Posted on 10/15/2018 9:03:34 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
That is John Locke from Lost. Reasonably decent TV series, kinda got lost in metaphysics stuff.
LOL, well put!
By some other tabloid talking head? Riiiiight. It was speculated that the pic showed a plane in flight, but other satellites show the same thing, so it isn't. There's a crashed plane there, but it looks like it has been there a long, long while.
If he is right, they should be able to find wreckage...if they don’t it is likely he is in error.
Maybe I shouldn't use the pics used in the linked aricle? That's what I did, and generally do, unless there are no pics, or a better one is available.
Wings are swept back too severely
It crashed bonehead
The picture in the article shows an intact airplane.
Looks like a DC-9/MD-80 class airplane.
I don’t buy that this guy has anything useful to the investigation of the missing MH370, but I also don’t think its something to argue over. Not completely sure why you included me in your earlier post, but no harm, no foul. Have a great day.
I call Bravo Sierra. There would be a 1/4 mile debris field.
Not buying this tale.
1. I can see no damage to the trees that happens when tons of metal hit them at 150 knots or better.
2. The aircraft still has its wings and seems intact. This does not happen at 150 knots or better when hitting a forest jungle.
3. Aircraft did not burn. This does happen when hitting the ground at 150 knots or better.
i'll be glad when (if?) the guy reaches the site and finds out what kind of plane is there, it'll eliminate one of the claims (or maybe confirm it, but that seems unlikely). The flaperon which was the first piece found from the plane (washed up on Reunion island in 2015 I think) hadn't sustained damage consistent with a nose-down crash, or a high speed ditch on water. It was also nowhere near the wild goose chase search area s of Australia. When the remains of the craft are found, they'll be somewhere north of Malaysia, probably underwater.
That picture if looked at closer does not show an intact plane as the fuselage is much brighter and the right wing appears to be sheared off. If one looks at what appears to be the wing it doesn’t line up right with the rest of the plane. This is not an intact plane image. There would be a tail section that isn’t there as the the plane ends unusually short. This may not be the plane in question but it is not an image of an intact plane.
Additionally, there appears to be a landing path that comes up diagonally from the bottom right of the picture. The yellow line is across it in the first picture. The jungle is at a different level in this path. Again this is not a picture of an intact plane and it may not be the plane in question. Only visual verification (boots on the ground) will verify this.
It is also very likely that the empennage and rear fuselage would separate behind the wing roots and trail the main wreckage in the debris path.
We are all going to see what we want to see in that poor resolution photo. You know how I feel.
Did you look at the Google pic? The plane is intact with wings still on.
Did you read the articles? No, you didn't.
So, chopper in to the GPS coordinates for a look.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.