(NaturalNews) For some reason we have yet to fully understand, jetliners keep disappearing or falling out of the sky with disturbing regularity. Air travel is amazingly safe, of course. Statistically, it produces far fewer injuries and deaths than vaccine shots which injure so many children that the United States Congress was
forced to set up a special "vaccine court" just to handle all the injury claims and billions of dollars in compensation payouts.
But the circumstances under which jetliners keep disappearing smack of conspiracy and cover-ups. Flight MH370, for example, has still never been located. In July of last year, I was the first independent media journalists to suggest
the plane had been hijacked. Mainstream media outlets like CNN ridiculed the theory, but just this month
CNN began rolling out the exact same explanation, now claiming the jetliner was, indeed, hijacked. (Funny how CNN's narratives completely flip-flop over time, isn't it?)
Now with the Germanwings jetliner incident, we have the New York Times "pulling a CNN," you might say. According to
this NYT story, the memory card of one of the airplane's two black boxes is missing, and the story claims it must have been "destroyed by the impact."
"Investigators have so far been unable to retrieve data from one black box, and the other was badly damaged and its memory card was missing," reports the New York Times.
If you read the logic of that sentence, it seems to state that no data was recovered from either black box, right?
But then
in the exact same story, the NYT also reports, "Remi Jouty, director of France's Bureau of Investigation and Analysis, confirmed that audio of voices had been recovered from the black box in the crash of the Germanwings plane in the French Alps."
So, wait: there WAS voice recording data recovered from one of the black boxes? Confusing things even further, another paragraph in the same story says:
At the crash site, a senior official working on the investigation said, workers found the casing of the plane's other black box, the flight data recorder, but the memory card containing data on the plane's altitude, speed, location and condition was not inside, apparently having been thrown loose or destroyed by the impact.So what we really have here is a story about two black boxes: one which either has voice data on it or doesn't have voice data on it, and the other black box which we are supposed to believe was located but the memory card it protects was missing because it was destroyed even though it was surrounded by a black box that's almost impervious to destruction.
Black boxes are designed to survive plane crashes... DOH!
Now, those of you who understand the laws of physics -- which obviously makes you a terrorist in modern America where any real grasp of scientific reality is widely condemned -- know that black boxes are designed for the precise purpose of making sure nothing inside them gets destroyed
even in a violent airplane explosion or impact crash.
If black boxes did not survive plane crashes, there would be no real point in having them in the first place.
It's nearly impossible to destroy these black boxes -- which are really orange -- without resorting to extreme methods of destruction. As
this NPR story explains, "The black box must be able to withstand an acceleration of 3,400 Gs (3,400 times the force of gravity)..."
To test the structural integrity of a black box, "[a]t 3,400 Gs," adds
HowStuffWorks.com, "the CSMU hits an aluminum honeycomb target at a force equal to 3,400 times its weight. This impact force is equal to or in excess of what a recorder might experience in an actual crash."
What the New York Times is now asserting, against all known laws of physics, is that a black box was found, it was opened, the memory card was missing and therefore
it must have been "thrown loose or destroyed."Consider the unlikelihood of such a claim being true. It mirrors the similarly ludicrous claim after 9/11 that the terrorist's passports survived the crash and were found on the sidewalk below the building... but the aircraft black boxes were all destroyed in the crash, of course. And like magic, we're all supposed to believe that U.S. passports will survive an extremely hot explosion that melts steel girders and collapses buildings, but a black box -- which is DESIGNED to be blown up and still survive -- somehow "lost" its memory card as a jetliner descended into terrain.
How convenient.
The far more reasonable explanation, of course -- which also happens to be aligned with the laws of physics -- is that
someone took the memory card out of the black box, which is why it's no longer in the black box.
If you scan a quick history of mysterious plane crashes that might be linked to rogue nations or government-run operations, you'll notice that
the black boxes are missing from ALL such plane crashes: 9/11, Malaysia Airlines, this Germanwings flight and no doubt many others. Black boxes, it seems, are only found intact when governments want to find them intact.
