Lmao @ people in here treating the pilot theory as an absolute fact. Yall in reality dont know shyt
1. He had the suicide route mapped out on his home flight simulator
2. His friends said he was clinically depressed and his wife had found out about his affairs
3. His family moved out of the house the day before the suicide flight
4. He spoke normally to air traffic control just 2 minutes before diverting the flight
5. The flight was diverted at the exact minute it was between air spaces, so that it would take the longest time possible for anyone to notice.
6. The flight diversion was so severe it could only be undertaken manually by an experienced pilot
7. The plane's electrical systems were manually shut off, then manually brought back online later.
8. The flight path does an odd hook to take an extended view over the pilot's home island.
9. The plane flew off-course in controlled flight for at least 6 hours
10. Wreckage from the plane has been found washed up on islands in the Indian Ocean.
Australian ex-prime minister Tony Abbott has stated that Malaysian officials at the highest levels told him they believe it was a suicide and have known this from the beginning.
Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah has been accused of hijacking the Boeing 777 and crashing it into the Indian Ocean in a carefully planned mass murder-suicide mission
www.mirror.co.uk
"Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah was "terribly upset" that his marriage with wife Faizah Khan was falling apart, a longtime friend
told the New Zealand Herald newspaper Wednesday.
"He's one of the finest pilots around and I'm no medical expert,"
said the friend, who is also a pilot and insisted on not being identified. "But with all that was happening in his life, Zaharie was probably in no state of mind to be flying."
The pilot of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 may have been clinically depressed, leading him to starve the passengers of oxygen and then crash into the sea in a murder-suicide, according to a new account.
www.telegraph.co.uk
I don't see how you take all that evidence that points to the same conclusion, and instead would favor a conclusion that has no evidence whatsoever. Because there is zero evidence for equipment failure, zero evidence for controlled landing, zero evidence for hijacking, and in fact the above data explicitly argues against those things because they all appear to show that a pilot had to be in charge of the plane the whole time and the plane wrecked in the end. What other possible explanation makes sense?