Barry: It seems extremely likely that the two incidents were unconnected.
In a catastrophic event like this, with such a void of information and a need for it, even the smallest noise can be amplified.
Were these "floating fires" reported at the time, or after the flight was known to be missing? Were the witnesses absolutely certain about the number, size and nature of these "fires", or was the information rather given couched in the terms of, "I doubt this will help, but for what it's worth, we thought we saw..."
The only explanations that fit all solid and putative data points are conspiracy theories. The real world is noisy.
And what's the point of analysis if you insist on taking information at face value?