Speaker 1: Fellow conspiracy realist, Welcome back to tonight's classic episode. You
Speaker 1: have probably heard a lot of scuttle but about aviation
Speaker 1: in general over the past few months, especially recently with
Speaker 1: the changes happening to the FAA here in the US,
Speaker 1: and of course with the early controversies surrounding Bowie. The
Speaker 1: America's answer to Airbus not.
Speaker 2: To mention the news that came through. I believe yesterday
Speaker 2: there was a Delta flight in Toronto that crash landed
Speaker 2: on the airstrip and was inverted completely. I was asking
Speaker 2: Matt off Air if anyone was killed. I think it
Speaker 2: was just like an emergency evacuation.
Speaker 3: After the fact.
Speaker 2: But it's kind of crazy times to be flying the
Speaker 2: friendly skies guys.
Speaker 3: Yeah, several people were critically injured, but nobody got killed
Speaker 3: in that incident, thankfully. They were all hanging upside down
Speaker 3: though inside the plane, which but hey, that didn't stop
Speaker 3: the three of us from getting on planes.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, what else are we going to do?
Speaker 1: Run really fast? I can't swim all right, but I
Speaker 1: can't swim across the Pacific yet. I'm trying to get
Speaker 1: my reps in. This is the thing. Though, thankfully, no
Speaker 1: one died in that recent aviation debacle, and the plane
Speaker 1: was like everybody knew where the plane was the entire time.
Speaker 1: And it may be immensely, profoundly disconcerting to realize that
Speaker 1: even now, in these our modern years, an entire plane
Speaker 1: can simply disappear. In November twenty nineteen, we explored something
Speaker 1: a lot of our fellow conspiracy realists. We're asking us
Speaker 1: about Malaysia Airlines Flight three seventy.
Speaker 3: Let's hear about him.
Speaker 4: From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
Speaker 4: riddled with unexplained events, and turn back now or learn
Speaker 4: this stuff. They don't want you to know. A production
Speaker 4: of iHeart Radios How Stuff Works.
Speaker 3: Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt.
Speaker 3: Noel is not with us today.
Speaker 1: They call me Ben. We are joined, as always with
Speaker 1: our super producer Paul Mission Control Deck and in spirit.
Speaker 1: Today we are joined with our returning super producer Seth Johnson.
Speaker 1: So say hello to Seth. Let us know if you
Speaker 1: think there is a particularly compelling moniker or nickname or
Speaker 1: appellation for Seth. That's appalation app e l l A
Speaker 1: t io N, not the Mountain range. I think Seth.
Speaker 1: You just said your favorite one was Seth Metal. In
Speaker 1: the meantime, you are you, You are here, and that
Speaker 1: makes this stuff they don't want you to to know. Matt,
Speaker 1: I feel like it's been forever.
Speaker 3: Yeah, you've been on an adventure.
Speaker 1: An adventure is a way to describe it. The last
Speaker 1: time I saw you, we were in Los Angeles.
Speaker 3: That's correct. Yeah. Yeah, And by the time this comes out,
Speaker 3: our episode with mister Dan Harmon will be out. But
Speaker 3: maybe that's something we should discuss when all three of
Speaker 3: us are in the room.
Speaker 1: Sure. Yeah. We took planes to our respective destinations, you
Speaker 1: and you and Noel went to Atlanta and I went
Speaker 1: to a couple other places before coming back to Atlanta.
Speaker 1: And the reality is that we are on the road
Speaker 1: and in the air pretty often. And you know, many
Speaker 1: of our fellow listeners tuning in today are part of
Speaker 1: the one point seven million US residents on a plane,
Speaker 1: like as we speak.
Speaker 3: Yeah, there are a lot of us in the air
Speaker 3: right now. Flyind this, guys.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And let's be honest, planes are amazing, astonishing, even
Speaker 1: it's this incredible thing that, for the majority of human
Speaker 1: civilization was a wild fantasy.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, and it's who is I think it's Luisy Ka,
Speaker 3: who has a bit about how amazing planes are. Maybe
Speaker 3: you don't listen to it anymore. I don't know where
Speaker 3: what the rules are, but you can he's got a
Speaker 3: great bit on it. It exists. But here's the thing.
Speaker 3: Sometimes traveling by a plane is that amazing experience, but
Speaker 3: other times, I mean it's at least a frustrating thing,
Speaker 3: or it can be. There are a lot of pros
Speaker 3: and cons. So if you are going to get on
Speaker 3: a plane, you'd know for sure you're going to get
Speaker 3: to your destination a lot faster than by any other means.
Speaker 3: If it's across a large body of water, then it's
Speaker 3: insanely faster than taking a boat. If it's across land,
Speaker 3: it's significantly faster in taking a car. But that is,
Speaker 3: of course, if everything goes well. There are some issues.
Speaker 3: Like we said, just getting through security now at this
Speaker 3: point is a bother. And also, you know, like we said,
Speaker 3: there are one point seven million people who are going
Speaker 3: to be in the air flying. They're also at airports
Speaker 3: hanging out and it gets really crowded. The planes themselves
Speaker 3: get really crowded, and also you got to deal with
Speaker 3: things like weather, because, let's face it, planes get delayed
Speaker 3: and sometimes even canceled because of the way moisture acts
Speaker 3: in the air.
Speaker 1: Or even lightning right as well, so we hear in
Speaker 1: stuff they don't want you to know, or no strangers
Speaker 1: being stuck in airports. Longtime listeners will recall that our
Speaker 1: current record was somewhere around sixteen eighteen hours in our
Speaker 1: own airport in Atlanta, Georgia. Let's also add, of course,
Speaker 1: the con that airplanes as they are designed now are
Speaker 1: terrible for the environment. That's just true. It's true that
Speaker 1: planes are often delayed, and while highly unlikely, plane sometimes crash.
Speaker 1: Let's emphasize this. You are much safer in an airplane
Speaker 1: than you will ever be in a car. So anybody
Speaker 1: afraid of flying, just think about that while you're driving
Speaker 1: on the interstate.
Speaker 3: Unless you're just in a car in a well yeah,
Speaker 3: I was gonna say in a garage, but that can
Speaker 3: be unsafe too.
Speaker 1: All right, if it's running in the interstate. When you're driving,
Speaker 1: let's all be very conscious of the fact that the
Speaker 1: only thing preventing other people from careening into you is
Speaker 1: an honor system of painted lines. In most cases, there's
Speaker 1: no physical barrier. A plane is much safer, but a
Speaker 1: plane will still sometimes crash, and every once in a
Speaker 1: while a plane will simply disappear. In today's episode, we're
Speaker 1: exploring one of the most recent, most famous examples of
Speaker 1: disappearing aircraft. Here's today's question, what happened to Malaysia Airlines
Speaker 1: Flight three seventy. Here are the facts.
