If The MH17 Was Not Shot Down - Part 1

如果MH17没被击落 – 第1章

To be continued and subjected to editing. 待续和编辑.  

18 July 2014 (2014年7月18日)

Doubt 1. If MH17 was shot down, why there was no trail of smoke in the sky before it crashed on the ground?

疑点1. 如果MH17是被击落, 为什么在它坠地之前空中没有烟迹呢?

Doubt 2. If it was shot at 10 km or 33,000 feet in the air, why it did not explode and burn high in the air, but exploded only when it touched the ground?

疑点2. 如果它在空中10公里或33,000尺被击中, 为什么它在空中高处没有爆炸与燃烧,而是当它触到地面时才爆炸?

19 July 2014 (2014年7月19日)

Doubt 3. If the Ukraine denied, pro-Russia separatists denied, and the Russia also denied, then the investigation could consider, what is the possibility of malfunction incidence of the aircraft? 

疑点3. 如果乌克兰否认, 亲俄罗斯分离主义者否认, 以及俄罗斯也否认, 那么调查就可考虑, 飞机失灵事故的可能性有多少呢?

(1) I hope it will not be another incidence.  

(1) 我希望不会有另一个事故.

Doubt 4. According to a media source, the tracked location of MH17 in the western Ukraine airspace was at 12:11 GMT (8:11 EDT), the crash at Grabovo (east of Donetsk) on the eastern side of Ukraine was at 13:21 GMT, the distance between these two locations is close to 1000 km, is it confirmed nothing unusual happen during this stretch of travelling?

疑点4. 根据一个媒体来源, MH17在乌克兰西部上空的追踪位置是于格林威治标准时间12时11分(东部夏季时间8时11分), 在乌克兰东边哈尔科夫(顿涅茨克的东边)坠落时是格林威治标准时间13时21分, 这两个位置之间的距离接近1000公里, 在这段航行期间已确定了没有不寻常的事发生吗?

Source of images: Internet.  影像来源: 网络.

Doubt 5. MH17 is relatively a quite old jet, 17 years old, its maintenance service must have been extremely stringent. You must believe it, otherwise who will believe it?

疑点5. MH17是一架相对老旧的飞机, 17年, 它的维修服务必须是极度严格的吧. 你必须相信它, 不然的话谁会相信呢?

Doubt 6. According to Daily Mail, MH17 was diverted further to the north, is it true? Why should the pilots do that? If it happened, could the diversion have been done more than hundred kilometres away before crash?
疑点6. 根据每日邮报, MH17有向北偏离, 这是真的吗? 机师们为何要那样做呢? 如果它有发生, 偏离有可能在坠落之前超过数百公里之外就做的吧? 

21 July 2014 (2014年7月21日)

Doubt 7. Can you imagine how strange is the coincidence of the number 17? A Boeing 777 aircraft, with its maiden flight on 17-7-1997, after 17 years, when used for the flight MH17, on the same day 17-7-2014, said to be shot by missile and crashed near the eastern border of Ukraine. For such kind of incidence, natural chances could be as low as to 1 out of a trillion, only purposeful human factor then only it could be larger than 1 out of 100. 

疑点7. 你可以想像得到17这个数字的巧合是多么奇怪的吗? 一架波音777飞机, 它的首航是在1997年7月17日, 17年后, 当它被用作MH17航班时, 在2014年7月17日的同一天, 被称在接近乌克兰东边边境被导弹击中和坠落. 对于这样的事故, 自然的机会可能低至1兆分之一吧, 只有刻意的人为因素那么它才可能是大过百分之一吧.

Doubt 8. 17-7-2014 is considered the 17th anniversary day of the aircraft, when it was said to be shot in the air, what was happening in the aircraft? You may think there was not a celebration during tea time onboard, but other people are free to spare imagination to think their ways. Whatever it was or it was not, the end result was a tragedy already happened.   

