? Was there a confrontation with something Otherworldly? Was it remotely cyber-jacked by the CIA or an agency of another government? Does the U.S. military have the plane hidden away, and, if so, why? PluribusOne™ has conducted a meta-study of all of these questions and the theories that purport to answer them. We have also pursued our own lines of inquiry, although hampered by disinformation and secrecy. The Noetitek™ system is indispensable when seeking to determine critical elements for analysis and helping shape complex data toward formulation of one comprehensible end-of-the-day assessment.

I am partly interested in this matter because it is a challenging mystery. But I am also interested because one of the passengers, Philip Wood, lived two houses away from me in the 1980s. Whenever I drive past his former home I remember his neighborly manner, ponder the strangeness of life, and wonder whether he is alive. It is possible.

Without writing a book, I cannot adequately discuss my use of Noetitek™ in this matter or attempt to explain my examination of the publicly available data and theories. For now, my thoughts must be presented without proper pro-and-con argumentation. For those not fully informed about the mystery and its numerous controversial elements, my conclusions will make sense if you read the books and news reports and listen to the online interviews with parties directly involved in the investigation. Only then can you appreciate the difficulty for investigators applying ordinary tools of logic to the vast amount of deeply conflicting data. This is not uncommon considering the nature of human perception, but the muddle is so extensive that I can only conclude that a deliberate expert effort has been made to obfuscate facts and create confusion. No logical theory—as presently strung together—holds up under scrutiny.

All of the theories can first be put into one of two basic categories. It was either an accident or intentional. Without extensive wreckage, there is very little to support any theory that involves some kind of accident ending in a crash and the deaths of all on board. Relatives of passengers clearly sense the truth of this and rightly cling to hopes that their loved ones may return alive, even after all this time. The disappearance of Flight 370 was intentional. The lead question is: Who hijacked/skyjacked/cyber-jacked this plane? The options are three: (1) a government agency, (2) a non-government agency, or (3) some other/Otherworldly, agency. It is very difficult to make a case for a non-government agency, such as drug cartel, having both the motive and sufficient means to steal a Boeing 777, especially in this manner. Call that the least likely option. A government (including terrorist) agency is a strong possibility—motive, means, and opportunity are easier to imagine. However, oddly enough, the idea that the plane was captured by a UFO is the only theory that makes sense of all of the anomalous data reported.

Unless you know the history of UFO intrusion, the idea that a UFO could explain MH370’s disappearance undoubtedly sounds outlandish. However, UFOs are real—I know because I saw some up close as a NICAP field investigator—and some are not American or Russian or made by a fascist “breakaway civilization.” General Nathan Twining knew that back in the 1940s and in 1957 President Eisenhower made him Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the top post over all U.S. Armed Forces. General MacArthur knew it too, and predicted that humanity would eventually go to war with aliens from space. This is not conspiracy theory; it is U.S. history. You might want to read these posts: The UFO Rabbit-Hole (June, 2015); Analysis: Robert Salas’ “Unidentified” (January, 2015); Flying Saucer Drive-By (September, 2014); Analysis: “Saucers, Swastikas, and Psyops” (April, 2014); The PluribusOne™ “Disclosure Project” (February, 2014); Secret Saucer War? (July, 2013); Analysis: “Aliens in the Skies” (July, 2013); Ancient Aliens (February, 2013); Scientific Studies of UFOs (March, 2012); Space Program Secrets (September, 2011); Presidential Disclosure: Alien Presence Affirmed (February, 2010); Roswell Crash: the Mystery Metal (January, 2010); and Alien Abduction Assessment (August, 2009).

