icon earthRecently, I reviewed a YouTube documentary entitled The Unknowns: Mystifying UFO cases, created by Lemmino, the channel name of a ‘twenty-something Swede’, as he calls himself. The video was about famous UFO sightings. I do recommend it, as I think it is well-made, and balanced in its tone and content. I later watched another Lemmino video, The Vanishing of Flight 370. This video documentary is about the MH370 mystery; the missing Boeing 777 passenger airliner that disappeared shortly after leaving Kuala Lumpur airport around midnight on the night of March 8th, 2014. The video is, once again, very well made. Here it is:

In the video, Lemmino describes the events that took place on that fateful night. The plane left Kuala Lumpur airport and flew out, over the Gulf of Thailand, heading for Vietnam. It left Malaysian air-space and then immediately disappeared from civilian aviation tracking over the Gulf of Thailand. A short time later, it was spotted by Malaysian military radar, which showed that it had secretly turned around and headed west. Lemmino explains that the loss of communication with the plane, and its tracking, occurred because the tracking devices on the plane had stopped working. This could have occurred either because of a fire on the plane or because the transponders were manually turned off by someone in the cockpit.

Lemmino explains that the last reliable sighting of the plane was as a military radar blip near the top end of Sumatra. Later, uncovered satellite information about the plane seemed to indicate that it had flown directly south after leaving the northern edge of Sumatra, and that it eventually travelled into a vast stretch of ocean to the west of Australia. Extensive searches in this area, which continued on for over a year, yielded nothing. Much later, pieces of the plane, almost all of them from the plane’s outer edges, washed up on several islands at the far western end of the Indian Ocean. This seemed to indicate that the plane had crashed somewhere in the Southern Indian Ocean.

Lemmino’s video seems to tell the full story of MH370. It even includes several dubious alternative theories as to where the plane went. It has racked up thirteen million views on YouTube. It would be therefore easy to conclude that he has explained everything that needs to be known about MH370’s disappearance, and that we’ll never know where the plane went, or its ultimate fate. But the video actually leaves out a piece of crucial evidence. This extra evidence gives a strong indication of where the plane went and the plan behind its disappearance.


Before we examine the extra evidence, it’s worth thinking about what the plan might have been of those who took the plane. Lemmino’s description of the pilot and co-pilot seems to show that they weren’t people who hijacked planes, but they may not have been the crew flying the plan off-route. It would have been fairly easy for someone else to take over the plane. Several people, for example masquerading as military officers, secret services agents, FBI etc could have persuaded the crew to relinquish control of the plane. Once in control of the plane, this new flight team could have carried out a pre-prepared plan.

The renegade team’s plan is relatively straightforward to work out. We know they waited until the plane signed off from Malaysian air-traffic control, at which point they turned off all tracking devices and turned the plane directly west. The deliberate turning off of the tracking equipment is far more likely than a fire, as a fire would almost certainly have caused the plain to crash in Malaysian waters. The renegade team then flew the plane away from Malaysia, using visual waypoints and compass headings. This is logical, as it requires no interaction with air-traffic control or satellite navigation systems, and so they can evade detection. The renegade crew steered the plane west over Malaysia, then used Penang Island as a visual waypoint and flew north-west along the Strait of Malacca until they were far enough north to clear the island of Sumatra. This was the last clear sighting of the plane by radar, as shown in Lemmino’s video. The question then becomes, where did then plane go next?

The renegade crew clearly had a plan; they were well-prepared. They knew how to turn off devices on the plane to stop themselves being tracked. They also were able to fly the plane using visual waypoints. It is therefore logical that they were planning to take the plane somewhere. If they had wanted to destroy the plane, they could have done that as soon as they gained control. They must have had a destination, a place where they would land. It is highly unlikely that this location would be a civilian airport, as it would next to impossible to hide their arrival. They were therefore planning to land on a private or military airstrip. It would need to be a large one, as they were flying a 777 passenger airliner. Their plan of flying with compass directions and visual waypoints as a way to avoid detection makes sense but it has one major flaw. If you’re flying a large plane close to islands, people on those islands will probably see you, especially after dawn. This seems to have happened to MH370.

The Huffington Post article entitled MH370: Maldives Islanders Insist They Witnessed ‘Low Flying’ Missing Malaysia Airlines Flight, dated 4th April 2015, reports that many Maldive Islanders saw a plane, seemingly similar to the MH370, flying low over their islands soon after the plane disappeared. Their reports of the plane passing over them makes sense. The plane could have flown directly west from the Straits of Malacca, then used Sri Lanka as another visual waypoint, before heading south west to the Maldives. This route is logical and an ideal way to head for that part of the world using visual waypoints, while avoiding major cities. The next question becomes; where did the plane go next?

