I agree Kalle,

Speculation that the tracking devices were turned of deliberately and at different times, changing direction of flight plan so dramatically, and the plane continuing to ping so long afterwards seems to suggest fowl play. As Bit mention, going into a dive would have set off distress signals. Also, there is no indication that they lost the ability to communicate all those hours after changing direction. It appears that the plane went deliberately silent.

It will be fascinating if they ever figure out what has actually happened.

So, I have been watching CNN this morning and this is getting really interesting.  Because they are starting to be able to decipher the satellite readings of the pings that were recorded; they are pretty certain that this plane changed course and turned West, towards Africa or the Middle Eastern region.  They are waiting for more satellite reports to come in and confirm exact locations of those pings.  Basically as 2 or 3 different satellite's show there readings, the signals cross in a triangular pattern and narrow down considerably the location of the pings.
 
One aviation expert mentioned that if you notice where the US has deployed the USS Kidd, it is in the Indian Ocean, where they believe the plane's course was directed too. 
 
I am not a conspiracy theorist, never have been.  I generally believe that the truth is usually the simplest explanation of what actually happened.  But if it turns out that this plane was hi jacked and redirected to this region, one would have to wonder what their plan is. 

Surprisingly, some of the best and most up-to-date information on this can be found on wikipedia. Pretty cool times we live in, when you can turn to an encyclopedia for news on an ongoing current event.

Great link, Bit.  A very good up to date summary.

You've all heard of spontaneous combustion right?... Well my theory is along those lines but with a bit of a twist.
 
The culprit? = Spontaneous Lard-ass-tion!
 
That's right! A little known condition that causes the body's cells to turn everything into fat, including the air that the victim is breathing, resulting in them blowing up like a Macy's day parade float! Except that it isn't air inside there? It's lard!!!
 
From what we know of the planes movements? I think it's obvious that multiple passengers suffered this affliction simultaneously and all of them just so happened to be on the same side of the plane. The resulting, almost immediate, massive gain in weight on only one side of the plane, caused it to veer off course.
 
This theory is obviously sound except that it leaves one question. Why did the plane stop transmitting it's location?
 
To that I say, why don't you try transmitting your location with a salty, jiggling, erupting man boob, squishing into you like a flesh geyser set to projectile vomit?!!... In other words, I imagine the transponder was possibly crushed... Or eaten?...
 
With all this taken into account and adding the fact that the airline have said that the pilot was exceptionally skilled at keeping big metal things airborne. They need to stop searching for a crashed plane in the ocean and maybe should start looking for it in a parking lot at a KFC in Jakarta...

One problem with that theory...  Lard floats.

The reason "they" say flying is safe is to protect the commercial institution from public fear. Federal safety standards are so strict and expensive that the smaller the operation (and smaller the plane) the more likely these standards are not adhered to. It's common for the flying community to view FAA as over controlling and corners are cut to save time and money.
 
Before FAA stepped in, flying was indeed very unsafe. The Wrights knew just enough to get off the ground. Once in the air it was pretty much every man for himself. After WW1 the government told their pilots to go home and forget everything they knew about flying. Like that was going to happen! Once flying is in your blood it's like a disease with no cure. So many of them bought surplus war planes and went barn storming... much to farmer's chagrin.
 
During WW2 many pilots died in stalls and spins because they didn't understand that basic aspect of flying yet. Now that they do, these are some of the first things you learn about.
 
Alaska is the "flyingest state" with more pilots per capita than any other state. On average 50 pilots a year die here, mostly due to operator error. I know many "backyard" pilots of whom most I would never dream of flying with.
 
I will say that the larger and more famous an airline is, the safer it is bound to be. Even so, I personally do not consider flying to be any more or less safe than any other form of transportation... except maybe cycling.
 
I could go on but I'm sure I've bored you enough already.

craigb
... A great landing is one where you can reuse the plane.  Unfortunately, I ran out of money at the time and never did finish to get my pilot's license.  Oh well.

Does that mean you CRASHED?
 
Bummer!
 

Little airplanes should be safer (a 747 can't land in a pasture in a pinch and has a glide ratio akin to a streamlined rock) but they're not, primarily due to pilot incompetence. Just marvel at the widespread incompetence every morning on the freeway during rush hour - well, some of those idiots have pilot licenses, too.
 
My father was a flight instructor, both in the military and in the private sector. He had some tales to tell! He was also an open-cockpit stunt pilot who understood the principles of aerodynamics quite well. He also understood the importance of procedure and consistent adherence to best-practices. I remember flying with him once when he chastised me for not folding a map properly, saying it was a safety issue.

A former girlfriend's father was a career Air Force pilot with thousands of hours in B-47s, B-57s and B-52s, yet he still managed to stall a small plane, with his only son aboard (also a pilot). They survived the crash, but were both seriously injured.