>> yeah, i think one of the big problems we've got here is that the accuracy of the search operation is predominantly based on assumptions. we know from the data that we've got the distance and the arc. what we don't know is how far down the arc south that it's gone. and what is fueling this information is assumptions based information. to it's distance, it's track, it's also altitude, and it's speed. but they're all based on conflicting evidence as what we've seen. we don't know what happened after that last transponder ping. we don't know what track it took. we don't know how high it was. we don't know what speed it was. so what they're having to do is they're having to work backwards. so anyone who says what we've been doing in the far south is irrelevant, i don't agree with it. even throw the process of elimination, it's allowed us to work backwards.