疑点8. 2014年7月17日是该飞机的17周年纪念日, 在它被说是在空中被击中的当儿, 飞机里会有发生什么事吗? 你可能会认为在机上的下午茶时刻没有一个庆祝会吧, 不过其他人倒是有自由的想象空间为他们所要想的. 无论是或不是, 最终的结果是一个悲剧已发生了.

Doubt 9. It has been reported that Ukraine people saw debris and body falling from the cloudy sky. It was a cloudy day, how would it affect a missile to strike its target? Certainly it needs high precision equipment and well planned coordination, including use of radar and satellite, how much is the precision of a surface missile shooting at an aircraft moving fast above clouds?  

疑点9. 曾有报道乌克兰人看见碎片和尸体从云天中掉下. 那是一个云天, 它会影响到导弹击中目标吧? 肯定的它是需要高度精准的仪器和良好策划的协调, 包括应用雷达和卫星, 一个地面导弹射击在云层上快速移动的飞机其精准度是多少呢?

Doubt 10. In one media report, showing an image and claiming the left wing of an aircraft was caught in flame, it was thought to be MH17. But the background looks so clear and brightly blue, suggesting the image was photographed upward from ground, but the time of incident was a cloudy day, so unlikely it is a true image of MH17.

疑点10. 在一则媒体报道中, 展示一张影像并称一架飞机的左翼着火燃烧, 它被当着是MH17. 不过其背景看来是清楚而鲜明的蓝色, 这说明该影像是从地面向上拍的, 不过事故那时刻是阴天, 因此它不像是MH17的真正影像. 

22 July 2014 (2014年7月22日)

Doubt 11. In a media report: “Russian Defense Ministry said on Monday (21 July), the crashed Malaysia Airlines flight ‪MH17 had strayed 14 km north from its planned route after passing ‪Ukraine’s eastern city of Donetsk”. If it was true, you must realize that the cause of straying may not necessary occur after shot by a missile, it also could be due to weather or other incidents. 

疑点11. 在一则媒体报道: “俄罗斯国防部于星期一(7月21日)称道, 撞毁的马航班机MH17在经过乌克兰东部城市顿涅茨克后的预定航道之北曾经迷荡14公里”. 如果那是事实, 你就必须了解迷荡的肇因不一定是被一个导弹击中后而发生的, 它也可能是因为气候或其他事故吧.

Doubt 12. The information is still unclear, “straying” certainly could mean it was diverting from its normal flight state, but in this case, it is uncertain whether it was during “downing” or while still high in the sky. At the speed of about 900 km/h, moving 14 km means about 1 minute, if the aircraft was straying for 1 minute, followed by free fall, then it would be a different explanation.   

疑点12. 该则资料还是不明朗的, “迷荡”肯定是可以意味它从正常航行状态而偏离, 但是在这个案件, 不确定它是“掉下”当时还是在高空的时刻. 在速度大约900公里时速, 移动14公里意味着约1分钟, 如果该飞机迷荡了1分钟, 接着是自由下落, 那将是一个不同的解释了.

 

Doubt 13. If the aircraft was struck by a missile at a the height of 10-km altitude, followed by straying 14 km, then fell to crash, the debris and other falling objects could scatter even 20 km away from the crash site, if other falling objects such as emergency door could be found far away then it might not be explainable by missile theory. 

疑点13. 如果该飞机在10公里的海拔高度, 接着迷荡14公里, 然后坠毁, 它的碎片和其他掉落的物体可能散落到离开坠毁地点甚至是20公里以外吧, 若其他掉落的物体例如紧急门口可以在远处被找到那么导弹理论或许就不能解释到了.

23 July 2014 (2014年7月23日)

Doubt 14. On 22 July, 282 bodies have been said recovered, where are the other 16? However, another report on 23 July: “Dutch forensic officials say only 200 bodies out of 298 MH17 victims have been found so far, not some 280 as previously reported”. If the head count is not tallied, certainly some more are still within or around the crash site or beyond, if one could be found much farther, the missile theory would be revised.  

