Malaysia airlines B777 missing

[Mr Quatro]

Who's going to pay for all of this?

Sooner or later that little problem is going to come up.

Malaysian airlines insurance company?

CNN, Fox News, ABC, CBS, NBC and other world news agencies are making tons of money off advertising.

Maybe they'll have a telethon using Jerry Lewis (is he still alive) or someone like that ... I can see it now:

"Okay folks we have located the black boxes, but this under seas project is costing over 1 million dollars a day we are going to need your support"

[TarJak]

So far the Australian Government's been footing most of the bill for the search coordination out of Perth. MAS will most likley have to cough up somewhere along the line and as they are government owned the Malaysian Government will be copping a lot of the bill.

The Airline's Insurance will only pay for the hull loss, and 3rd party claims on loss of life, luggage etc. Search doesn't get covered AFAIK.

[August]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

Not necessarily.

I agree. 73 years from sinking to discovery glosses over the fact we only had the technology to actually conduct a successful search for a small fraction of that time.

[guntherprien]

Originally Posted by TarJak

No. But I'm also not claiming I know that intelligence services know where the aircraft is by spouting a bunch of poorly thought out speculation with very large factual errors.

The search is moving to its next phase: http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2014-0...e-sent/5388550

And you really believe everything the press tells you ?
On second thoughts,judging by your sweeping remarks,you probably do.
Do you know ANYTHING about the capabilities of modern listening techniques?

[TarJak]

Originally Posted by guntherprien

And you really believe everything the press tells you ?
On second thoughts,judging by your sweeping remarks,you probably do.
Do you know ANYTHING about the capabilities of modern listening techniques?

No I don't believe everything the press tells me. I also don't believe every conspiracy theory that I read on the internet.

Yes, I know quite a bit about the capabilities of modern and also ancient and historic listening devices. It's been a career and hobby of mine for the past 30 years, and an interest of mine since my father explained how SONAR works to me almost 40 years ago. What would you like to know?

I also know a lot about the commercial airline industry and the capabilities and inadequacies for tracking aircraft in-flight,having worked in that industry for 16 years.


You've presented no facts to support your claim of intelligence services covering up the location of the missing aircraft.

Before attacking what I know. Perhaps you should provide what you know then we can discuss it in an adult fashion.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by guntherprien

And you really believe everything the press tells you ?
On second thoughts,judging by your sweeping remarks,you probably do.
Do you know ANYTHING about the capabilities of modern listening techniques?

Should I be detecting something of a negative nature in your tone/nuance?

[Jimbuna]

The Bluefin has eventually completed its first mission after three attempts.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-27048242

[STEED]

Lets flog some more...

[guntherprien]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

Should I be detecting something of a negative nature in your tone/nuance?

I'm merely rebutting what I consider a negative response,maybe you should ask him the same question ?
Should I be detecting something threatening in your tone/nuance ?

[guntherprien]

Originally Posted by TarJak

No I don't believe everything the press tells me. I also don't believe every conspiracy theory rhat I read on the internet.



Before attacking what I know. Perhaps you should provide what you know then we can discuss it in an adult fashion.

Pray tell what you know of modern listening techniques.
What I posted initially was nothing conspiratorial,it was straight from the horses mouth,not some 40 year old,ancient knowledge......Just saying
Try researching instead of attacking a friendly poster.
It's people like you that stop folk posting on here for fear of ridicule.
I will debate you on any subject you care to mention,as long as you try to be adult about it,quid pro quo ?

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by guntherprien

Pray tell what you know of modern listening techniques.

One could easily ask you the same question. You seem to claim knowledge of said techniques, but you have not yet demonstrated said knowledge. What do you know of these things?

And before you ask, I don't know anything, and I haven't claimed to know anything, but you have, and have insulted other people by challenging their opinions. So, what are your credentials?

What I posted initially was nothing conspiratorial,it was straight from the horses mouth,not some 40 year old,ancient knowledge......Just saying

So you say, but the problem is we only have your word for that. You have not shown any knowledge of the subject at all so far. Can you back up your claim of the government knowing exactly where the jet is but covering it up? If you can, then show it. If you can't, then your argument is no better than anyone else's.

Try researching instead of attacking a friendly poster.

Does this mean that you have done the research? Can you show it? If so, please do.

It's people like you that stop folk posting on here for fear of ridicule.

I would say it's people who make claims then don't back them up who invite ridicule upon themselves.

I will debate you on any subject you care to mention,as long as you try to be adult about it,quid pro quo ?

So you say, but you have hardly been adult about it so far. You make a claim. Someone asks you to prove it. You counter by asking if he believes everything the government tells him. He counters that by saying no, but he also says he doesn't believe everything he reads on the internet. You counter by claiming to have inside knowledge. The problem is that so far you have shown no evidence of what you claim, and accuse the person who challenges your claim of not doing his research and then of being childish.

So, can you show any evidence for this claim or not?

If not, I'm ready to argue that my cousin works in the satellite tracking industry and says the plane was zapped by aliens. Any takers?

