GeoResonance Press Release

Press Release

April 29, 2014

GeoResonance Pty Ltd (“GeoResonance”), a South Australian company and its team of scientists have invested considerable resources into the search for Malaysian Airlines flight MH370. The only motivation is to help the families of the missing passengers and crew, knowing the company has the technology capable of the task.

GeoResonance has discovered what they believe to be the wreckage of a commercial aircraft. The wreckage is located approximately 190km south of Bangladesh in the Bay of Bengal. The wreckage is sitting on the seabed approximately 1000m to 1100m from the surface. The company is not declaring this is MH370, however it should be investigated.

The search was completed using proven technology. In the past, it had been successfully applied to locate submersed structures, ships, munitions and aircraft. In some instances objects that were buried under layers of silt could not be identified by other means. At present the technology is being used with great success in the mining exploration industry.

In order to identify and locate subsurface substances, GeoResonance Remote Sensing analyses super-weak electromagnetic fields captured by airborne multispectral images. During the search for MH370, GeoResonance searched for chemical elements that make up a Boeing 777: aluminium, titanium, copper, steel alloys, jet fuel residue, and several other substances. The aim was to find a location where all those elements were present.

GeoResonance commenced the search before the official Search and Rescue operation moved to the Southern Indian Ocean. The multi-discipline team of 23 researchers, including 5 professors and 12 PhDs got involved in the project. The search used the imagery taken on March 10, 2014, and was conducted consecutively in 4 zones north and northwest of Malaysia, until all targeted elements produced an anomaly in one place in the Bay of Bengal.

GeoResonance completed analysis of multispectral imagery of the location taken on March 5, 2014. It established that the anomaly had appeared between the 5th and 10th of March 2014.

The approximate location was passed onto Malaysian Airlines and the Malaysian and Chinese Embassies in Canberra, Australia, on March 31, 2014. It was well before the black box batteries had expired. These details were also passed onto the Australian authorities (JACC) in Perth on April 4, 2014. A more detailed study was completed in early April. The final 23 page report including the precise location of the wreckage was passed onto Malaysian Airlines, Malaysian High Commission in Canberra, Chinese Embassy in Canberra, and the Australian authorities (JACC) on April 15, 2014.

The Company and its Directors are surprised by the lack of response from the various authorities. This may be due to a lack of understanding of the Company’s technological capabilities, or the JACC is extremely busy, or the belief that the current search in the Southern Indian Ocean is the only plausible location of the wreckage.

The people involved in the Channel 7 Adelaide News interview were Mr Pavel Kursa, GeoResonance CEO, Mr David Pope GeoResonance Director and CEO of Tellus Resources Mr Carl Dorsch. Mr Dorsch was involved as a client reference for the technology. The company Directors are not seeking publicity, they only want to bring the results to the attention of the authorities. The Directors feel a moral obligation to help bring closure for the families of the 239 passengers and crew of flight MH370 by releasing the findings, so the authorities can investigate.

Read More: Bangladesh checking out GeoResonance lead

This entry was posted in Uncategorized.

60 Responses to GeoResonance Press Release

  1. Nick Bird says:

    I don’t believe the official search is in the right area either, perhaps more west to Africa where the western arc of the satellite where data would show identical results would be is a possibility. Time, fuel and speed allow this. But does GeoResonance have a good pre-March 8th survey of this new site and why would it?
    Nick

  2. C. Steven Rorke says:

    Since the GeoResonance report appears not to be generating much interest among the governments most involved in the search in the area of the “southern arc,” perhaps it would be a good idea for GeoResonance to release its full 23-page report to the Press.

  3. Jamie Shepherd says:

    “GeoResonance Remote Sensing analyses super-weak electromagnetic fields captured by airborne multispectral images.” No – sorry, it sounds like Star Trek made up mumbo jumbo to me. Who cares about all their combined PhD’s etc. The ability to detect different metallic AND non metallic substances under 3000 feet of water from either space or aircraft, they don’t say, is too fantastic. This is a wrong’un – methinks they’re taking the mineral exploration industry for a ride.

    • mbuck says:

      So this is the old “I don’t understand it so it must be wrong” defense?

    • Mike Austin says:

      This is a very un-educated comment…GeoResonance DO carry out this work and HAVE been for some time…aiding the mining industry in particular. They are NOT make believe. I actually do care about all of their PhD’s as opposed to your lack of simple ability to research one subject.