疑点14. 于7月22日, 282具尸体被说已寻获, 其他16个呢? 无论如何,  7月23日另一则报道“荷兰的证鉴官方说至今MH17的298罹难者中只有200具尸体被发现, 而不是之前报道的280多个”. 如果人头数不符合, 肯定还有一些还在撞毁地点之内或周围或更远处, 如果可以在更远处找到一个, 哪个导弹理论将会被修正了.

Doubt 15. Malaysia Airlines released a statement on 18 July: “Malaysia Airlines confirms it received notification from Ukrainian ATC that it had lost contact with flight MH17 at 1415 (GMT) at 30 km from Tamak waypoint, approximately 50 km from the Russia-Ukraine border”. The time was then corrected to be officially 13:15 GMT (local time 4:15 pm or 16:15), but if MAS adopted the Moscow (about same longitude) summer time, it was GMT+4 hours, that is 17:15 or 5:15 pm local time. Minutes before it crashed, it is curious what happen to it at about 17 o’clock. Is the “17” still a coincidence?  

疑点15. 马航于7月18日发布的一则声明: “马航确认它收到来自乌克兰空管的通知即他们于14时15分(格林威治标准时间)在离坦马克航点30公里和MH17航机失去联络, 距离俄罗斯-乌克兰边界大约50公里”. 那个时间后来被改正为正式的格林威治标准时间13时15分(当地时间下午4时15分或16时15分), 不过如果马航采用莫斯科(大约同一个东经线)的夏天时间, 那是格林威治标准时间加4个小时, 那就是当地时间17时15分或下午5时15分. 在它撞毁之前多分钟, 好奇的是大约17点钟时它发生了什么事. “17”还是一个巧合吗?

Doubt 16. The aircraft Boeing 777-200ER registration as 9M-MRD, with its maiden flight on 17-7-1997, after 17 years, when used for the MAS flight as MH17, on the same day 17-7-2014, at about 17 o’clock (local time zone near Russia border), it should be a good time of “happy birthday”, but why was it so ill-fated to be the target of tragedy?

疑点16. 那架波音777-200ER飞机注册为9M-MRD, 它的首航于1997年7月17日, 17年后, 当它被用做马航航班作为MH17, 于2014年7月17日的同一天, 大约17点钟时(靠近俄罗斯边界的当地时区), 那应该是“生日快乐”的好时光, 可是为什么它那么不幸成了悲剧的目标?   

Doubt 17. As given in Malaysia Airlines’ statement on 18 July, the Ukrainian ATC had lost contact with flight MH17 at 13:15 (corrected GMT), but the time of crash on ground was reported as 13:21 by some media, are these two times truly accurate? If there was 6 minutes lag time from lost contact at 13:15 and crashed at 13:21, then unlikely it was shot and could still fly for about 5 minutes, then only fell to the ground in less than 1 minute time.

疑点17. 即如于7月18日马航的声明所提供, 乌克兰空管和MH17航机失去联络于13时15分(修正的格林威治标准时间), 一些媒体报道坠落地面的时间是13时21分, 这两个时间真的准确吗? 如果从失去联络于13时15分和坠毁于13时21分的时差是6分钟, 那就不像是它被击中而还能飞行大约5分钟, 然后才在少过1分钟时间内掉落到地面.

 Source: Internet. 来源:网络. 

2 August 2014 (2014年8月2日)

Doubt 18. After the black boxes sent to UK for analysis, it was said data have been downloaded, and then returned to Netherlands for data analysis, isn’t it an indication that UK is not fond to commit directly or bear the responsibility of their finding, or something not right about the initial speculation that missile shooting down the aircraft?

疑点18. 黑箱被送去英国分析之后, 据说数据已经被下载了, 而后被送回到荷兰做数据分析, 那不是一个显示英国不欢于直接介入或承担他们的发现的责任吧, 还是导弹击落该飞机的起初揣测有些不对劲吧? 