Speaker 3: Okay, So there are a lot of numbers in here
Speaker 3: that we're going to be going over. Some of them
Speaker 3: are much more important than We'll kind of let you
Speaker 3: know as we're going. So the flight in question, Malaysia
Speaker 3: Airlines Flight three seventy, was the plane at least a
Speaker 3: Boeing seven seven seven now is a specific kind of
Speaker 3: seven seven seven. It was a two h six er. Now,
Speaker 3: this just means that it was an extended range versions,
Speaker 3: so it can travel further than the regular Boeing seven
Speaker 3: seven seven. Now, this particular model of seven seven seven
Speaker 3: has been in the air, been flying commercially since nineteen
Speaker 3: ninety seven. And this model is it's huge. Its length
Speaker 3: is over two hundred feet and it's designed to accommodate
Speaker 3: upwards of two hundred and sixty passengers. So two hundred
Speaker 3: and sixty plus. It can be basically changed slightly. How
Speaker 3: how the seat structure is to accommodate more people.
Speaker 1: Yeah, here's a little conspiracy that we'll just add in
Speaker 1: add in for free here on our free show, and
Speaker 1: we'll confirm this Concer two airline leg room is getting
Speaker 1: smaller with each successive iteration.
Speaker 3: Why has that been because.
Speaker 1: They even put more people on the plane. Oh oh,
Speaker 1: and then there's still sell more tickets than there are
Speaker 1: seats in the plane. There's a there's a dark science
Speaker 1: to it. This particular plane in question, the one that
Speaker 1: the Boeing seven seven seven two h sixty R that
Speaker 1: was flying on flight three seventy. It had the serial
Speaker 1: number two eight four two zero. It had the registration
Speaker 1: number nine m MRO. It was the four hundred and
Speaker 1: fourth Boeing seven seventy seven produced. It was first flown
Speaker 1: on May fourteenth, two thousand and two, and then after
Speaker 1: that it was delivered to Malaysia Airlines on May thirty first,
Speaker 1: two thousand and two. And you know, like we were
Speaker 1: talking about with the confirmed conspiracy to rob you of
Speaker 1: leg room, this plane was configured to fit two hundred
Speaker 1: and eighty two passengers. Yeah, So luckily for the people
Speaker 1: who are stuck in those middle rows, the plane wasn't
Speaker 1: packed to the gills, right.
Speaker 3: Yeah, Well, let's go ahead and talk about that, just
Speaker 3: so most people understand in the if you're thinking about
Speaker 3: maybe a plane that you've been on before, if you've
Speaker 3: flown in a plane Malaysia, this one, Malaysia Airlines flight
Speaker 3: three seventy, had three seats in the center aisle. Then
Speaker 3: it had two seats, you know, a row of two
Speaker 3: seats on the left and a row of two seats
Speaker 3: on the right. If you were sitting economy. It was
Speaker 3: much more spread out and sparse if you were sitting
Speaker 3: first class or a business class.
Speaker 1: And during this flight there were twelve crew members. There
Speaker 1: were two hundred and twenty seven passengers. One hundred and
Speaker 1: fifty three of those passengers were Chinese nationals, the majority
Speaker 1: thirty eight passengers were Malaysian, and the rest were from
Speaker 1: a combination a mixtape of twelve different countries. You will
Speaker 1: read different estimates of the total number of people aboard,
Speaker 1: but we'll have more on that later. The plane itself
Speaker 1: had had no major incidents in the past, and routine
Speaker 1: maintenance inspections had been carried out, the most recent one
Speaker 1: on February twenty third, twenty fourteen. They found no significant issues,
Speaker 1: you know what I mean.
Speaker 3: So it's pretty good. Twelve years of service almost with
Speaker 3: no major incidents. I would take those odds if I
Speaker 3: was gonna get on that plane or be the captain
Speaker 3: of that plane. So let's get to the day. On
Speaker 3: March eighth, twenty fourteen, So it departed from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia,
Speaker 3: and it was headed to Beijing, China. So and oh,
Speaker 3: so oh, it's really important to note here this was
Speaker 3: a red eye flight. This was one of those early
Speaker 3: early morning you're gonna fly basically through the night and
Speaker 3: probably sleep on the plane if you're a passenger. The
Speaker 3: wheels were up at twelve thirty five am, the local time.
Speaker 3: And it should also be noted that this is the
Speaker 3: same they're essentially flying north east a little bit to
Speaker 3: Beijing from Kuala Lumpur, so they're in the same time zone.
Speaker 3: So when we're talking about times here, it's going to
Speaker 3: be the same thing. So leaves at twelve thirty five am,
Speaker 3: it's scheduled to arrive in Beijing at six thirty five am.
Speaker 1: And this was a routine trip. It's one of two
Speaker 1: daily flights the airline conducts along this route. That's pretty
Speaker 1: common with a lot of airline destinations because you can
Speaker 1: fly the plane from point A to point B and
Speaker 1: then fly it from point B to point A, so
Speaker 1: it ends up where it left and it still has
Speaker 1: its home. It's HQ, but now you have two flights
Speaker 1: instead of one. This flight takes about five hours and
Speaker 1: thirty four minutes. This consumes a ballpark of eighty two
Speaker 1: thousand pounds of jet fuel, which is normal, and in
Speaker 1: another routine practice, the aircraft carries one hundred and eight thousand,
Speaker 1: two hundred pounds of fuel, including its reserves. This gives
Speaker 1: it an overall flight time endurance. It can be in
Speaker 1: the air for seven hours and thirty one minutes. This
Speaker 1: ensures that pilots can keep the craft aloft in case
Speaker 1: they need to divert to another airport. Think of it
Speaker 1: like a form of insurance, a margin of error. Again,
Speaker 1: this is a pretty common thing. This is not in
Speaker 1: any way unusual. We have to set the facts out there,
Speaker 1: so we've established the following things as being normal and routine.
Speaker 1: Right the roots, the passengers, the mountain fuel they had
Speaker 1: and so on. But there was a very abnormal and
Speaker 1: tragic thing that happened that made flight three seventy different
Speaker 1: from all the other routine trips back and forth from
Speaker 1: Beijing and Malaysia, and that was that this plane disappeared.
Speaker 1: What exactly happened will answer the question after a word
Speaker 1: from our sponsor. We're back a little bit of a
Speaker 1: fake Matt, unfortunately, we will answer what we know about
Speaker 1: this question.