      • Nancy Ellen Richardson says:

        As I see it, the companies which have been searching all this time…the nay Sayers, don’t want anyone else to find the 777 which is STUPID, IGNORANT! ARROGANT! GREEDY! I agree with the scientists at GEORESONANCE!
        -Richardson

    • W. Wimlet says:

      I am a scientist (and a PhD) and I completely agree that this reads like a scam. They are using fancy technical words strung together in a nonsensical way to claim technical capabilities that are essentially impossible. I understand what they are saying, and it sounds to me like fantasy. Recall that in the early days, and even now in the Indian Ocean, satellite imagery showing FLOATING objects tens of meters on a side were erroneous or ambiguous. How can this same technology pinpoint the elements that comprise a jet under thousands of feet of water. No known technology can do this.

      • jerry25 says:

        So am I, a Ph.D. Physical Scientist. I did NMR Spectroscopy research and I know of no such technology as they report. The team even invokes NMR spectroscopy in its methods, but that is impossible without putting “sample” in a large magnet first.

        • anti_spin says:

          Everything on the planet is in a large (albeit weak) magnet. Google “earth’s field NMR”. A postdoc I knew actually got paid good bucks by Schlumberger to develop oil detection instrumentation based on this principle, and that was decades ago. Method is limited mostly by engineering details involving signal sensitivity (i.e., ingenuity & $). A Ph.D. education no doubt gave you expertise, but not omniscience, so there’s still a lot out there you don’t know. When you think something is true, ask yourself why before locking it in. No one needs a degree for that.

      • Loomis Webb says:

        You so-called “experts” are saying that the findings from GeoResonance are impossible and that no hyperspectral imaging can be done underwater. Well, maybe you should have told that to DARPA which has been working on that since the ’60s and maybe you should explain this description of the aircraft and satellite reconnaisance program created by the University of California at San Diego and the National Reconaissance Organization: “The Littoral Airborne Sensor Hyperspectral (LASH) program, applies hyperspectral imaging to the problem of submarine detection in the littoral zone.” Also, GeoResonance, and other companies, have been using geospatial hyperspectral imaging to discover mineral deposits under the earth from satellites, some for over 20 years. That’s why we launched Landsat1 (1972) through Landsat 7 (1999). “The Advanced Land Imager (ALI) was launched in November 2000 aboard the NASA Earth Observing (EO-1) satellite [11]. EO-1 also carries a VNIR/SWIR hyperspectral sensor, called Hyperion, with 220 spectral bands and a GSD of thirty meters.” I’m not saying this is MH370 but don’t tell me the technology doesn’t exist when you can find it online. – Karen Bazemore

    • W5CDT says:

      Who’s airborne multi spectral platform are they using? Where is the peer review. Where are the technical papers typical of real peer reviewed science?

  4. Lyle says:

    What is lost by checking out GeoResonance’s claim? At this point it is like looking for a needle in a haystack. The news release provides a possible answer as to where the plane may be located. This find by GeoResonance will either make or break them. There is a very good probablity that they are on to something and it should be investigated. GeoResonance – release the 23 page report to the public and prove to all you know what you are talking about. If they turn out to be correct, shame on the Malaysian Air and Malaysian and Chinese Embassies for ignoring the report. They will have egg on their faces and GeoResonance will be recognized for finding the aircraft.

    • W5CDT says:

      Actually checking out their claim is a great way to debunk their alleged technology.

  5. Anjum says:

    Yes no harm in giving it a try when so many Prime Ministers were positive about finding the plane close to their countries. And wanting to spend Millions of dollars in the search. This company is not claiming for any money but just to help the families get closure.
    True if this is found it will be getting all the publicity in the world it deserves.
    Well done GeoResonance. We are all with you. Give it your best shot.

  6. M a Liebert says:

    This has to be checked out!

  7. Anton says:

    I hope GeoResonance would go the EXTRA mile to verify possible location by sending a Ship to Bay of Bengal and conduct sonar verifications. Go For It guys !

    Anton

    • ulhas says:

      Involve india or ask india in the hunt in bay of bengal

      • john says:

        i to hope georesonance check it out and make there own finding of it …..as the searching parties don’t seem to open to looking else where.,,,would look good on the governments that seem that’s the correct location they are looking in but so far empty handle…

        good luck georesonance

  8. Juan says:

    Without a precise map, it looks that it is more or less a straight line from the last known MH 370 flight path before turning south (as is the main official investigation line)

  9. Aaron says:

    The only reason they have not found the plane is because they are looking the wrong place. GeoResonance is the most logical evidence I’ve seen yet.

