Posted on 06/05/2009 12:35:45 PM PDT by milwguy
new analysis of the weather in the vicinity at the time of the crash appears to cast doubt on earlier reports that the plane encountered severe thunderstorms, lightning and wind gusts. Though there were storms, they were almost certainly less intense than those sometimes encountered above the United States, and lightning was at least 150 miles away, said Greg Forbes, severe-weather expert for the Weather Channel.
Forbes said an examination of weather data for Sunday, including satellite images, indicated updrafts of perhaps 20 mph, far from the initial reports of 100 mph.
"I wouldn't expect it to be enough to break apart the plane," Forbes said.
Meanwhile, even more doubt was placed on the lightning strike theory when the World-Wide Lightning Network (WWLLN) announced that they did not detect lightning anywhere near the suspected crash area for an hour or more on either side of the event.
(Excerpt) Read more at weather.com ...
Or some other explosion. Fuel tank explosion triggered by a lightning strike is one possibility. Apparently it has happened before.
I read that the winds were severe and violent combined with a extreme and multiple lightening strikes. There was even a moment by moment scenario described of what must have happened on board in reaction to this severe weather. Yet all of this was based on the premise that unusually severe storms were the cause and there was no way to avoid the system.
If that premised has changed or is a lie then there is no question in my mind. Terrorism. The question is why go to such great lengths to hide it or bury that possibility. That is the big concern and that is the question in the end that I want answered.
I would just note that it’s possible that some terrorist group has in fact claimed credit - to sources that are being kept quite ...
IMHO Flight 800 (supposed exploding fuel tank) was a cover-up of a terrorist missile hit...
Why would a terrorist group that wants credit make its claims to sources that can be kept quiet? Am I to believe that a group capable of pulling off this airliner destruction has no Internet access?
Let’s say you are right. Would that missile have been shot off a seaward vessel?
Maybe it is a test run for something larger.
Possibly. That’s one of the few popular conspiracy theories that actually has some serious evidence to back it. But Flight 800 was not an example of a fuel tank explosion attributed to a lightning strike.
There is also another possibility - sloppiness in maintenance. Some years back, Taiwan's state-owned airline - China Airlines - had a plane (a 747) that also broke up in mid-air. The cause was diagnosed as maintenance issues - parts were not replaced when they should have been, leading to stress cracks accumulating until they disintegrated the entire plane in mid-flight.
The flight out of Brazil was not delayed due to a bomb threat. The bomb threat was made against a flight out of Argentina a couple days earlier.
Likewise some of these same individuals are stating that a massive explosion (some say bomb going off) best fits the known facts (no trace of aircraft)
I still contend it's not possible to somehow rule out terrorism simply as a result of it not being publicly proclaimed
I was just thinking the same thing. If there is a way to undetectably bring down a single plane, why not hold back on claiming credit until you can do it to 10 or 12 (US- & Israeli-flagged) planes simultaneously. Mid-atlantic location perfect for disposing of the evidence of your trial run...
Minister says cannot rule out terrorism in Air France plane crash
www.chinaview.cn 2009-06-06 00:46:57 P
PARIS, June 5 (Xinhua) — French Defence Minister Herve Morin said Friday that the possibility of a terrorist attack on Air France Flight 447 cannot be ruled out.
“We have no right to exclude terrorism,” he told journalists, but adding that he had not heard of any threats to the flight or of any group or individual claiming responsibility for bringing down the aircraft.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-06/06/content_11496193.htm
There has been plenty of confirmation that major thunderstorms were in the plane’s flight path, and the following analyst believes there was lightning as well, based on the other confirmed attributes of the storm systems, and explains why definitive confirmation may simply not be available.
http://www.weathergraphics.com/tim/af447/
Can’t be definitely ruled out, but makes it even more unlikely than the other explanations which have been proposed, each of which are so far being classified by experts as unlikely. Fact remains, though, that the plane is gone.
Yeah, the entire MSM.
The pilots didn’t transmit anything after the plane was in trouble. Those were all automated transmissions from the plane’s systems. The last actual communication from the pilots was quite a bit earlier, and quite routine, just noting thunderstorm activity which is to be expected along that route.
Yeah, and the entire cybersphere too. Apparently not one associate of the responsible group has access to the Internet.
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.