Intention and unintention
There is an unhelpful continuing confusion between intention as a cause for the disappearance, and pilot intention. MH370’s disappearance was either unintentional or intentional. Unintentional causes are being covered. General intention does not impute pilot cooperation, though it could. Hypothesizing pilot involvement does not cast aspersions on all other pilots any more than the good reputation of all pilots ensures the performance or behavior of any single pilot at all times. Nor does it necessarily suggest the pilot acted in an antisocial or violent way, which is no small point. Posters irately suggesting that moderators remove any posts that suggest pilot involvement are not distinguishing between some general intention and pilot involvement, and are wrong to try to impede ideas which may prove true and useful in as yet unrecognized ways. While life history and societal norms are strong circumstantial evidence, there are probably a thousand possibilities why a good person might take a completely unanticipated action for the greater good as he saw it in the moment, or a greater good as described to him by others to whom he ascribes authority or high regard who may have hidden agendas, or for many other reasons. In fact, acting "under authority" or within a chain of command but against personal opinion or judgment is usually recognized as exemplary behavior. Both pilots demonstrate a solid and predictable history but no one yet knows what led to MH370’s disappearance. There is no shred of evidence excluding general intention as the cause, or excluding intentional misdirection. If one wanted to lose an airliner there would be few better places to travel near or aim for than the Ninety East Ridge and the Diamantina Trench. There is nothing wrong with asking why someone would want an airliner to disappear. Asking this question directly confronts why this might have happened.