Speaker 3: Yes, the official numbers and such times and what occurred.
Speaker 3: And again, it may be a little bit confusing as
Speaker 3: we're going through this because there are a lot of
Speaker 3: times and kind of numbers that are occurring here. Just
Speaker 3: we'll try and keep you as focused as possible as
Speaker 3: we're getting through this. But this stuff is important. So
Speaker 3: you've probably been on a plane before, and you've watched
Speaker 3: movies hopefully maybe okay, So if you've ever seen a
Speaker 3: movie before where a pilot is involved, or you get
Speaker 3: to spend time in a cockpit of a pilot, or
Speaker 3: maybe you've ever flown a plane, or you have any
Speaker 3: working knowledge of this, maybe you've just used Microsoft's flight
Speaker 3: simulator like I have, so you know that there are
Speaker 3: important transmissions that occur between air traffic control and the
Speaker 3: person who is in control of a flight an aircraft
Speaker 3: flying vehicle in the sky. And a lot of this
Speaker 3: is actually transmissions that are done by voice, where two
Speaker 3: human beings are talking to each other. But a lot
Speaker 3: of other really important stuff occurs just through the systems
Speaker 3: within the airplane itself and the radar that exists at
Speaker 3: air traffic control at varying places throughout the world. As
Speaker 3: a plane is flying over certain areas, and there are
Speaker 3: these handoffs that occur between the varying air traffic control systems.
Speaker 3: So let's say in this case they're flying from Kuala
Speaker 3: Lumpur up to Beijing. There are several places they're going
Speaker 3: to go over Vietnam, right, So as they're going into Vietnam,
Speaker 3: they have to then begin communicating rather than the Kuala
Speaker 3: Lumpur air Traffic Control to then begin communicating with the
Speaker 3: Vietnam Air traffic Control or whichever local air traffic controllers
Speaker 3: are there. So just keep that in mind as we're
Speaker 3: going through here. Communications are key. So the last automated
Speaker 3: transmission that came from the plane that was sent out
Speaker 3: to air traffic controllers was this automated position report, and
Speaker 3: it's something that was sent through a cars ACARS, the
Speaker 3: aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting system, and this occurred at
Speaker 3: one six Malaysian time, so that came that's what twelve
Speaker 3: thirty five wheels up to one oh six. That's where
Speaker 3: that signal went out.
Speaker 1: And this signal, this message, this transmission does not contain
Speaker 1: a multiple plot twist or anything. It's sort of the
Speaker 1: metadata of the flight. How much gas do we have left?
Speaker 1: Where are we is it where we're supposed to be
Speaker 1: and the answers to all these questions at the time
Speaker 1: where yes, we have ninety six six hundred pounds of gas,
Speaker 1: where we're ready to go. We're doing the right thing.
Speaker 1: The final verbal signal to air traffic control occurs just
Speaker 1: a bit after. It's a one nineteen one twenty in
Speaker 1: the morning. Captain Zahari Ahmad Shah acknowledges the transition from
Speaker 1: the Kuala Lumpur radar to the ho Chi Min Area
Speaker 1: Control Center. And that's just as you said earlier, Matt.
Speaker 1: Let's think of it kind of like an audio radar
Speaker 1: version of a handshake or a pass off, So that
Speaker 1: despite no longer being in Malaysia's airspace, the plane is
Speaker 1: still under the watchful eye of some sort of authority.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and that's gonna come. It's going to be important
Speaker 3: later on in the story because there's a very specific
Speaker 3: thing you have to do within the airplane to change
Speaker 3: your transponder to then it's called squawk, to then change
Speaker 3: that to send out to the new air traffic controllers.
Speaker 1: Just so. The crew was expected to signal air traffic
Speaker 1: control in Ho Chi Min City as the aircraft passed
Speaker 1: into Vietnamese airspace, and that was Vietnamese airspace was just
Speaker 1: north of the point where contact was lost. Interesting part
Speaker 1: about that last verbal signal. We have the We have
Speaker 1: the quote of what they said. The controller Kuala Lumpur
Speaker 1: Center radioed Malaysian three seven zero contact Ho Chi Minh
Speaker 1: one two zero decimal nine. Good night. The captain Zahari
Speaker 1: answers good night Malaysia three seven zero. But he doesn't
Speaker 1: read back the frequency the way he should have according
Speaker 1: to protocol. Otherwise that transmission is normal. He didn't say anything,
Speaker 1: you know, like the elder gods rise, the stars are right,
Speaker 1: the rivers run red with blood. He just said what
Speaker 1: he was supposed to say. And when we get into
Speaker 1: the pinging the science of the radar here, we just
Speaker 1: have to understand a few basic things. Radar relies on
Speaker 1: just simple raw pingsing thing thing off different objects in
Speaker 1: the sky, but air traffic control systems use what's known
Speaker 1: as secondary radar. Secondary radar needs a transponder signal that
Speaker 1: is transmitted by each airplane and contains more information than
Speaker 1: the primary radar does. Secondary radar comes from the plane
Speaker 1: has the airplane's identity and altitude. A few seconds after
Speaker 1: MH three seventy crosses into Vietnamese airspace, the symbol showing
Speaker 1: its transponder its secondary radar stuff drops from the screens.
Speaker 1: It disappears at least as far as Malaysian Air Traffic
Speaker 1: Control can see, and then sorry, in their primary radar,
Speaker 1: it disappears from Malaysian Air traffic control. Thirty seven seconds later,
Speaker 1: the whole thing disappears from secondary radar. And that time
Speaker 1: occurs that's around one twenty one thirty nine minutes after takeoff.
Speaker 3: And that's really weird because that would possibly signal that
Speaker 3: someone within the aircraft in the cockpit turned their transponder
Speaker 3: to stand by, which is like I'm trying to imagine
Speaker 3: what an equivalent of that would be it's like a Bluetooth.
Speaker 3: Imagine a Bluetooth machine that you've got somewhere in your
Speaker 3: house and it's connected up. Let's say to your phone, right,
Speaker 3: You've got let's say it's a Google Home speaker in
Speaker 3: your phone. The phone is the airplane and the Google
Speaker 3: Home is the air traffic controller, and they're connected via
Speaker 3: this Bluetooth signal because both are sending out signals, right,
Speaker 3: and they're talking to each other. In this scenario, it
Speaker 3: appears that somebody just turned the Bluetooth off on that
Speaker 3: phone or the airplane to where Now that Google Home
Speaker 3: is still searching for that thing, but it can't find
Speaker 3: it because the phone is no longer transmitting.