Doubt 19. After a few days, there is no indication that the Netherlands is ready to disclose their findings, so have to wait until the Malaysia’s Prime Minister to visit Netherlands on 31 July. However, nothing was announced about their discovery from the black boxes yet, it seems to become highly confidential until the preliminary report is submitted to ICAO, otherwise something is not right?

疑点19. 几天过后, 没有迹象荷兰准备好公开他们的发现, 所以就得等到7月31日马来西亚首相造访荷兰吧. 可是, 还是没有公布他们从黑箱所得的发现, 看来它已成了高度机密直到初步报告呈上国际民航组织, 不然的话有些东西不妥吧?

Doubt 20. In the last few days, there was diminishing sound from the government authorities of Netherlands, Malaysia, UK and Australia who were previously claiming the MH17 was shot down by missile. It now seems that nobody is absolutely sure, do you still believe it was shot down by a missile?  

疑点20. 在过去的几天, 之前称说MH17是被导弹击落的荷兰, 马来西亚, 英国和澳洲的政府当局已减少声音了. 现在看来没有人是绝对的肯定, 那你还相信它是被一个导弹击落的吗?

11 August 2014 (2014年8月11 日)

Doubt 21. International media reported in the late July (28 July), Time: “Explosive decompression happens when the air inside an aircraft depressurizes at an extremely fast rate, with results similar to a bomb detonation”. The Telegraph: “MH17 suffered a massive decompression caused by an explosion according to data recovered from the Malaysian plane's black box recorders”. If the decompression was a result of missile explosive shrapnel punched on the aircraft fuselage, could the depressurization be more drastic if compared with a result due to a sudden internal air pressure build-up?    

疑点21. 国际媒体在7月尾(7月28日)报道, 时报: “当一架飞机内的空气以极度快速的速度减压时爆炸性反压缩发生, 其结果就如一颗炸弹引爆”. 电邮报: “根据该马来西亚飞机的黑箱记录器所索取的数据MH17有经受一个由爆炸引起的重度反压缩”. 如果反压缩是导弹的爆炸碎片穿破飞机机身的一个结果, 那么和一个由于内部气压突发爆升引起的一个结果比较其减压是比较激烈的吗?

Doubt 22. For some certain reasons, air to air strike on the aircraft is unlikely to be the fact. If it was surface (ground) to air missile strike, you must think of what kind of result it should be, when explosive directly hit on aircraft it should give the first explosion, should a second explosion due to its fuel follow immediately and occur in the air? However, based on the video recorded, the tremendous explosion occurred on the ground, which was heavily combustive and smoky, more likely due to fuel explosion.

疑点22. 由于某些理由, 空对空射击该飞机不像是一个事实. 如果是地对空导弹射击, 你就必须想想它会是哪一类结果, 当爆炸物直接击中飞机时它应该是第一次爆炸, 紧接着的应该是由燃料引起的第二次爆炸以及在空中发生吧? 然而, 根据记录到的录影, 巨大的爆炸是在地面发生, 那是猛烈的燃烧和浓烟, 比较像是由于燃油爆炸. 

Source of video: Internet / Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3VbG0lHDhQ

Doubt 23. There was another speculation thought that the missile did not hit right on the aircraft, but exploded at several metres away from it, the shrapnel that led the aircraft to disintegration, but, how come no shrapnel hit on the fuel tank and cause explosion in the air?

疑点23. 有另一个揣测想法是导弹没有击中该飞机, 而是离开它数公尺处爆炸, 碎片就导致该飞机分解, 但是, 怎么会没有碎片击中燃油箱而造成在空中爆炸呢?

Doubt 24. Fuel is the most flammable material in the aircraft, if it burns into fire, there should be obviously visible of smoke trails when the aircraft coming down from the air, but it is not seen in the video. Isn’t it strange?