Investigators say that MH370 was “deliberately diverted,” which it was, but not as a willful act of the pilot if hijacked by a UFO. It was reported that the plane made abrupt course changes from northeast to west to northwest to south, and made changes in altitude from 45,000 feet to 23,000 feet, to 35,000 feet, to 5,000 feet—all of which is typical for a UFO. And if the plane was electromagnetically tethered to a UFO—as was the helicopter piloted by Army Captain Lawrence Coyne in 1973 (Ohio)—its electrical systems, including communications systems would be affected—“shut off.” Like MH370, Coyne also lost radio contact. I personally experienced electromagnetic interference in a close aerial encounter with a disc-shaped UFO in 1966 (Mid-Hudson Valley) that overheated the cockpit and disrupted (“shut off”) ventilation. The garbled communications from MH370 in its attempts to reply to other planes in the vicinity is also reminiscent of the disappearance of Frederick Valentich and his Cessna aircraft in 1978 where he encountered a UFO near Australia, never to be seen again—and no debris.

But was any UFO activity detected on radar over the South China Sea during MH370’s flight? Yes. A UFO was detected by military radar in the vicinity of MH370, but this is rarely mentioned when it should be brought center stage. An oil rig worker, whose testimony has been suppressed, including losing his job, reported an orange “burning” correlative object “at high altitude” that demonstrated “no lateral movement,” which is, historically, a good description of a large hovering UFO. Also, the reported sightings of a fighter jet or jets “escorting” MH370 make more sense when the jets are understood as helplessly trailing alongside 370 while the airliner is under external control by a UFO that may not be visible to the eye either because it is temporarily cloaked or positioned at a much higher altitude. UFO files contain other sightings of UFOs “escorted by” fighter planes. Fighters are almost useless against UFOs—other than manmade UFOs—another fact that military forces avoid admitting. So, it is not surprising that there has been no official confirmation of a fighter plane or planes sighted by civilian witnesses. Lesser incidents more than fifty years old are still being held at the highest level of secrecy as a matter of National Security.

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

8 Responses to “Analysis: Flight 370 Mystery”

  1. Stark Raven Says:

    So you don’t think it’s possible that parts found may prove to be from Flight 370, even if all examiners don’t agree, or that all occupants were probably killed?

  2. PluribusOne™ Says:

    No, I’m saying that skepticism is warranted when so little is purportedly found after so long a time and that, by all of the data available to the public, this was not an accident.

    If a UFO suddenly took control of the airliner it would explain the pilot’s atypical behavior and the loss of communications other than garbled short-range transmissions. And if a UFO captured the plane, shut off all electronic systems, and later dropped it onto the ocean’s surface from a low altitude, it would probably have killed everyone but without the aircraft breaking up right away and creating a debris field.

    The USA, which is apparently controlling the outflow of information about this incident, has not been especially forthcoming about UFO incidents involving aircraft since the early 1950s. The policy in Chile is less restrictive. In Chile, an air-defense analysis has noted the effects of UFOs and electromagnetic fields because there had been events where “…there was a blockage of radio communications concurrent with the presence of a UFO near aircraft.” This was revealed by Chilean Air Force Captain Rodrigo Bravo Garrido in the book: UFOs—Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go On the Record.

    In 1988, a Boeing 737 that was approaching a runway at Tepual Airport, in Chile, suddenly encountered a UFO coming straight at the plane, forcing the pilot to make a steep turn to avoid colliding. Aircraft encounters with UFOs date back to almost the beginning of the history of human flight. Military forces, the NSA, the CIA, the FAA, and aircraft manufacturers are all fully aware of that history and of the hazards posed by UFOs.

  3. Stark Raven Says:

    The idea of a UFO dropping an airliner onto the surface of the ocean seems overly imaginative to me.

  4. PluribusOne™ Says:

    The idea of a UFO dropping an airliner onto the surface of the ocean intact may seem overly imaginative, and yet some have suggested that MH370’s pilot intentionally landed on the surface of the ocean in one piece and allowed it to sink slowly under the waves, which is practically impossible considering that the surface is not smooth like a river or lake. Aviation experts say that landing on the ocean is like crash-landing on rugged terrain. The plane would be torn apart. However, depositing a plane directly down onto the ocean’s surface would, potentially, be less damaging.