Oh, by the way, I'm only mildly interested in where the plane went, and how, and why. What I'm interested in here is honest debate.

[TarJak]

Lets review your words not mine:

Originally Posted by guntherprien

I find it hard to believe that any major powers', hi tech submarine, didn't pick anything up.
These subs can pick up anomolous sounds a continent away.
The intelligence services know exactly where the plane is,but can't reveal due to security reasons.
I know this sounds conspiracy bs,but my friend of a friend of a friend.ad infinitum,wink,wink,serves on SSN's and he has told me things that would make your hair curl. 'Nuff said

I selected the part where you said "I know this sounds conspiracy bs" and I suggested that it probably was. From the information that you have provided it certainly sounds like a conspiracy theory, so I can only assume that it most likely is one without some evidence to the contrary.

So far all we've seen from you is rhetoric that attempts to put the burden of disproving your unsupported claim on me.

Pray tell us what you have to support your claim of a government cover up.

Make your case or get off mine.

[guntherprien]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

One could easily ask you the same question. You seem to claim knowledge of said techniques, but you have not yet demonstrated said knowledge. What do you know of these things?

And before you ask, I don't know anything, and I haven't claimed to know anything, but you have, and have insulted other people by challenging their opinions. So, what are your credentials?


So you say, but the problem is we only have your word for that. You have not shown any knowledge of the subject at all so far. Can you back up your claim of the government knowing exactly where the jet is but covering it up? If you can, then show it. If you can't, then your argument is no better than anyone else's.


Does this mean that you have done the research? Can you show it? If so, please do.


I would say it's people who make claims then don't back them up who invite ridicule upon themselves.


So you say, but you have hardly been adult about it so far. You make a claim. Someone asks you to prove it. You counter by asking if he believes everything the government tells him. He counters that by saying no, but he also says he doesn't believe everything he reads on the internet. You counter by claiming to have inside knowledge. The problem is that so far you have shown no evidence of what you claim, and accuse the person who challenges your claim of not doing his research and then of being childish.

So, can you show any evidence for this claim or not?

If not, I'm ready to argue that my cousin works in the satellite tracking industry and says the plane was zapped by aliens. Any takers?

Oh, by the way, I'm only mildly interested in where the plane went, and how, and why. What I'm interested in here is honest debate.

I don't recall inviting you into this conversation.
Don't be so rude.
Have some manners instead of jumping into a full frontal attack,I know you're only trying to bolster your pal's response,but a little decorum goes a long way.
All I'm asking is for people to think outside of the box,instead of believing everything they hear.
A disappearance of this magnitude is unprecedented,my source says there is more to it than meets the eye (which is obvious).
It's absurd of you to ask me to back up 'my claim' that the govt. knows where it is,I was saying that there is no chance that if the plane crashed into the ocean that modern subs wouldn't have picked up the black box pings within 30 days.
Like I said,a little broader vision brings with it,it's own conclusions.
Best wishes and no offense taken/meant.

[NeonSamurai]

Alright let's all take a step back here <I am speaking as a moderator>, and relax. <moderator hat off>

Without my getting into it. The points are that a submarine may have picked up the pinging and the government it was attached to may have classified that knowledge. The opposite point is it is quite likely that a submarine did not hear this (there are not that many submarines in the ocean and they generally cannot hear for thousands of kilometers), and even if they did hear these sounds (plane hitting the water, or the pinging) the crew of the submarine may not have recognized the significance.

The other point was that if you are going to claim something and you want anyone to listen to it, it is wise to demonstrate that you have some knowledge in the subject (submarines and sonar in this case).

Anyhow lets keep it civil shall we?

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by guntherprien

I don't recall inviting you into this conversation.

It's an open internet forum. Did someone invite you to post in the first place? Anyone can say anything they want, as long as they don't violate the forum rules.

Don't be so rude.
Have some manners instead of jumping into a full frontal attack,I know you're only trying to bolster your pal's response,but a little decorum goes a long way.

How exactly was I rude? By posting a response on a forum?

All I'm asking is for people to think outside of the box,instead of believing everything they hear.

You did much more than that. You said flat out that the government knows exactly where the plane is but is covering it up.

A disappearance of this magnitude is unprecedented,my source says there is more to it than meets the eye (which is obvious).

Your unnamed source known only to you. Again, why should anyone believe you on your word alone?

It's absurd of you to ask me to back up 'my claim' that the govt. knows where it is,I was saying that there is no chance that if the plane crashed into the ocean that modern subs wouldn't have picked up the black box pings within 30 days.

You said the government knows where it is, and is covering it up. You stated it as a fact, rather than your opinion. A fact can be shown, or else it's not a fact. If you can't show it, then it's your opinion.

Like I said,a little broader vision brings with it,it's own conclusions.
Best wishes and no offense taken/meant.

But in a debate a statement must be backed up with facts, or else it is just opinion. Vision has nothing to do with it. What you say may be true, but you can't expect people to take your word for it, especially when you accuse others of swallowing lies. Until disproven, the government story may also be true.