疑点24. 燃油是飞机里最易燃的原料, 如果它燃烧起火, 那么当飞机从天空中掉下来时应该会有明显可见到的烟迹, 但是录像中没有看见. 那不是奇怪吗?

12 August 2014 (2014年8月12日)

Doubt 25. Although it was not clearly elaborated what was meant by “decompression”, it could mean for a closed system there was a drop in air pressure due to leakage, or, more serious one could mean an outside force (such as missile explosive) breaking the closed system and lead to escaping of air, there is another situation that cannot be rejected without evidence, when there is a tremendous build-up of air pressure in the closed system until it cannot sustain the pressure anymore, the system will burst and decompression occurs. Which one is relevant to the MH17?

疑点25. 虽然没有清楚详尽说明反压缩指的是什么, 它可指一个封闭系统由于泄漏而造成气压减低, 或者, 比较严重的可以指外来力量(如导弹爆炸物)击破封闭系统而导致空气逃离, 另一个没有证据就不能排除的情形, 当在封闭系统内的气压剧度增加时它不能耐住压力时, 该系统就爆破而反压缩就发生. 那一个是与MH17有关呢?　

15 August 2014 (2014年8月15日)

Doubt 26. It was reported that on 12 August, the spokesman for the Dutch Safety Board (OVV), Wim van der Weegen said: “We have sufficient information to compile a preliminary report”, “We hope that it will be ready in a few weeks”. He then said on 13 August that, the preliminary report for the MH17 incident will be released in the first week of September. Although reason was given, for violating the standard practice of releasing preliminary report within one month, but whatever evidence and data obtained so far should be more than sufficient to present a preliminary report, so that nobody will buy time to set up something, otherwise there could be some shocking findings about the aircraft crash, the most stunning one is not “it was not shot down”.    

疑点26. 8月12日有报道, 荷兰安全委员局发言人, 范德维根说: “我们有足够的资料来编写一个初步报告”, “我们希望它在几个星期内就完成”. 后来于8月13日他说, MH17事故的初步报告将在9月的第1个星期公布. 虽然有给了理由, 违反了一个月内公布初步报告的标准惯例, 但是至今所获得的无论什么证据和数据应该是绰绰有余来呈现一个初步报告了, 那么就无人能争取时间去设计某些东西, 不然的话坠机可能是有某些震惊的发现, 最震惊的不是“它不是被击落的”. 

16 August 2014 (2014年8月16日)

Doubt 27. Another even more strange thing is, people expected some news about black box data after the visit of Malaysia Prime Minister to the Netherlands on 31 July, but there was no, and after about the third day of visit, there was no more media report about his public appearance. Then, 1 or 2 days after Australia Prime Minister visited the Netherlands on 12 August, Dutch Safety Board announced the release of preliminary report will be deferred to September. Are you able to sense something not right? 

疑点27. 另一个更奇怪的事是, 人人期望7月31日马来西亚首相到访荷兰后会有关于黑箱数据的新闻, 但是没有, 而大概访问的第3天后, 就再也没有媒体报道关于他的公众露面. 后来, 澳洲总理于8月12日访问荷兰之后的1或2天, 荷兰安全委员局就宣布初步报告的公布将会延迟到9月. 你能感觉到某些东西不妥吗?

Doubt 28. On 10 August, the Malaysian New Sunday Times reported the debris dispersal over the war zone area near the Hrabove. For fragment No. 16, it is the rear passenger cabin “right side” with its door missing, can this door be found and be a clue for the incident?   

疑点28. 于8月10日, 马来西亚新周日时报报道了碎片散布在靠近哈尔波夫战区的地区. 第16个碎片, 那是后部客舱的“右边”不见了门, 这个门能被找到而做为这起事故的线索吗?

Doubt 29. Based on the scattering pattern of the aircraft debris, some fuselage parts were thrown farthest on the ground, not the cockpit and front parts, unlikely it was shot and immediately disintegrated while travelling at 900 km/h at 30,000 feet. Can this not suggesting it was shot while travelling towards the east?