    Based on a report filed by a Malaysian woman whose flight passed over the Andaman Sea during the day of March 8 on a flight into Kuala Lumpur, the idea that MH370 may have been dropped onto the water is not wildly imaginative. Some twelve hours after 370 went missing she said that she saw a plane sitting on the surface of the sea. At the time of her sighting she had yet to learn of the loss of MH370. She was laughed at for saying it, but, in her words: “I know what I saw.” The location makes sense too.

  5. PluribusOne™ Says:

    News update: On August 28, 2015, a New York Magazine article posted online presented the latest public information about the analysis of the Boeing 777 flaperon that washed up on the island of La Reunion.

    Popular expectation was that this part that Boeing identified as a 777 wing-part would be confirmed as belonging to MH370 as soon as the serial number was matched-up. Malaysia’s prime minister went so far as to say that it had been “conclusively confirmed” as belonging to the crashed airliner, which was premature and untrue. It has now been officially confirmed that the ID plate that would have borne the matching serial number was missing and that the part also did not match-up with Malaysia Airlines’ maintenance records in some undisclosed physical respect. It has been speculated that the found part was either a new replacement part not yet put in service or a scrapped part held for that purpose.

    Adding to the mystery with respect to the flaperon is its encrustation with barnacles because these little creatures would only be there if the part had been suspended beneath the ocean waters—for months—without actually sinking or floating. The problem here is that experts says that such an object would either float on the surface or sink, not hover underwater.

    In my analysis, the found part was most likely not a new replacement part because such a part would only have been able to drop into the ocean if a plane or ship delivering the part met with catastrophe, and there is no reasonable explanation for a new part to be missing its ID plate. It was also not a scrapped part because such a part would be accounted for someplace and yet it was not apparently logged into anyone’s inventory—and, again, how would it have gone missing to the point of accidentally turning up in the ocean? This is an exotic item, not a Toyota hubcap.

    Our speculation is that the part was manufactured outside of the normal production process solely for the purpose of being planted as evidence, and it could not avoid being recorded in factory records if a serial number were assigned. As to the barnacles, the evidence is clearer. The part had been suspended underwater for months. Since this is not the way the part would have behaved, we conclude that the part was intentionally tethered underwater for months by someone having access to a clandestinely manufactured part for the purpose of collecting barnacles.

    The evidence indicates that an unprecedented elaborate effort has been and is being made to cover up the true nature of the disappearance of this plane and to force closure of the investigation into its crash.

  6. PluribusOne™ Says:

    News update: As of today, after two years, authorities admit that the disappearance of flight 370 officially remains a mystery.

  7. PluribusOne™ Says:

    After nearly two and a half years of theorizing and searching, on July 22, 2016 it was reported that—despite the pursuit of several favored theories—the search for Flight 370 is being called off, suspended indefinitely, due to an “absence of evidence.”

    Authorities explained that no debris points to a location for the main wreckage, an explanation that avoids reporting greater truth that no debris found was definitively determined to have been part of 370; hence there is “absence of evidence” that 370 crashed at all.

    We continue to assert, as we did the day of its disappearance, that Flight 370 was “taken” by a UFO. It is possible, as we suggested a year ago, that the abducted plane was subsequently dropped onto the ocean’s surface, in which case there would be little, if any, debris.

    We predict that in the near future one or more exposés will be published that include tantalizing “insider” allegations—but no solid evidence—to keep the public debating about what really happened. Those few who know will keep the secret shrouded in clouds of disinformation.

  8. PluribusOne™ Says:

    After nearly three years, today it was announced that the search for disappeared Malaysian Flight 370–now called the greatest mystery in modern aviation history–has been suspended (again). This suspension follows the July, 2016 suspension.

    The Malaysian Transport Minister says they are going “back to the drawing board” to revisit the data. This is not the first time that aircraft have gone permanently missing in conjunction with (publicly) unexplained phenomena.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s