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly. The people in the Vietnamese control center, they
Speaker 1: know that MH three seventy is crossed in the airspace.
Speaker 1: They've seen it disappear, and they tried to contact the
Speaker 1: aircraft to various means, to no avail. The captain of
Speaker 1: another aircraft attempted to contact the crew a little bit
Speaker 1: after one point thirty using the International Air Distress or
Speaker 1: IAD frequency, and he was trying to reach them to
Speaker 1: relay what air traffic control in Vietnam was saying, which
Speaker 1: was basically what happened to you call us check in,
Speaker 1: and the captain of this other aircraft says that he
Speaker 1: was able to establish communication, but he only heard mumbling
Speaker 1: and static, which would make for a very creepy sound.
Speaker 1: Cue purpose.
Speaker 3: In that right there could get into something that may
Speaker 3: have occurred on that plane. Just the just keep that
Speaker 3: in your mind, mumbling and static.
Speaker 1: And calls me to Flight three seventies cockpit at two
Speaker 1: thirty nine AM and seven thirteen am as this search
Speaker 1: is continuing and reaching fever pitch. They went unanswered, but
Speaker 1: they were acknowledged by the aircraft's onboard satellite data unit.
Speaker 1: So something acknowledged that received it. But it was an
Speaker 1: automated acknowledgment. It was a machine.
Speaker 3: But it is at least good to know because again,
Speaker 3: if we're following our timeline here, we're still around one
Speaker 3: thirty right when we're talking about this other airplane that
Speaker 3: was attempting to contact. But if we're jumping to you know,
Speaker 3: the plane was supposed to be in Beijing at six
Speaker 3: thirty am, right, and it's the same it's the same
Speaker 3: time zone. So if they're pinging at seven thirteen. They're
Speaker 3: attempting to establish communication again, and something on that plane
Speaker 3: is still responding. That means it's it's functioning somewhere right.
Speaker 1: Yes. Exactly around the time that Flight three seventy disappears,
Speaker 1: radar and its transponders stops pinging. Military radar shows Flight
Speaker 1: three seventy turning right but then beginning a left turn
Speaker 1: to some southwesterly direction. From one thirty in the morning
Speaker 1: until one thirty five in the morning, military radar shows
Speaker 1: Flight three seventy at thirty five thousand, seven hundred feet, so,
Speaker 1: despite becoming unresponsive, the bird is still in the air.
Speaker 1: The last satellite contact with the plane occurs much later
Speaker 1: at eight nineteen am, which is believed to be the
Speaker 1: time around the time when the plane ran out of
Speaker 1: fuel somewhere over the southern Indian Ocean, and from that
Speaker 1: point on, as far as we know, the plane largely disappeared.
Speaker 1: So what happened, we'll tell you after a word from
Speaker 1: our sponsors. Here's where it gets crazy. In the days, weeks, months,
Speaker 1: years following the disappearance of the flight, numerous theories have
Speaker 1: cropped up. There are a ton of them out there, folks,
Speaker 1: and they range from the fanciful to what I have
Speaker 1: to admit is the disturbingly plausible. Matt, which way do
Speaker 1: you want to go with this?
Speaker 3: Let's start with some of the most plausible stuff that's
Speaker 3: out there, because there have been some I think well
Speaker 3: reasoned arguments as to what have possibly occurred. However, now
Speaker 3: that we know a little more information, specifically what we
Speaker 3: mentioned right before the break, the military radar info that
Speaker 3: was held back for quite a time there by the
Speaker 3: Malaysian authorities, we do know that that weird left hand
Speaker 3: turn occurred, or at least that they went off course.
Speaker 3: Right we talked about that northeast direction heading up to
Speaker 3: Beijing where it should have been, and it didn't do that.
Speaker 3: It turned around, went back over Malay and then over
Speaker 3: the tip of Indonesia there and then took a left
Speaker 3: turn somehow. That's what we know. So taking all that
Speaker 3: into account, it changes things and it makes some of
Speaker 3: these most plausible explanations a little different. So let's get
Speaker 3: into the one of the most plausible, the idea that
Speaker 3: somehow the people responsible for flying this plane either lost
Speaker 3: consciousness or we're experiencing something called hypoxia, and hypoxia is
Speaker 3: just a fancy way of saying, a lack of oxygen
Speaker 3: specifically to the brain, and then what happens. It describes
Speaker 3: what happens in the brain because of that lack of oxygen.
Speaker 3: And this generally occurs on aircraft when there's a decompression
Speaker 3: of the cabin right just quickly to go over this bend.
Speaker 3: Maybe you can probably you could probably explain this a
Speaker 3: little better than I But the thinning of air as
Speaker 3: you go higher and higher in altitude is a real
Speaker 3: issue because humans. Human bodies need a certain density of
Speaker 3: oxygen in air to be able to breathe correctly. And
Speaker 3: when you're flying in a plane, if you were just
Speaker 3: at that altitude, like thirty five thousand feet in the
Speaker 3: air without a pressurized cabin, you wouldn't be able to breathe.
Speaker 3: It would only take a few seconds before you would
Speaker 3: begin to experience hypoxia, not be able to think correctly,
Speaker 3: and then pass out. In a plane, it's pressurized, and
Speaker 3: it's generally pressurized to around ten thousand feet or the
Speaker 3: equivalent of about ten thousand feet in the air, So
Speaker 3: the air you're breathing inside the cabin is they call
Speaker 3: it ten thousand feet generally it's the equivalent of that.
Speaker 3: In this case. If the cabin was depressurized, then the
Speaker 3: crew would have been experiencing hypoxia. They would have been disoriented,
Speaker 3: They wouldn't have been able to make good decisions, or
Speaker 3: at least decisions that were based on their training, and
Speaker 3: if that happened, it could lead down this cascading pathway
Speaker 3: of bad decisions and then tragedy. But here's the thing.
Speaker 3: Even if the crew was unresponsive because the cabin de pressurized,
Speaker 3: they experienced hypoxia, they passed out, Even the autopilot that
Speaker 3: exists on these Boeing seven seven seven planes would have
Speaker 3: kicked in and they would have at least stayed on
Speaker 3: that path northeast towards Beijing.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the autopilot would stay on until the engine literally
Speaker 1: ran out of fuel and experienced a flame out, at
Speaker 1: which point the autopilot would disengage and the aircraft would
Speaker 1: crash very soon thereafter. However, this doesn't explain why the
Speaker 1: planes seemed to turn around after becoming unresponsive, which I
Speaker 1: think you mentioned at the top before we even started
Speaker 1: going into theories. Yeah, autopilot won't do that. An autopilot
Speaker 1: program would not do that. Hypoxia is known to cause
Speaker 1: confusion and disorientation, which can lead to abnormal erratic behavior,
Speaker 1: And the question here is could that have played a role.