疑点29. 基于飞机碎片的散布图, 一些机身部分被抛到地面最远处, 而不是机舱或前头部分, 不像是当它在30,000尺以900公里时速航行时被击中后马上就分解. 这样的话可以不建议它在航向东边时不是被击中吗?

Doubt 30. Instead, can it suggest that when the aircraft was disintegrating, it was plunging straight or toppled down, so that the front parts were on the west side while the central parts on the east side?

疑点30. 或者, 可以建议当该飞机分解时, 它是直插或翻倒, 那么它的前头部分是在西边而中间部分则在东边吗?

Doubt 31. Based on the scattering coverage area, is it likely that the aircraft disintegrated at lower altitude such as about 10,000 feet rather than 30,000 feet?     

疑点31. 基于散布的覆盖地区, 像是该飞机在比较低的海拔分解例如10,000尺而非在30,000尺吧?　

Doubt 32. Have the investigators absolutely sure what happen to the MH17 and MH370 are not similar at all? The whole world people and experts initially thought they are completely different, but I always see things entirely different.  

疑点32. 调查员是否绝对肯定MH17和MH370所发生的全都不是一样的呢? 全世界的人和专家起初认为它们是完全不同的, 而我常常视物截然不同.

20 August 2014 (2014年8月20日)

Doubt 33. Among the 19 major wreckage fragments illustrated, mostly were not burned into flame, the largest fragment No. 12 is the centre structure together with fuel tanks and engines, shouldn’t this be the only one that caught into fire when it smashed on the ground?  

疑点33. 被描叙的主要19残骸碎片中, 大多数是没有着火燃烧, 最大的第12碎片是中间结构和燃油箱以及引擎一起的, 这不就是唯一的当撞落在地上时着火的吗?

Doubt 34. Since most of the debris fragments were not burned, if they were stained with specific missile explosive residues, then it could confirm missile shooting, otherwise, can it be not shot by missile?

疑点34. 由于大多数的碎片块体没有烧着, 如果它们有沾染上特定的导弹爆炸残余物, 那么就能确定导弹射击了, 不然的话, 可能它没有被导弹击中吗?   

Doubt 35. You may imagine what could be the situations where an explosion does not lead to serious combustion, such as, internal high pressure build-up?  

疑点35. 你可能会想像会是什么情况一个爆炸没有导致严重的燃烧, 例如, 内部压力增大?   

Doubt 36. A jumbo aircraft, broke up into many pieces in the air, and scattered on ground in a large area, only few pieces are said seen to be punched by missile explosive shrapnel, so, isn’t it unlikely missile exploded outside the aircraft?

疑点36. 一架庞大的飞机, 在空中破成多片, 和分散在地面上的一个大面积, 只有少数片块被说看来是被导弹爆炸物的弹片击穿的, 那么, 不就是它不像是导弹在飞机外爆炸了吗?     

Doubt 37. Otherwise, if a missile hit directly on the aircraft and punched into its fuselage, followed by explosion inside the aircraft, then explosive residues should have dispersed on the debris, has the investigation found any of such residues?

疑点37. 否则的话, 如果一个导弹直接击中飞机而穿入其机身, 接着在飞机内爆炸, 那么爆炸残余物应该会散播在碎片上, 该调查有找到这样的残余物吗?     

Doubt 38. If no explosive residues were found, the investigation has to consider another situation, can it be an internal explosion?

疑点38. 如果没有找到爆炸物残渣, 调查就须考虑另一个情况, 它可能是一个内部爆炸吗?　   

Doubt 39. Consider an air-tight closed system, when it is under high air pressure, especially under hyperoxia condition, will it possible subject to thermal explosion or “pressure-metal fatigue” explosion? Could such explosions be less combustive, but mainly break up the system into many pieces?  