The Maldive Islands are in the Indian Ocean, far from any continent. Once the renegade crew flew MH370 past the Maldive Islands, the plane’s possible destination is reduced to a single, viable option; Diego Garcia. That is likely to be the only private or military airstrip that the plane could have reached, considering the fuel on board. Diego Garcia lies roughly a thousand kilometres to the south of the Maldives. It is a coral atoll governed by Britain but ‘leased’ to the United States. It contains a large, military base and a full-length airstrip. If you study a map of the Indian Ocean around the Maldives, the area is a vast expanse of open ocean, save for a few, small islands. Diego Garcia is basically the only place to go. The next airfield large enough to land a Boeing 777 is thousands of kilometres away and probably beyond the aircraft’s maximum range, due to its fuel-load. It therefore seems logical, based on the Maldive Islanders’ sightings and the modus operandi of the hijackers, that the MH370 went to Diego Garcia.

Diego Garcia is a United States military base hundreds of kilometres from any city. It’s therefore practically impossible to discover, through any normal means, what might happen there. There is unsubstantiated evidence that might support this place as a destination. For example, one story appeared, reporting that a passenger on board had phoned out, six-or-more hours after the disappearance, using a phone they’d hidden in a body cavity. They said that everyone on board was in hoods, before the signal cut out. Another story reported that a passenger on the plane, from Australasia, whose profession was unknown, had given his wedding ring to his wife before leaving home to go on the flight. I have not thoroughly sourced these stories and so they should be regarded purely as rumour. Everything that happens in Diego Garcia is out of the public eye. If the plane went there, we’ll probably never know what happened to it.

I am not making a legal or rock-solid case that MH370 went to Diego Garcia. I am simply commenting on a published news article, describing its evidence and making logical inferences. The rest is up to others. What I would like to discuss in the rest of this article is the effect of not talking about the Maldives sightings on Lemmino’s video.

Common knowledge

Lemmino’s YouTube video, about the disappearance of MH370, doesn’t include the eyewitness reports from the Maldives. He doesn’t even discount them in his video. He does mention Diego Garcia in his video as a possible destination for MH370 but without the Maldives sightings, it’s not a convincing destination. I’m not being critical of Lemmino for this omission, it’s easy to miss something when you’re researching a subject, but this omission will probably have a strange, knock-on effect; it will have actually helped his video’s popularity.

YouTube channels, such as Second Thought, Peak Prosperity and Mystery History, have found themselves demonetised, or discovered they’ve lost subscribers, or been removed from recommended lists because the YouTube administrators haven’t liked their content, even though their content wasn’t abusive, irrational or explicit. Knowing this, we can see that Lemmino’s omission of the Maldives’ reports may have saved his video from being downgraded. This would have then helped the video become more popular. As a result, its view will dominate. But this unfortunately means that people believe that the video is true because it is the dominant view. By missing out on a key fact, paradoxically, the video has become the truth. There is very little any single individual can do to rectify this, since the video already has 3,000 comments, which drowns out the voice of an individual respondent. Certain views do rise to the top of the comments list, and thereby become more prominent, but again, it’s only because they’re popular, not because they’re correct.

Years ago, Google came up with a plan to stop spurious theories and crackpot ideas gaining traction on the internet. It decided to downrate content that it believed was false. Google did this by scanning the internet and discovering the dominant view on that matter. It would then decide that that view was the correct view. It would then downgrade content that disagreed with that view. The problem with this strategy is that the majority view is often wrong. For example, most people think that glass is a slow-moving liquid at room temperature, and that this is why medieval window panes are thicker on the bottom. This view is false. Glass is a solid at room temperature. Medieval glass panes are thicker on the bottom because they are blown glass, not pane glass, and so aren’t flat. The glaziers put the thicker edge on the bottom of the window panes because it was aesthetically more pleasing, and possibly easier to apply. Google’s plan would therefore have mean that any article explaining the truth about glass being a solid at room temperature would be downgraded, because it was a fringe view, even though it was the correct one. As a result, anyone  using Google to find out the truth about glass being a solid at room temperature would end up getting the wrong answer because the search engine had buried the correct explanation.

This seems to be the situation now on much of our internet. Massive controllers such as Google and YouTube (which Google owns) decide what becomes popular, and what dominates. They then encourage us all to believe the idea that whatever dominates is true. We are therefore left with an internet in which the gatekeepers decide, by themselves, what is officially true, using an entirely circular argument. Our internet is therefore a little like Stalin’s Russia, only perhaps with less gulags. If you disagree with the Party Truth, you disappear. Then again, if you’re reading this, they haven’t entirely succeeded. Nice! 🙂