Speaker 1: Could the gradual decompression of the cabin occurred such that
Speaker 1: people didn't maybe instantly pass out, but the captain or
Speaker 1: someone piloting the aircraft was confused and freaking out and
Speaker 1: then tried at the last minute to do what they
Speaker 1: saw as a course correct. That's the question. Australian Transport
Speaker 1: Safety Bureau doesn't one hundred percent confirm this. They're very
Speaker 1: careful with the way they build their case. If you
Speaker 1: read the report, they're essentially saying, the evidence indicates this
Speaker 1: is the most plausible explanation, but there are other ones
Speaker 1: out there. What if this was I know this is
Speaker 1: a tense term for some people, an inside job. What
Speaker 1: if the plane was hijacked by a member of the crew,
Speaker 1: possibly in a suicide attempt. Rational Wiki has a great
Speaker 1: approach to this. They summarize the following facts about the
Speaker 1: pilot we'd mentioned earlier. Zahari Ahmad shah Shah was reported
Speaker 1: by his coworkers and friends to be going through a
Speaker 1: period of quote emotional distress due to his marriage falling apart.
Speaker 1: A later police investigation, they did a background check on
Speaker 1: everyone on the plane, and in these, of course these
Speaker 1: background checks, the police investigation of Zahari found that he
Speaker 1: had been acting in an erratic manner in the last
Speaker 1: few days leading up to this flight. Specifically, he had
Speaker 1: made absolutely no plans after March eighth. Yeah, that's where
Speaker 1: his calendar ended. And it sounds crazy at first to say, Wait,
Speaker 1: a pilot hijacked their own plane to commit suicide or
Speaker 1: something like that. Weirdly enough, that's not as uncommon as
Speaker 1: any of us would probably like to believe.
Speaker 3: It certainly happened a few times that I can think
Speaker 3: of in the past. It's a weird thing to imagine
Speaker 3: somebody deciding to take their own life along with two
Speaker 3: hundred plus others. It's hard to imagine. Well, it's but
Speaker 3: it's not. It's not implausible.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Unfortunately, that's something we know because one thing this
Speaker 1: show has taught us about the human experience is that
Speaker 1: humans are very very selfish and very very talented at
Speaker 1: rationalizing their horrible base traits. Right, So we know that
Speaker 1: it's we know it's not uncommon. There's another example. German
Speaker 1: Wings flight nine five two five. That's a similar thing.
Speaker 1: We also know that the same technology that prevents outside
Speaker 1: hijackers from successfully taking a plane is the same technology
Speaker 1: that helps inside hijackers carry off something like this. The
Speaker 1: cockpit door of this Boeing seven seven seven had anti
Speaker 1: hijacking technology on it make it once the door's locked,
Speaker 1: nearly impossible, virtually impossible for crew members or passengers to
Speaker 1: break in and stop him. Also, the police investigation turned
Speaker 1: up some weird stuff at his homemade flight simulator. Right.
Speaker 3: Oh, yeah, he had this really impressive flight simulator set
Speaker 3: up at his house. You know. For me, when I
Speaker 3: was playing it, it was just on my home computer,
Speaker 3: had a mouse and a keyboard, and I thought, I
Speaker 3: it was awesome. But for him, he actually had a
Speaker 3: lot of the controls, a lot of the actual devices
Speaker 3: that you would need to manipulate on a plane to
Speaker 3: make it function. And what they found there was very strange.
Speaker 3: Apparently when they actually pulled stuff up, all they really
Speaker 3: found were coordinates of basically like takeoff and landing. Right, So,
Speaker 3: there were several coordinates that were out in the Indian
Speaker 3: Ocean where it's thought within the area that it's thought
Speaker 3: that perhaps this plane crashed. Did we talk about that already? Like,
Speaker 3: we honestly don't know at all where this plane crashed.
Speaker 1: Somewhere in the Indian Ocean.
Speaker 3: Yeah, there's literally a giant ocean and a huge number
Speaker 3: of plot points basically where this plane could have crashed.
Speaker 3: It's insane, but several of the coordinates on its flight
Speaker 3: simulator were within that area, just in the ocean. And
Speaker 3: you generally don't plot points like that when you're flying
Speaker 3: a simulator.
Speaker 1: Right, Yeah. According to New York Magazine, the the US
Speaker 1: FBI was able to recover six deleted data points that
Speaker 1: have been stored in his simulator program in the weeks
Speaker 1: before three seventy disappeared. And what's interesting about that article,
Speaker 1: which is through their intelligence or brand or imprint, is
Speaker 1: that you can see the path here with the simulated
Speaker 1: flight Sahari took in red, and then the projected flight
Speaker 1: path of the actual plane in yellow. They don't line
Speaker 1: up one hundred percent, but the direction is more or
Speaker 1: less exactly the same. So this flight simulator stuff is
Speaker 1: not proof positive that Zahari himself took over the plane
Speaker 1: and purposely crashed it or crashed it in an attempt
Speaker 1: to get somewhere.
Speaker 3: Well, yeah, because there's no you can't prove intent or
Speaker 3: anything like that with his what he was doing on
Speaker 3: his flight simulator. There's no way he may have just
Speaker 3: been wanting to fly out towards Antarctica that day because
Speaker 3: he was bored on his flight simulator.
Speaker 1: Yeah, seriously, he may have just been And call me
Speaker 1: crazy here. I mean, maybe this two timfoil hat for everybody.
Speaker 1: Because he's a pilot. He might have just been practicing
Speaker 1: flying planes. Yeah, I mean, maybe maybe I'm the fringe
Speaker 1: theorist in this case. Here's here's the problem. A report
Speaker 1: in twenty eighteen claimed to rule out suicide based on
Speaker 1: an analysis of the cruise backgrounds including the pilot and
Speaker 1: then personalities, and analysis of voice recordings. This report claimed
Speaker 1: the pilot wasn't the culprit, but it did not rule
Speaker 1: out interference by a third party. And we do have
Speaker 1: to we have a couple of things we have to
Speaker 1: mention about those reports in general, which is that the
Speaker 1: Malaysian government and a couple of other governments scrambled to
Speaker 1: cover up and suppress things in the initial in the
Speaker 1: initial early days of the investigation, partially because they did
Speaker 1: not want to They did not want to have bad
Speaker 1: PR ultimately, and I don't mean to sound reductive calling
Speaker 1: it that, but they didn't want to have bad PR.