  10. katz says:

    Maybe just maybe ALL the players in the southern search are involved in someway (maybe with the exception of Australia) knowing the truth but are playing it out with “staged” data…I am not sure of the Inmarsat group (UK) and the stand off US participation. A little suspicious – knowing inquiries are going on right now into Diego Garcia. If just if – this plane was taken accidentely taken out and a huge coverup has been staged. Leading all searches far away from where is really is. Hoping the day will come to stop the search because of cost???? Couldn’t someone have dropped off a black box with weak batteries??? This whole matter smells awfully suspicious.

  11. Robert D. Shelley says:

    Good Day,
    I am quite sure that with the number of “experts” who have put their reputations on the line that there will be great resistance to searching in an area “not agreed upon” by those experts. The most apparent problem with the current endeavor lies in the fact that the current search area was determined by consensus.I remember the first time you issued a bulletin regarding the possible crash site in the Bay of Bengal. You information was ignored then and I doubt that anything will result from your follow announcement.
    I suggest a simple, low tech way of determining what is on the bottom. The simple way of doing so it to drop a large diameter line, polyfiber or metal, with a series of grappling hooks and troll the bottom for parts. It wouldn’t require a large ship but a commercial fishing boat would be ideal. Just a suggestion.
    Cheers,
    Bob

  12. Steve g says:

    How come no one has noticed this collaborates the report by a Malaysian lady flying over this area that she saw a plane in the water? This was reported by the Daily ?Mail, so not conclusive but she did provide a police report to Malaysian police when her plane landed as she was so convinced. She was ignored and now another company says the plane is in the same place it has to be worth investigating?

  13. Osmodia says:

    Well done Geo ! The apparent lack of interest could suggest that some don’t want the plane found??

  14. Vincent says:

    It just makes sense to go for a check at GeoResonance claimed location. It’s simple. Unless the countries involved in the search are working together to cover up something, intently.

  15. sandra says:

    Well done Geo. Cannot one country involved in this see the reasoning here and commit themselves to investigating this further for the people who have lost loved ones. As already mentioned this is the first solid lead there has been – please check it out, what would you do if it was your family

  16. jane says:

    Go for it! Find it and everything that is concerned with it!
    This had to happen! Planes don’t just disappear. With all the publicity regarding the costs of the present and futuere search I would’ve thought someone would’ve jumped on this lead.
    Apparently, not so…
    Wonder why…

  17. Stan R. says:

    Even if this not MH370, it is still must be checked out because another plane from an earlier time might be found there. The water is not too deep and they have an exact location. Easier to find quickly and confirm or dismiss this possibility. There is no reason not to follow up.

  18. Patrick Switzerland says:

    I am personally very sceptical with the current seach efforts. French, Chinese and other Satellites have seen possible wreckages but no one found any trace or even searched sometime in the same reported areas. Then we had “pings” at so different places. It seems to turn round. I take Georesonance lead as a serious lead as it coroborates the testimony of a lady flying over the gulf of bengal who pretented to have seen a place in the water exactly at the same place. Go for it and congratulations for your work.

  19. CJ Sazdad says:

    Did they do a pass looking for evidence of the mass of Lithium batteries?
    CJS

  20. Intrigue says:

    What are the rules for salvage operations in the Bay of Bengal? If a salvage company was interested in reclaiming airplane parts for salvage, they might happen to find something worth a lot of money sitting in the Bay of Bengal. Since the international search team is choosing to ignore this new development, I suggest engaging the services of a salvage operation…money is a motivator for these kinds of operations, and your data certainly indicates the potential for profit. Sadly, the humanity of this affair is not enough for the international team. What was the cargo on that plane that they don’t want anyone to find?

  21. Helen says:

    If I were part of the grieving families, I would demand that they investigate if just to rule this possibility out or not. Sarah Bajac rally the famiies of flight MH370 ……

  22. LoriG says:

    Go Geo Resonance!!!!! Every credible lead should be checked out for the sake of Those who boarded Flight 370, Their Families & Friends.

  23. Malaysian says:

    There is a conspiracy at work here. Why would the search teams & countries choose to disregard GeoResonance’s findings??
    Why are they not sending a search team to the location to see if the claims are true??
    Instead, they keep INSISTING they ARE looking in the “RIGHT AREA”??
    So, it just so happens that the “RIGHT AREA” is WAYYYY in the opposite direction from GeoResonance’s find??
    Hmmm.
    Somehow it looks like the authorities DONT WANT to find the plane, especially if it’s intact & in one piece.
    The black box might reveal evidence that links up certain countries to the conspiracy.
    God protect the souls aboard MH370.

