Lol at everyone who doesn't know the answer to this

In theory yes. In practical terms, with only 0.3% of the search area available to the public, come on. It's a waste of time and absolutely ineffective. I would think at least on this site people would understand that having access to only 24,000 square kilometers of the 7,400,000 square kilometers the search area is comprised of is a waste of time but whatever.

This is a cute shift in your argument. Now the problem is that they're not doing ENOUGH crowdsourcing and it has nothing to do with Boston at all.

If you go back near the beginning of this discussion I actually mentioned that the one thing needed to make this work was good data being given to people.

Sorry I even asked.

I don't think it changes the possible outcomes very much. I never put a ton of weight on the programmed in course change since its still not too clear to me what exactly they were saying was transmitted, there have been mixed reports, and programming in an alternate/back-up/emergency landing site doesn't seem too non-standard.

Really, the only thing that would actually increase the accident probability for me would be a knowledgeable engineer explaining that the location of the systems that 'failed' was such that it could be likely they all failed without fatally damaging the plane so that it could continue to fly for hours more on autopilot.

I also suspect that its impossible for a breaker being pulled to stop the data being transmitted to the satellite but not stop the pinging. Pulling a breaker implies to me that you're removing all power from that device - and so its not going to keep pinging.

The type of 'damage' that we know had to have happened + lack of communication from pilots about an emergency + course change + plane continuing to fly on autopilot for hours is very damning. Everything else (preprogramming, computer simulator, timing of last message, etc.) is just sort of secondary to me.

Also, we know something out of the ordinary had to have happened. A knowledgeable person taking control of the plane is out of the ordinary but it does happen and its one thing that fits all the facts.

The electrical fire scenario involves lots of extraordinary things. Something starting a fire (it happens). The fire spreading in such a way to disable only transmission/location functions (I don't think its ever happened). A fire not bringing down the plane (not sure if a fire left alone has ever not brought a plane down). The pilots not radioing any distress call at all (I'm not sure if thats ever happened with a fire before).

what about attempted hijacking/pilot rerouting that ended up resulting in an accident? i think that's still a pretty strong possibility.

i still think the chances of a successful hijack/reroute are low.

I know why the general public wants to know what happened and why the families want to know - but why do governments all over the World care so much what happened? Why is it so necessary and urgent for them to find the plane? It's obvious at this point everybody on board is dead - so why not just move on?

I think JAASH's comparisons to Boston bombing crowdsourcing issues have been solid.

For example, what if a dolphin was identified by amateurs as a potential piece of floating debris. That dolphin's reputation might be ruined by false connection to the tragedy. And even if exonerated, the media coverage alone would put a strain on the dolphin's life.

Oh, I see your problem, you think this is a search and rescue mission.

That's what the victims families think it is.

these are kind of the same thing. given the uncertainty with the acars transmission, i think a perfectly reasonable chain of events is:

1) everything is ok. co-pilot radios in good night.
2) a catastrophic fire starts that knocks out many of the systems, including communication.
3) pilots try to rectify the situation. they over the indian ocean, perhaps their mapping software is down too.
4) they fly around aimlessly trying to find somewhere to emergency land. perhaps unable to even really control the plane. perhaps even unconscious.
5) plane crashes in the ocean.

Did Courtney Love find it yet?

I heard she did, but she's withholding disclosure pending the announcement of the reward amount.

Why was the plane re-routed prior to #1? The fact that it was makes that whole list completely unreasonable.

It wasn't?

We don't know the plane was re-routed prior to #1. That information came from an anonymous source who could have been an FAA investigator or a mail room clerk.

Pretty sure it was this guy

the major problem (among others)is this "catastrophic fire" which apparently did a ton of damage but not enough to knock the plane out of the sky for 6 hours. and also the fact that this fire happened at exactly the point between radar handoffs.

.

fire knocked out electrical systems. interior fire. the body of the plane was able to fly, and was either unable to be controlled by the pilots, or the pilots were unconscious. perhaps the interior fire was even put out by people, but the resulting smoke then caused people to pass out.

timing just a major coincidence. weirder stuff has happened.

-----

to me that theory just makes the most sense. obviously open to all other possibilities.

Right. And we also don't know for sure that a black hole didn't swallow it or it wasn't abducted by aliens.

But pilot suicide and hijacking also don't make any sense. Hijackers make demands or do something with the plane. There is some objective other than flying it to the middle of the ocean. And pilot suicide? Why would he fly around for seven hours? Just to screw with the people riding in the plane?

exactly. so why do we think it was rerouted prior to the final communication?