Speaker 1: They also did not want to reveal their military capabilities,
Speaker 1: because if you allow military tech to enter into a
Speaker 1: civilian or commercial search like this, you're essentially giving away
Speaker 1: information to other adjacent countries and state actors. And Vietnam
Speaker 1: will say, oh you can you can see that, Yeah,
Speaker 1: but that's in our airspace, and then of course China
Speaker 1: will say, oh, so that's how far your radar goes delightful,
Speaker 1: Thanks for the info, bro. But this other report argues that, well,
Speaker 1: it doesn't argue it does not rule out interference by
Speaker 1: a third party. And this idea of hijacking by an
Speaker 1: external party is the most commonly cited explanation. It's the
Speaker 1: one you saw in most mainstream US media. The problem
Speaker 1: is there's no terror group that has taken responsibility, or
Speaker 1: no terrorists who said we did this. It's us.
Speaker 3: There's a weird open letter from some group purporting to
Speaker 3: be from China, like a terror group from China, but
Speaker 3: it was it was ruled to be likely not actual.
Speaker 1: And background checks and all the passengers have come up
Speaker 1: relatively clean, except for some scuttle but about two Iranian
Speaker 1: passengers flying on fake German passports, I want to say
Speaker 1: there's still no known motive for the disappearance. Fire has
Speaker 1: also been advanced as a possibility. That's true. Fire has
Speaker 1: happened in the past, but until we actually find the
Speaker 1: majority of the wreckage, there's no way to know it.
Speaker 1: They are less plausible things that have been advanced. There's
Speaker 1: always an alarmist call citing jahattist. Oh yeah, there's the
Speaker 1: possibility of a cyber attack.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah. And that has to do with the plane's
Speaker 3: autopilot system, because after nine to eleven, as another way
Speaker 3: to try and prevent some kind of hijacking, Boeing installed
Speaker 3: this specific countermeasure within the autopilot so that air traffic
Speaker 3: controllers could take over basically and remote control fly that plane.
Speaker 1: And in two thousand and seven Boeing had said they
Speaker 1: had installed what they call the un into ruptible auto pilot.
Speaker 1: So the theory is that hijackers on the plane around
Speaker 1: the ground hijacked this autopilot program and tampered with it,
Speaker 1: sort of the way that US intelligence agencies have been
Speaker 1: accused of tampering with remote driving capabilities of newer vehicles.
Speaker 1: And there's a tech writer named Jeff Wise who said,
Speaker 1: maybe the hijackers access the systems through the floor of
Speaker 1: the first class compartment, being able to spoof satellite data
Speaker 1: to mislead searchers. And then he said maybe they flew
Speaker 1: the plane north to Kazakhstan. But this doesn't This doesn't
Speaker 1: explain nor account for dozens of other problems. One thing
Speaker 1: I think is interesting that is probably not true. There's
Speaker 1: a Delta Airlines captain named Field McConnell. His real first
Speaker 1: name is Field, and he said that there was corporate
Speaker 1: espionage a play that flight three P seventy was captured
Speaker 1: because some of the passengers on the plane were Chinese
Speaker 1: employees of an Austin based semiconductor manufacturer named Freescale. And
Speaker 1: this is something that some of us have heard. Reading
Speaker 1: into three seventy, Captain McConnell claimed that the paint and
Speaker 1: equipment on flight three seventy were secret devices produced by
Speaker 1: Freescale that gave the plane stealth capabilities. So he's saying
Speaker 1: like it didn't wreck, Yeah, it was captured. The corporate
Speaker 1: espionage angle is pretty fascinating. You know, initially when that
Speaker 1: came out, I thought, I didn't know whether there was
Speaker 1: sand to it, but I thought, okay, well these are
Speaker 1: this is a collection of people who work in the
Speaker 1: same rarefied air, right, so they would be potentially high
Speaker 1: value subject matter experts to someone. But does that make
Speaker 1: them a high value target? And that's what I couldn't
Speaker 1: get past. They're easier ways to disappear people.
Speaker 3: Certainly, but the concentration of a lot of those people
Speaker 3: is if we were gaming it out, that would be
Speaker 3: very helpful.
Speaker 1: Yeah, true. And the other there's another part here, which
Speaker 1: is that the plane doesn't have to have high value
Speaker 1: targets quote unquote a board for it to just be
Speaker 1: shot down. And a lot of people said it was
Speaker 1: shot down. It was very popular with the right wing
Speaker 1: contingents here in the United States. The theory is not
Speaker 1: super complex, just says a government somewhere, possibly Malaysia, possibly
Speaker 1: the US, possibly China shot plane down.
Speaker 3: So there are a lot of reasons there. Some of
Speaker 3: it was just because the plane ended up in airspace
Speaker 3: that was controlled, specifically over Ukraine. That was the thought
Speaker 3: at least, and that he was shot down because it
Speaker 3: was perceived as a threat in controlled airspace. There's some
Speaker 3: other stuff in there about Oh I forgot even mention this.
Speaker 3: Do we talk about North Korea and that possible connection
Speaker 3: that proposed, Yeah, it's not possible there. Well, I can't
Speaker 3: say that. It doesn't make much sense to me personally.
Speaker 3: The idea that for some reason it was flown to
Speaker 3: North Korea on purpose.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's a that's a reddit theory, right, yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: The only strong support I saw for that theory or
Speaker 1: the argument for it was there was enough fuel in
Speaker 1: the plane yea to make it to pill and.
Speaker 3: Getting it would have been in range done. That's it.
Speaker 3: Of course he went to North Korea.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's that's one of those things that gets advanced
Speaker 1: is sort of a you know, I'm just asking questions
Speaker 1: and there's nothing wrong with asking questions. Yeah, kind of
Speaker 1: thing like that guy who was like, hey, maybe it
Speaker 1: was a black hole.
Speaker 3: Oh you mean Don Lemon from CNN.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's true. Don Lemon over at CNN asked whether
Speaker 1: a miniature black hole could to have caused the wreck.
Speaker 1: The answer is probably not, Don, probably not. But also
Speaker 1: this hid behind that rhetorical device of just asking questions. Yeah,
Speaker 1: by framing a preposterous claim as though it is a question,
Speaker 1: we put the burden of proof on the person that
Speaker 1: we're arguing at. Right now, we no longer have to
Speaker 1: prove that we think the Queen of England is a
Speaker 1: half hybrid alien who just has a real interest in
Speaker 1: like screwing humans over for some reason. Now we just say,
Speaker 1: I'm just asking the question, what if the Queen of
Speaker 1: England is like a half alien reptilian, half human hybrid
Speaker 1: and just generally hates people.