    #prayforMH370

    • Donna Kelly says:

      A quick search for GeoResonance news and company officers shows that they are using
      an older method of Soviet technology. Let’s see– the Brit’s and Aussies want to be proven
      wrong by soviet technology???? I think this has more to do with political issues and they would rather not find the plane than ever admit their creative hypothesis of an arc could be off…especially if proven off by soviet technology now acquired in the private sector.

      • Nick says:

        Agreed, there is something fishy in the prime nations not wanting to find the plane. No terrorists are boasting about taking it or destroying it, no floating debris was found. Rumour has it that Boeing planes built since 911 can be remotely taken over (so they cannot be crashed into buildings). What cargo did it have on board that someone did not want delivered to China? Definitely not the batteries. The more time it takes to find the passengers in water, the harder it is for an autopsy to determine how they were killed. And so on. Very fishy.

  24. William says:

    The only thing that’s fishy (pun intended) to me from the Geo report is their pictures. They show mineral densities that would match the patterns of an intact aircraft. There is no way the 777 would land on the ocean and remain intact.

    • Osmodia says:

      It could remain intact! The airbus that landed on the Hudson river didn’t break up.

      • robert says:

        William is correct. Actually, the US Airways Airbus did not land on the Hudson River “intact”. It suffered major damage including one engine completely ripped off the wing and the other engine stripped of all cowling materials. Many of the flaps tore off and the lower rear section of the cargo hold was buckled and ripped open spilling part of the cargo into the river. I wish people would check their facts before spreading inaccurate information.
        As for this GeoResonance claim, it borders on criminal misrepresentation. It may actually be subject to legal action once their hoax is exposed as a cruel fraud. It has been done to gather publicity for their tiny company. Once the ships get out there and find nothing, GeoResonance will simply blame the search crews for not doing a competent job and move on to trying to sign up new suckers.

    • leo says:

      If it couldnt remain intact debris would have been found already.

  25. April Gallagher says:

    This is a tremendous humanitarian contribution from GeoResonance. How can they not investigate this lead further?
    The evidence is way too compelling to ignore.
    What a truly remarkable application of remote sensing technology!
    Is the GeoResonance company hiring??? That’s the kind of company I dream of working for. I don’t want to be sitting around “turning the crank” all day for the rest of my life. I want to do something that actually will make a difference for humanity. Solving mysteries along the way is the “fun” part…Perhaps mysteries on other planets as well…

    ~A~

  26. Fenris says:

    Good on you GeoResonance – go get them.
    The only half accurate data the search authorities have is that calculated by using the geosynchronous Intelsat PLC satellite do something it was not designed for, (act as crude radar). By measuring the delay between the satellite ping and the plane’s response, they got a rough measure of distance. Not only are the arcs ambiguous as to north or south tracks but they are currently searching way off the southern arc.
    If this were a criminal investigation, establishing motive(s) is paramount before looking at mere conjectures or calculations. What possible motive(s) would they have for going south? Zero; it just makes no sense.
    On the other hand, motives for going north include:
    a) Four of the 20 engineers on board reportedly shared in a pending patent on new stealth technology
    and also had patent samples with them. They all worked for Freescale Semiconductor of Texas and
    were from both Malaysian and Chinese semiconductor production facilities. This was too good
    a ‘catch’ for any militant group to pass up.
    b) The plane could be re-purposed as a huge suicide bomb or for a 9-11 type attack.
    c) To test-run radar/satellite avoidance techniques and at least one route for future use in/out of
    Pakistan.
    The only ‘excuse’ they have for choosing the southern track are frequency drifts on the plane’s responses which they mistakenly assumed to be Doppler. These shifts were actually caused by gravity as the plane neared the Burmese Himalayas. The effect of gravity on crystal oscillators is well documented and scientific papers are available. A contemporary example is how NASA had problems with sounding rockets when they first switched from FM telemetry to narrow band digital. Launch acceleration shifted the rocket transmitter frequency enough to lose communication.

    Underwater pings were reported from several surface locations but they were much too far apart to possibly be received from a common source. This is just not credible. My own opinion is that the pings were faked; possibly by a Russian sub messing with us. The sub could be deep enough to avoid detection by the Orion aircraft yet move around, sending out fake beeps from different locations. It would be in Russia’s interest to confuse and prolong the search. This not only costs the searchers money but ties up air and naval resources while Russia invades Ukraine.