疑点39. 考虑一个气密的封闭系统, 当它处在高气压时, 尤其是在高氧情形下, 它会可能遭受热因爆炸或者“压力-金属疲劳”爆炸吗? 可能这样的爆炸会比较少燃烧性, 反而主要是爆破该系统成为多个块体吗?   

 

Doubt 40. In the past few days, the authorities had discussed about arrangement to go back to the crash site to look for more evidence and investigation. What else to look for if they couldn’t find any explosive residue? If they could find a door or some more bodies westerly farther from the crash site, then would it be new shocking evidence?

疑点40. 在过去的几天, 有关当局曾讨论安排回到坠落地点去找更多的证据和调查. 如果他们找不到爆炸残余物那还要找什么呢? 如果他们能在离坠落地点西边更远处找到一个门或一些尸体, 那么就会是新的惊人证据吧?

25 August 2014 (2014年8月25日)

(2) Although I hope it will not be another incident, but on 23 August, a MAS flight MH70 from Kuala Lumpur to Tokyo’s Narita Airport, departed at 10:50 am and turned back after about 50 minutes, it was said that the pilot indicated some problem. Luckily it was safely landed at KLIA. Still hope that it will not be another such incident.   

(2) 虽然我希望不会有另一个事故, 但是于8月23日, 一架从吉隆坡前往东京成田机场的马航客机MH370, 于早上10时50分起飞大约50分钟后折返, 据说机长表明出了一些问题. 幸运的它安全地在吉隆坡国际机场着陆. 还是希望不会有另一个这样的事故.  

Doubt 41. In later media reports, it was said that: “It was not able to maintain the right pressure differential for the comfort of the passengers”. Air pressure problem can be big, can be small. Have any of the investigators for the MH17 and MH370 incidents thought of the possibility of air pressure factors?

疑点41. 在后来的媒体报道, 称说: “它不能正确地保持压力差别以使到乘客舒适”. 空气压力的问题是可大可小的. 那些MH17和MH370事故的任何调查员有没有想到气压因素的可能性呢?

Doubt 42. The similarity between MH17 and MH370: they are Boeing 777-200ER aircrafts, belong to Malaysia Airlines. If “MH370 burned into fireball in the air” had been denied, how can “MH17 burst into fragments in the air” not be denied? All because there was no evidence in the way their investigation was carried out, however, realization will come much later.   

疑点42. MH17和MH370相同之处: 它们是波音777-200ER飞机, 属于马来西亚航空公司. 如果“MH370在空中燃烧成火球”曾被否定, 怎么可能“MH17在空中爆成碎片”不会被否定呢? 全都因为他们的调查以那样的方式是没有证据的, 无论如何, 很久之后领悟才会到来. 

30 August 2014 (2014年8月30日)

Doubt 43. 6 Weeks after the crash of MH17, the preliminary report is not yet released. The Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, queried on 25 August why the recordings from the plane’s black boxes had not been released publicly, thinking that nothing is transparent. This is doubtful that the investigation is stalled, especially could be so if they couldn’t find any explosive residue evidence. He also said that those who had initially accused the Russia and the Russia-backed Ukrainian rebels shot down the plane had now fallen silent and “seemed to have swallowed their tongues”. Isn’t this an indication the investigators have no evidence that the MH17 was shot by a missile? If it isn’t, the investigation must release the preliminary report even earlier but not delay till first week of September, it is their responsibility to prevent any unforeseen new incident.

疑点43. MH17坠毁后6个星期了, 初步报告还没被公布. 俄罗斯外长拉夫罗夫于25日质问为什么飞机的黑匣子记录还未公布给大众, 认为没什么是透明. 这就令人生疑调查是停顿了, 尤其是如果他们找不到任何爆炸残余物的证据. 他也说那些起初指控俄罗斯和俄罗斯支持的乌克兰武装击落该飞机的人现在已经静下来了而且“似乎把他们的舌头吞下去了”. 这不就是一个迹象调查员没有证据MH17是被一个导弹击落的吗? 如果它不是的话, 调查就必须更早公布初步报告而无须延迟到9月的第1个星期吧, 那是他们的责任去预防任何意料不到的新事故.

