OK, I\u2019ve never heard that expression, and I\u2019m not really intentionally trying to coin a new phrase. \u00a0But you know what Ockham\u2019s Razor is about \u2014 the idea that, all other things being equal, you should choose the explanation for an event that\u2019s the simplest. \u00a0And why the situation with the vanished Malaysian flight feels like Ockham\u2019s Razor in reverse is this:<\/p>\n
People have speculated that the pilots had planned a 9-11 type attack on some kind of target. \u00a0But in such a case, why would they have, apparently, landed the plane somewhere, with the intent to refuel and take off again for their nefarious ends? \u00a0Why would they not have simply crashed the plane into its target right away?<\/p>\n
People have also speculated that the pilots intentionally crashed the plane as an act of terrorism. \u00a0But the whole point of terrorism is induce a feeling of terror in your enemies, by leaving them insecure, knowing, in this instance, that no flight is safe. \u00a0Accordingly, terrorism, to be effective, requires announcing to the world that this was, in fact, a terrorist event.<\/p>\n
Perhaps this was some kind of mass kidnapping? \u00a0That would mean either that these people are being held hostage for ransom, with no ransom demand, or being held as some kind of slaves, equally improbable.<\/p>\n
Was this \u201csuicide by plane crash\u201d? \u00a0 There were two pilots, so they\u2019d either both have to be suicidal, or one would have had to have overpowered the other. \u00a0And, even though I can\u2019t say much about the culture in which these men lived, I can\u2019t see someone who\u2019s suicidal deciding to take a whole planeload of people with him.\u00a0 Besides which, why continue to fly for so many hours in that case?\u00a0 In the one actual instance of \u201csuicide by plane,\u201d EgyptAir 990, the crash occurred shortly after take-off.<\/p>\n
Was this a plane theft? \u00a0To what end? \u00a0A Boeing 777 seems entirely unsuited to the task of providing transportation for some criminal group; a smaller jet would seem to be a much better choice, given the runway requirements, maintance issues, etc., of a jumbo jet.<\/p>\n
So in each of these instances \u2014 9-11 attack, intentional crash for terror purposes, mass kidnapping, suicide, \u201cplane theft\u201d \u2014 this mysterious disappearance of the plane would be a pretty lousy way of accomplishing the goal, so that makes these theories improbable. \u00a0Hence, \u201cOckham\u2019s Razor in reverse.\u201d<\/p>\n
My personal guess? \u00a0It was intended to be a \u201clone wolf\u201d 9-11 style attack, but all their attempts to fly literally under the radar meant that they unintentionally crashed into the sea rather than their intended target. <\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
OK, I\u2019ve never heard that expression, and I\u2019m not really intentionally trying to coin a new phrase. \u00a0But you know what Ockham\u2019s Razor is about \u2014 the idea that, all other things being equal, you should choose the explanation for an event that\u2019s the simplest. \u00a0And why the situation with the vanished Malaysian flight feels […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2209,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-574","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n