Speaker 3: I'm just asking, Yeah, in this case, don Lemon, I
Speaker 3: think worded it as preposterously. Is it preposterous to think
Speaker 3: that maybe a black hole opened up and sucked in
Speaker 3: that plane and then closed and then nobody saw the
Speaker 3: plane again, But nobody saw the black hole again. It
Speaker 3: was just a quick little I'm just asking, just tell
Speaker 3: me if that's crazy.
Speaker 1: And then that's that's very much related to the other
Speaker 1: idea aliens. There was a poll on CNN's website that
Speaker 1: I think has been deleted now, and according to that poll,
Speaker 1: nine percent of the people responding answered that it was
Speaker 1: quote very likely or quote somewhat likely that Flight three
Speaker 1: seventy was abducted by aliens. Time travelers or beings from
Speaker 1: another dimension. There is no scientific basis for that. That's
Speaker 1: a self reporting pole.
Speaker 3: Yes, and that's just the idea that maybe the concept
Speaker 3: that nine percent of the people in that particular pole
Speaker 3: believed that somehow aliens were involved. Right, It wasn't any
Speaker 3: specific there's no specifics to that pole. It wasn't like
Speaker 3: were was the plane itself transported onto another larger alien vessel.
Speaker 3: Did as extraterrestrials board the plane and then take it
Speaker 3: to North Korea. Sorry, that's poking fun a little bit,
Speaker 3: but you know it's not to be poked fun at
Speaker 3: here is the fact that hundreds of people went missing
Speaker 3: on that plane, including the pilot and the first captain
Speaker 3: and all the crew and all of the family members
Speaker 3: that were on there. So these kinds of conspiracy theories. Again,
Speaker 3: while while I'm making fun of it a little bit personally,
Speaker 3: that is not to discount the tragedy that has occurred here.
Speaker 1: Yes, and well said, there are other theories at play here,
Speaker 1: the idea that the plane was abducted by the US
Speaker 1: and taken to the a toll of di Ago Garcia,
Speaker 1: or that it was taken to some other place. There
Speaker 1: are different genres of MH three P seventy or conspiracy theories.
Speaker 1: But we do know that some experts have claimed to
Speaker 1: have found parts of the wreckage. Do you hear about this?
Speaker 3: Oh? Yeah, several pieces have washed up on the shores
Speaker 3: of small islands out there within the Indian Ocean. Pieces
Speaker 3: that are definitely you can you can link up the
Speaker 3: serial numbers within these pieces. It's not the fuselage, it's the.
Speaker 1: There's a wing flap in Tanzania.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's one of the things like that, you can
Speaker 3: actually match it up and say, yes, this came from
Speaker 3: this specific model and serial number.
Speaker 1: And there was a plain wing fragment in Martius Mauritius.
Speaker 3: Yeah. There's a great, great article from the Atlantic called
Speaker 3: What Really Happened to Malaysia's Missing Airplane that is written
Speaker 3: by William Langwish or Languish.
Speaker 1: That's pretty recent, it's July twenty nineteen.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and within there he does Williams does a great
Speaker 3: job of outlining there's a particular man that I cannot
Speaker 3: recall his name right now, but.
Speaker 1: He Gibson Gibbs. It is Gibson Lane Gibson.
Speaker 3: He's the essentially self made Malaysia three Malaysia Airlines three
Speaker 3: seventy hunter. I mean really, he's he's been looking for
Speaker 3: pieces of debris that have washed up on shores across
Speaker 3: the world, over, all over, and he's also put feelers
Speaker 3: out to a lot of these smaller islands where you know,
Speaker 3: stuff just happens to wash ashore and then they notify him.
Speaker 1: Yeah, to continue with the examples, there was a not
Speaker 1: I am not an aviation expert. I do not know
Speaker 1: what a flat perone is or a flat perone what
Speaker 1: There was one found in Reunion Island or on Reunion
Speaker 1: Island twenty fifteen. That would make a total of at
Speaker 1: least three three confirmed pieces. But then there are other
Speaker 1: things that have been found that are almost certainly from
Speaker 1: the missing jetliner Madagascar. There was a cabin interior panel
Speaker 1: found in June and twenty seventeen, engine calling in South Africa,
Speaker 1: another interior panel on Rodriguez Island, horizontal stabilizers on Mozambique,
Speaker 1: flap track fairing on Mozambique. The stuff is out there,
Speaker 1: it's being found. One interesting conspiracy theory I heard about Gibson,
Speaker 1: which I hope was not proposed in a serious air,
Speaker 1: was that he had access to much more wreckage, but
Speaker 1: was doling it out slowly for his reputation. And mister Gibson,
Speaker 1: if you're listening, I do not believe that's the case.
Speaker 1: And I think people are doing that we're hopefully being
Speaker 1: satirical or trying to be edge lords online.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I would agree, at least from the writing from
Speaker 3: that article, it appears that his actions have been well intentioned,
Speaker 3: like going to memorials to meet with family members of
Speaker 3: victims and going, you know, traveling all over the world
Speaker 3: with people. In particular, there was a young woman whose
Speaker 3: mother I believe was lost in that flight. It's an
Speaker 3: interesting thing because as they're finding these pieces of wreckage
Speaker 3: that wash up on shores dotted across the area there,
Speaker 3: the whole point is, or at least Gibson and some
Speaker 3: of the other people involved, they're trying to trace back
Speaker 3: through ocean currents where that piece of wreckage may have originated, right,
Speaker 3: because if it was sixteen, you know, however many months
Speaker 3: after the wreckage was found, from the day that they
Speaker 3: know the plane went missing, you can kind of trace,
Speaker 3: you know, just through the records of ocean currents what
Speaker 3: possibly was the route, right, And then if you find
Speaker 3: that route, then maybe you can find the origins of
Speaker 3: where it actually went down, and you could find the
Speaker 3: rest of the plane, and then the end goal for
Speaker 3: that would be to find the black box so you
Speaker 3: can actually hear what occurred inside that cockpit.
Speaker 1: And it's interesting you say that, because that would be
Speaker 1: my summation to the importance of finding the black box. However,
Speaker 1: that's not what the author from the Atlantic ends up proposing.