    If GeoResonance has located MH370, it suggests to me some sort of damage occurred during the high altitude crossing of Malaysia. That damage may have limited maneuverability and the pilot performed a ‘soft ditch’ in the ocean rather than attempt crossing India. Close to shore in the Bay of Bengal would have nothing like the raging waves of the South Indian Ocean. This would also explain not activating the ELTs. Presumably, the pilots would have taken a few of the most valuable hostages to shore and continued to Pakistan over land.

    • irene Linda says:

      I am not a scientist… I am an English teacher for adult professionals in Sao Paulo, SP Brasil (have lived in Brasil for 23 years after my entire previous lifetime of many years in the USA). Intuitively, I have ‘known’ since the beginning that there were too many false leads that were being pursued… and only recently learned the motive, which is covered quite clearly in your well written comment:
      a) Four of the 20 engineers on board reportedly shared in a pending patent on new stealth technology and also had patent samples with them. They all worked for Freescale Semiconductor of Texas and were from both Malaysian and Chinese semiconductor production facilities. This was too good a ‘catch’ for any militant group to pass up.
      True… but also the other party to the patent is a multi millionaire or billionaire from the states. With those engineers out of the way, the entire patent reverts to that person!
      And now that I have climbed out on this limb… my additional intuition from the beginning was that the plane was on Diego Garcia. Oddly enough I learned that the day before the plane went missing, and for two days afterward, all flights into and out of DG were prohibited. Curious, no? I do prefer the impressive and exciting scientific possibilities raised by GeoResonance to my own intuition… and found the GeoResonance material extremely exciting. What could be the reason for it being ignored? Smells like rotten fish to me… Good luck to GeoResonance. The truth will out! Thank you.. all of you, courageously pursuing the whole truth!! Sincere regards. Irene Linda

    • jerry25 says:

      What CNN and everyone else seems to ignore is that the frequency of the Pings was 32.5 KHz, instead of 37.5 +/- 1 KHz. I was a physical scientist myself (Ph.D. in NMR Spectroscopy) and I know that there should be simulations available by Materials Scientists to test what the shift in frequency should be as a function of Temperature, Salinity and Pressure/depth. In lieu of theoretical simulations, I told CNN how to conduct a simple test to verify the frequency shift. Its as simple as dropping another Pinger at the same location and measuring the frequency shift as well as ability to locate this known Pinger.

      I also suggested to CNN that the false Pinger could have come from a Russian submarine. That independent minds would come up with same deduction is not coincidence.
      CNN of course refuses to respond to logic. No wonder people go to the Internet for answers.

  27. LoriG says:

    Geo Resonance, If there is any way the public can volunteer to help you, please let us know. It’s worth a try to prove or disprove.

  28. mike says:

    this company if it has a submersible perhaps they could sent it down and confirm the wrecjkage

  29. William J. Wagner says:

    The Ukrainian/GeoResonance story seems to have come out of left field. In order to dial back the Snicker Factor a bit, I would point out that Ukrainian scientists at the Crimean Astronomical Observatory have long been recognized as skilled in gamma ray imaging astronomy. (Gamma rays permit chemical identification from great distances of elements such as aluminum, iron and titanium coming from a star, a nuclear reactor, etc.)

    - Bill

  30. Graham Martin says:

    Anton’s hope that GeoResonance would go the EXTRA mile to verify the possible location by sending a ship to the Bay of Bengal and conduct sonar verifications is totally unrealistic unless GeoResonance is a charity with unlimited resources. The costs for a private company or individual would be prohibitive. It would only be governments that could undertake a mission like that. However, if it can be shown that there is any merit in this “theory” it would be well within the resources of a government with the existing capabilities to do such an investigation. The capital costs of existing government capabilities have already been paid for. High tech government teams need constant practice to maintain their skills and to improve them. The basic costs for operating and maintaining those systems have already been budgeted for. The only real additional costs (which would be significant to an individual, but are only a mere drop in the ocean when considering government budgets) are for fuel and labour overtime. The $64,000 question is: how can GeoResonance convince a government with the capability to go and take a look? Graham

  31. chhh says:

    One thing bothers me: so everyone disregarded the info for over a month already (!) as the initial report was submitted on March 31. They’re saying each day of underwater search costs 250k$, they could bite off a piece of that and hire a commercial company nearby to do the search there for a fraction of that cost. But they didn’t. So now I’m worried, that if the officials go to that GeoResonance found location – they’ll just say there was nothing there. And we’ll never be sure because nobody trusts the authorities about that MH370 story anymore. The only way to find out is to hire a 3rd party to check that spot.
    Maybe we could start a kickstarter campaign to accumulate money and hire some salvage company?

