MH370: Geomar’s Role Revisited

I would like to have removed the old article at the bottom of this post long ago. I did not because if I had I believed I would have opened myself to legitimate criticism for posting diametrically opposed analyses based on the exact same material. The original article was profoundly wrong, and I was slow in figuring it out.

Please be assured:

  1. Geomar was the first known entity to record MH370’s terminal crash site with Multibeam sonar;
  2. Geomar deliberately intervened in an international search effort involving the loss of 239 individuals;
  3. Geomar then participated in withholding confirmation of MH370’s terminal crash site, along with Malaysia’s Razak administration and Australia’s Turnbull administration.

The only thing that is at issue is how, precisely, Principal Investigator Reinhard Werner, aboard the Sonne Cruise SO258/1, was able to put two camera landers so close to MH370’s fuselage without revealing it in published AIS data from the voyage: UNLESS there is also footage that places the vessel (or one of its launches) directly above the wreckage. I have been unable to find an audit trail to that kind of data. It may only mean the book-cookers involved in it were careful and thorough, but it could also mean I’ve simply missed it.

Below are the two images that have caused me enormous confusion. The third image is an amalgam of the first two. The first two images were distributed by Dr. Reinhard Werner, who is believed to have published the first image shortly after reaching Colombo, Sri Lanka on July 7, 2017. The second image was emailed to me by Reinhard Werner on Friday, October 30, 2020, 39 months after the cruise concluded at Colombo.

The red dot in the second image was placed there by Dr. Reinhard himself to mark the location of MH370’s debris field (which he claimed not to have ‘reached’). That debris field shows up prominently in all renditions of the R/V Sonne sonar data EXCEPT in the version Reinhard Werner makes available on the Geomar / Germany website. In the latter, the debris field was physically deleted from the record. That is, it was intentionally removed by Geomar’s Principal Investigator or by someone acting on Dr. Werner’s authority, and that removal was confirmed in early 2021 by independent US Kongsberg specialists, as well as by none other than Scripps Oceanographic of California. It happened. It is a fact that Geomar materially tampered with evidence of MH370’s terminal location. The question going forward will be: on whose authority?

The conundrum I faced for weeks was, “if Reinhard Werner’s positioning of the Jamieson Camera Landers was accurately depicted in the first graphic above, and I now have every reason to believe it is, then Geomar deliberately sailed to that crash site to participate in a hoax involving 239 victims. It also means that the Jamieson Camera Landers were intentionally dropped on two sides of MH370; probably within meters of it; and that high-quality images of the wreckage have been hidden ever since.

The image below is identical to the one above, except that the one below has a circle centered on the red dot provided by Reinhard Werner marking the location of MH370’s debris field. The radius of the circle is 21.1 kilometers. It is a yardstick of sorts. The purple pit is 21.1 km southeast of the debris field. It shows by comparison that two of the yellow Jamieson Landers were within 10 km of the wreckage. That is not close enough to obtain underwater stills of the wreckage, no matter how good the cameras or how clear the water is, but it is important for other reasons. In the final report of the cruise, the Jamieson Landers are recorded as having been placed in a narrow strip more than 10 kilometers east of the wreckage (second image below). They could not have been in both locations unless the only thing accomplished was shuttling back and forth with R/V Sonne. Unlikely. The only conclusion I’ve been able to reach is that the Cruise Report is largely imaginary for the Zenith portion of the voyage. That is, it was selectively edited to conceal Geomar’s deceit.

Does ICAO know about this? Did Malaysia, Germany, and Australia obtain permission from ICAO to deceive the entire world? If not, we have three rogue nations that collaborated on deceiving everyone. Who were they protecting? And it is no secret that several world-class bad guys associated with Malaysia had their fingers in the sauce. Not the least of whom was convicted felon and former Prime Minister Najib Razak. The only analogy that comes to mind is, What if the US had collaborated to hide the horrible loss of life associated with the Boeing 737 Max? From my point of view, that is precisely what Australia, Malaysia, and Germany are doing by trying to hide MH370.

So the foregoing shows how Geomar pulled off the deception. But it is important to stress that AIS from Geomar’s vessel R/V Sonne is inconsistent with such skullduggery. The official AIS record shows Sonne remaining in a north-and-south pattern above the landers shown above as white pins over an orange back-and-forth pattern. That is what puzzled me for a long time. But given the many efforts to deceive, including the effort to have me believe R/V Sonne did not ‘reach’ MH370’s debris field, the only plausible conclusion for me is that Geomar and several of its science advisors fabricated AIS returns as well as the final Cruise Report. The only thing not altered before it was published (perhaps!) was the second weekly report published by Reinhard Werner long before an altered final report was released. Someone hoped no one would check those lander locations.

Finally, the chart below shows where Camera Landers were claimed to have been deployed in the Week #2 Report (yellow dots), and where they were claimed to have been deployed in the Final Report. Locations are not graphically shown in the official final report, unlike in the Week #2 Report. Moreover, the Week #2 Report was only available in German for a while and was difficult to locate on US websites. Seems to be well known that I do not read or speak German.

ORIGINAL POST (profoundly incorrect)

Original Title: MH370: No Evidence Geomar Looked For It or Found It in 2017

The evidence is not all in, but from what I’ve read and been able to cross-check so far in the 2017 Cruise Report titled:

RV SONNE Fahrtbericht / Cruise Report SO258/1; INGON: The Indian – Antarctic Break-up Enigma,

there is nothing to convincingly indicate that the voyage might have been a covert effort to document the plane’s terminal location. If it is indeed there, I’ve been unable to find evidence anyone associated with Geomar’s June 2017 cruise knew that, knows that, ignored it, or helped cover it up by failing to report it.

The things that initially pointed to those possibilities include 1) assertions in emails from Geomar’s 2017 Principal Investigator to me in late 2020 that the cruise did not scan a large shiny object within 20 km of the 2017 study area; 2) assertions from Scripps’ Oceanographic scientists that the image of an unidentified object that appears in a Google Earth plugin came from the Geomar study; 3) the deletion (apparently by  Geomar) of that large object from the public version of its 2017 EM122 .ALL files; 4) the existence of Geomar images that depict “camera landers” in close proximity to the GPS of the large object; and 5) an unannounced voyage to the 2017 area at Zenith in May 2021 by one of the marine biologists who participated in the 2017 Geomar voyage.

I would add that six images from the 2021 voyage that appear to have been photoshopped did not help build confidence in the source (#5 above). They were not geocoded or independently verifiable in any way, and were sent to me in the form of… “there is nothing there… there”. That simply reinforced suspicions that the plane’s debris field had been found but not reported. (The snarling, sarcastic marine biologist behind the 2021 images may have hoped to provoke such a response. If so, he succeeded.)

I will soon inactivate previous posts focused on the possibility that MH370 debris has been observed / recorded at Zenith Abyss. There is no convincing evidence it is not there; telemetry based on the tracking satellite suggests it is there; but I see nothing to be gained by blindly asserting something that cannot be verified.

Figure 1
Figure 1: Zenith Abyss. Transect tracks by day between June 11, 2017 and June 14, 2017. None reported for June 10, which was largely a Lander-Drop day at Zenith Abyss. AIS pings were not in close proximity for the most part, but no indication of intent to mislead. Geomar appears to have developed fairly tight accounting practices that provide effective audit trails throughout its operations.