5 September 2014 (2014年9月5日)

Doubt 44. It is now the end of first week of September, the preliminary report for MH17 incident has not been released as previously announced, yet it was said that will be released next week, another media source said in this month (September), can you guess why? A preliminary report should present the raw data including original records of voice communications from the black box and air traffic control centres, the actual reasons and cause of the crash is not a must at this stage, unless they found that the aircraft initially said to be shot down by a missile but now doesn’t seem to be the only true cause? 

疑点44. 现在是9月的第1个星期尾了, MH17事故的初步报告没有如之前宣布的被公布, 然而据说是下个星期才被公布, 另一个媒体源说是这个月内(9月), 你能猜到为什么吗? 一个初步报告应该呈现原生数据包括来自黑箱与空管中心的声音通讯的原始记录, 在这个阶段确实的原因和坠落的肇因不是迫切的, 除非是他们发现起初飞机是被说成被一个导弹击落而现在不像是唯一的确实导因吧.  

Doubt 45. Why does the Dutch Safety Board announce it will release the interim report on next Tuesday (9 September), that is, only after confirmed the visit of Malaysian representatives to the Netherlands and Ukraine next Sunday and Monday? What do they want to verify with the information from Malaysia that they do not have, but crucial for them to determine the cause of the crash of MH17? Well, you may guess the management and maintenance records.

疑点45. 为什么荷兰安全局宣布它在下个星期二(9月9日)才公布临时报告, 即是, 只有在确定马来西亚的代表下个星期日和星期一访问荷兰和乌克兰之后? 他们是要核实他们没有的哪些来自马来西亚的资料, 却是对他们是决定性的去判断MH17坠毁原因的呢? 好的, 你可能会猜测管理和维修记录吧. 

8 September 2014 (2014年9月8日)

Doubt 46. In a local newspaper report (8 September), the Malaysia Inspector General of Police and the Attorney General are now in the Netherlands (7 September). You must be very curious, it may be the reason for the delay of the preliminary report? Why does the aircraft crash investigation in the Netherlands got to do with the police in Malaysia? What can you guess now? What do investigators want to cross-check or confirm with? There must be some very crucial internal investigation. You may agree that, to arrest and charge culprits from Ukraine or Russia does not seem to be viable. Will the preliminary report be not stunning the world? Tomorrow will see the answer.     

疑点46. 一个本地报章报导(9月8日), 马来西亚警察总长和总检察长现在在荷兰(9月7日). 你一定会很奇怪, 这可能就是初步报告延迟的理由吧? 为什么在荷兰的坠机调查跟马来西亚警方有何关系? 你现在可以猜到什么吗? 调查员要核实或确认什么呢? 一定是某些很决定性的内部调查吧. 你可能同意, 要逮捕和控告乌克兰或俄罗斯的元凶不像是行得通的. 初步报告将会是不震惊世界的吗? 明天就可以看到答案了.

11 October 2014 (2014年10月11日)

Doubt 47. On 9 October, the Dutch foreign minister Frans Timmermans said, an Australian passenger of MH17 aircraft, was found to have oxygen mask around the neck, this is a shocking revelation, because expert analysis speculated that victims died within seconds after the aircraft was thought shot by a missile. Is it true that victims had time to put on oxygen mask? Is it contradicts with the theory of missile shooting that brought down the aircraft?   

疑点47. 于10月9日, 荷兰外交部长法兰斯迪莫曼斯说, MH17飞机的一个澳洲乘客, 被发现在颈上绕着氧气罩, 这是一则震惊的透露, 因为专家分析揣测认为飞机被一个导弹击中之后遇难者在数秒中内就死亡. 遇难者真的有时间套上氧气罩吗? 这和导弹击中而打下该飞机的理论有冲突吗?