  32. agc says:

    A day before the press came up with the story of the malaysian lady, who saw a wreck of large plane in the water, there were press publications, that in the in Gulf of Bengal fishermen discoverd swimming suitcases and other objects may belonging to an aircraft. Even we know now today, the oceans are full of garbage, after the Geo R. report this makes more sense. Regarding the Inmarsat pings: it is very simple to hack the computers of this company and to put the pings in the right order, when it not was done by Inmarsat itself.

  33. jerry25 says:

    I suspect that GeoScience has ALREADY found the plane using their existing Sonar capabilities (displayed in a photo), but are being disingenuous to attribute it to some “fantastic” multispectral analysis that they refuse to even divulge the detailed basis for their technology (they don’t have to reveal Trade Secrets to reveal the basic science that can be verified by other scientists). No physical scientist has yet to support the technology reported by GeoScience.

  34. anti_spin says:

    Sceptics of GeoResonance should search “earth’s field NMR”. Everything on the planet is in a large (albeit weak) magnet, and NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance) can and has been done on geological scales. The method is limited mostly by engineering details involving signal sensitivity. For those Ph.D./NMR-deniers, education no doubt gave you expertise, but not omniscience. It’s foolish to behave as if no phenomena occur beyond the limits of your knowledge horizon. When you think something is true, or false, ask yourself why before locking it in. No one needs a degree for that.
    (Originally posted as a reply; reposted in main thread)

  35. Fenris says:

    In case anybody else thinks GeoResonance’s technology is pie in the sky magic…it has been around for years. The basics can be found here: http://www.cis.rit.edu/htbooks/nmr/inside.htm
    What the Russians and GeoResonance hold proprietary is how they scaled up the technology for geophysical applications.

    • jerry25 says:

      You obvious don’t have a Ph.D. in NMR spectroscopy. I do. What you linked is an elementary text book on NMR spectroscopy. It has NOTHING at all to do with finding elements such as Aluminum in the ocean. You have to first bring the sample (usually in liquid form) and place inside a powerful magnet. GeoResonance denies even seeing the Plane. They claim to be doing this from a satellite. It IS BOGUS. Still, I am hoping that they sent down a submersible with Sonar, and have already verified that MH340 is sitting 120 miles off the coast of Bangladesh.

  36. Fenris says:

    In your 2 PM post, you asked for the basics and you’re right, that’s what the link was for. If you want the whole thing on a platter, sorry, I’m not your man. Goodnight….

  37. Gatta says:

    With all respect to GeoResonance… but their pictures look just too nice to be true. A plane CANNOT land on water without being damaged (according to my brother who’s a B1 licensed aircraft engineer). Regarding Flight 1549 ditching in the Hudson River, the weather was ideal with favorable winds and calm waters, so the aircraft remained mainly intact but still some parts were ripped off and the fuselage was damaged. It is very unlikely to have the same weather conditions in the Bay of Bengal, that means even in case of controlled landing, MH370 would suffer major damage. While the spread of aluminium and titanium still may be similar to the GeoResonance pictures, you certainly cannot expect to find the engines or fuel perfectly aligned as they are the pictures. A picture of a messy spot with mixture of all elements would look much more credible…

  38. David Elliott says:

    When this many people are missing and the grieving families don’t till now have concrete answers, it is appalling that there is resistance to investigating the reports from GeoResonance. Malaysia – go to the families – tell them to their face – NO we are not checking it out – and see what happens. Where is China in this? Any lead at this point needs investigation. China needs to step up to the plate as do every other one of the 28 countries. GeoResonance should also release their coordinates and report to the press. After all, you can’t say you don’t like the taste of something if you haven’t tried it. Come on people! Check it out! At least! Then and only then, if it is not 370, then everyone knows. But to dismiss, is absolutely appalling on the part of the investigative team and countries. My ten cents!

  39. Bate says:

    Suggest research of this company prior to throwing weight behind their claims. (They say they found Armenia hospital ship, yet still no one knows where it is!)

  40. April Gallagher says:

    Great news! Three Bangladeshi naval ships have arrived in the Bay of Bengal to investigate the GeoResonance coordinates… We will know pretty soon if they find anything found at that site
    I’m keeping my fingers crossed! :)
    ~A~