08-22-2016, 07:38 PM
I thought the drift study work done by David Griffin of the CSIRO useful and very thorough, even if it was still tied to that 7th arc. That is what they were commissioned to look at. The CSIRO looked at many different points and chose a nice WIDE area at each location, so covered a lot more than just the ATSB's useless 7th arc. I saw no sign of any loss of objectivity. Yes the first report the ATSB commissioned from another group was rubbish, I suspect deliberately, certainly all the overseas ones seem to be suffering a similar problem, whether France, Germany or some one else. Do not believe any of them trying to move things north. If the debris had started north it would not be as spread out and would have been found a lot faster. This stuff spread out before it entered the gyre, and I am still not convinced it all even went that way to start with. You can see some of the other CSIRO graphics at this link. http://www.marine.csiro.au/~griffin/MH37...index.html
And as is the nature of drift studies, they all assumed the debris was near the surface or on the surface. We do not have any drift data for things below the surface, because it is not meant to drift if it gets down that far. And things naturally buoyant are not meant to travel submerged. So do not blame our drift specialists for not being able to solve the problem, I doubt they are ever going to back track this stuff with drift studies.
Now they manage to get a similar reaction to any of their fake flaperons next year, we can all watch them try and explain it, with these fancy mathematical models or the old fashioned drifters, they will fail. They deliberately filter out any actual drifters that behave strangely, by moving too fast. So things not behaving as expected is nothing new. We have just never lost an entire plane before, and been so determined to find out where all the pieces went.
Personally I doubt the surface search was the failure they want us to believe. The whole investigation has smelled more than a bit fishy to me, it is not just Malaysia involved in the coverup.
And as is the nature of drift studies, they all assumed the debris was near the surface or on the surface. We do not have any drift data for things below the surface, because it is not meant to drift if it gets down that far. And things naturally buoyant are not meant to travel submerged. So do not blame our drift specialists for not being able to solve the problem, I doubt they are ever going to back track this stuff with drift studies.
Now they manage to get a similar reaction to any of their fake flaperons next year, we can all watch them try and explain it, with these fancy mathematical models or the old fashioned drifters, they will fail. They deliberately filter out any actual drifters that behave strangely, by moving too fast. So things not behaving as expected is nothing new. We have just never lost an entire plane before, and been so determined to find out where all the pieces went.
Personally I doubt the surface search was the failure they want us to believe. The whole investigation has smelled more than a bit fishy to me, it is not just Malaysia involved in the coverup.