Speaker 1: Because now we're several years past the event. People in
Speaker 1: Australia have done all the research they could. The government
Speaker 1: of China is censoring news that might The government of
Speaker 1: China just wants to move on, right. The government in
Speaker 1: Malaysia wishes that of course this never happened. They want
Speaker 1: it to go away. And while people are still finding pieces,
Speaker 1: and Gibson being one of the main sources of those pieces,
Speaker 1: you would think that the government in Malaysia would be
Speaker 1: more happy about it, right, But unfortunately that does not
Speaker 1: seem to be the case. They want to walk away
Speaker 1: from this because it made them look, bade them look
Speaker 1: a little incompetent. They weren't following protocol. They were doing
Speaker 1: cover ups pretty much immediately, and so to the Atlantic, author.
Speaker 1: I guess the best way to sum it up is to
Speaker 1: take an excerpt from their earlier piece in July twenty nineteen.
Speaker 1: They say, quote, the important answers probably don't lie in
Speaker 1: the ocean, but on land in Malaysia. That should be
Speaker 1: the focus moving forward. Unless they are as incompetent as
Speaker 1: the Air Force and air traffic control. The Malaysian police
Speaker 1: know more than they have dared to say. The riddle
Speaker 1: may not be deep. That is the frustration here. The
Speaker 1: answers may well lie close at hand, but they are
Speaker 1: more difficult to retrieve than any black box. If Blaine
Speaker 1: Gibson wants a real adventure, he might spend a year
Speaker 1: poking around Kuala Lumpur. I don't know what do you
Speaker 1: think of that, Matt.
Speaker 3: It's weird to put it on Blaine Gibson like that,
Speaker 3: because I think what he's doing is separate from what
Speaker 3: the writer is talking about. The writer's saying about right
Speaker 3: and an investigation into that corruption. What Blaine is doing
Speaker 3: is literally trying to find pieces and then trace back,
Speaker 3: working with Australia and a couple other places to trace
Speaker 3: back to the originating point to find that black box.
Speaker 3: So I don't know, to make inequivalency out of those
Speaker 3: I don't know. It doesn't make sense to me.
Speaker 1: I'm not doing that.
Speaker 3: No, No, that's what I'm saying. It doesn't It doesn't
Speaker 3: make sense to me. But I see what the author
Speaker 3: is saying in the same right that the way it
Speaker 3: was obtuscated by the Malaysian military and some of those
Speaker 3: you know groups, at least initially, it does lead you
Speaker 3: down the path of they know something more than they're saying,
Speaker 3: because they certainly did before it was leaked.
Speaker 1: And now the question is did they reveal all the
Speaker 1: stuff they knew at the time or are they for
Speaker 1: some reason holding back information? And if so, what is
Speaker 1: that information? Yeah? Why what is the motivation? It goes
Speaker 1: down to information and motive. And this is close to
Speaker 1: where today's episode ends. We do not have all the answers.
Speaker 1: There are pages and pages written about the event, but
Speaker 1: what we can conclude is that it does clearly seem
Speaker 1: to have wrecked many of the survivors. The relatives, the
Speaker 1: family members and loved ones of people who most likely
Speaker 1: died on this plane would of course be joyous for
Speaker 1: the closure of discovering the bodies, giving them a proper
Speaker 1: burial and so on. But the ocean is vast, and
Speaker 1: at this time, while we can speculate about the circumstances
Speaker 1: of these people's unfortunate deaths, we can not pinpoint where
Speaker 1: the bulk of the plane is now, or even if
Speaker 1: the plane exists in one largely coherent piece.
Speaker 3: Well, I don't know, man. It feels like if it
Speaker 3: did crash into the ocean, you know, going as fast
Speaker 3: as it generally would, it would be pretty difficult to
Speaker 3: find a couple of big pieces of that plane. But
Speaker 3: it doesn't make sense because it seems like there will
Speaker 3: be more things in pieces floating on the surface than
Speaker 3: wherever recovered.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Also, the ocean is awash with trash, yeah, and huge.
Speaker 1: It's very difficult. It's very Our species is very good
Speaker 1: at losing things. It's very difficult to find missing planes.
Speaker 1: I know that seems counterintuitive because planes are big, right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: but the ocean is bigger, and we lose planes way
Speaker 1: more often than I would like to believe. I agreed, agreed,
Speaker 1: And this leads us to something that you have been
Speaker 1: thinking of off air, right Occam's Razor.
Speaker 3: Yes, there's an article that's written by Christine Nagrony, and
Speaker 3: she she basically just puts the idea that if we
Speaker 3: do take Okham's razor into account, here, the combination of
Speaker 3: a transponder that ended up somehow in standby mode, a
Speaker 3: depressurized cabin that disoriented the people who were meant to
Speaker 3: be flying that plane, and then an inexperienced first officer
Speaker 3: who didn't know exactly what to do to then gain
Speaker 3: control of the plane. Because in her mind, at least
Speaker 3: to the facts that she has the idea that the
Speaker 3: very very experienced pilot that was supposed to be piloting
Speaker 3: the plane was in the bathroom for some reason in
Speaker 3: the main cabin or in the business class cabin when
Speaker 3: the cabin depressurized so that he could not get back
Speaker 3: to where he needed to be to fly the plane,
Speaker 3: and the inexperienced guy was at the helm. That's at
Speaker 3: least what she believes, and that's what led to ultimately
Speaker 3: to the weird stuff that happened on the flight and
Speaker 3: in the crash. But that scenario does not account for
Speaker 3: that strange left turn, well, I mean, the whole turning
Speaker 3: round of the plane from their heading towards Beijing to
Speaker 3: then taking that big left turn towards Antarctica.
Speaker 1: The manual Southwestern term, which was essentially.
Speaker 3: A one to eight because somebody did that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, someone had to do that, And that's our classic
Speaker 1: episode for this evening. We can't wait to hear your thoughts.
Speaker 2: It's right let us know what you think.
Speaker 1: You can reach.
Speaker 2: You to the handle Conspiracy Stuff where we exist on
Speaker 2: Facebook X and YouTube on Instagram and TikTok or Conspiracy
Speaker 2: Stuff Show.
Speaker 3: If you want to call us dial one eight three
Speaker 3: three std WYTK. That's our voicemail system. You've got three minutes.
Speaker 3: Give yourself a cool nickname and let us know if
Speaker 3: we can use your name and message on the air.
Speaker 3: If you got more to say, then can fit in
Speaker 3: that voicemail. Why not instead send us a good old
Speaker 3: fashioned email.
Speaker 1: We are the entities the read every single piece of
Speaker 1: correspondence we receive. Be aware, yet not afraid. Sometimes the
Speaker 1: void writes back conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 3: Stuff they Don't want you to Know is a production
Speaker 3: of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Speaker 3: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.