Why would someone want to take the memory card out of the black box?
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that the only reason someone who remove the memory card from the black box is because
they won't want the world to find out what's on the memory card.
And what is stored on these memory cards, exactly? Audible recordings of the flight deck and a detailed digital log of every flight command, environmental variable, flight control surface, altitude, heading, airspeed and everything else you might imagine is important in an airliner crash investigation. Black boxes contain all the data needed to entirely reconstruct the accident and find out what happened.
If someone carried out the attack on purpose, they could have easily been pre-positioned on the ground, ready to rush to the wreckage and pull the memory card. Black boxes are not terribly difficult to find if the wreckage is sufficiently broken apart. They're bright orange and unmistakable to identify, even in a pile of wreckage. They are designed to scream out "FIND ME!" in a mass of rubble. Because of the rugged terrain, it took rescue workers many hours to even arrive at the scene, leaving plenty of time for someone with a pre-positioned ground-based scout team to reach the wreckage first.
Why were the pilots apparently unconscious?
One reasonable working theory in all this is that some rogue government wanted to kill someone on the plane but make it look like an accident. Somehow they managed to incapacitate the pilots and then put the plane into a controlled descent into terrain, the theory goes.
"Among the theories that have been put forward by air safety analysts not involved in the investigation is the possibility that the pilots could have been incapacitated by a sudden event such as a fire or a drop in cabin pressure," reports the NYT. "A senior French official involved in the investigation, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said that the lack of communication from the pilots during the plane's descent was disturbing, and that the possibility that their silence was deliberate could not be ruled out."
On this point, I concur. Commercial pilots are incredibly well trained and tend to be very intelligent people. If they were conscious, they would have absolutely noticed the altitude descent, especially when flying among high-altitude mountains. All pilots who are still living are fully aware that if your aircraft altitude goes LOWER than the height of the nearby mountains, you probably need to go full throttle and climb. Monitoring your altitude is one of the very first things all pilots are taught (airspeed, altitude and heading, actually), and commercial pilots are taught to scan their instruments on a regular basis to watch for unexpected readings.
On top of that, pilots tend to be people who prefer to be living rather than dead. In fact, one of the best assurances of pilots doing a good job flying commercial airliners is the inescapable fact that
they are on board that same airliner. (Never fly in an aircraft remotely piloted via drone technology, if it ever comes to that...)
Thus, pilots tend to keep passengers alive because they want to keep themselves alive, too. It is almost inconceivable that the two pilots of this Airbus A320 would have both failed to notice the descent in mountainous terrain. The fact that the aircraft obviously did not suffer a sudden flight control failure also means it was not blown up in mid-air.
The list of plausible theories narrows
So what's left in the realm of deductive logic? The list of possibilities narrows rapidly:
• Pilot murder-suicide.
• On-board hijacking that incapacitated the pilots.
• A sophisticated cyber war hack attack that somehow took control of the plane and its communications capabilities.
• A bizarre coincidence of mechanical failures (such as a loss of oxygen) combined with highly unlikely aircraft control failures (loss of altitude calibration or electronics glitches). This possibility is almost certainly ruled out, as all commercial pilots are trained in emergency oxygen mask deployment when noticing signs of hypoxia.
• An unusual electromagnetic attack of some kind -- perhaps a "pulse" weapon that selectively disabled some functionality of the aircraft. (Extremely unlikely.)
The award for the most bizarre theory of all belongs to the "CERN brought down the aircraft" explanation you can
read about at All News Pipeline.
We still don't have enough information to know with any degree of certainty what really happened, but we do have enough information to know that the "official narratives" being put out by the media just don't hold water. Not if you believe in the laws of physics, anyway. And if you don't, then how do you think airplanes fly in the first place?
Sound off with your comments below: