r/UFOs • u/Atiyo_ • Aug 12 '23
Megathread MH370 - Relevant Posts regarding MH370 Compilation
Decided to take a break from this, this is actually consuming my life and I won't have enough time to keep up with this anymore, so I won't be updating the megathread any further.
New sub: r/AirlinerAbduction2014
Original Video from webarchive
Revisiting Supposed Military Drone Footage of UFO Airliner Abduction (This was the first post that sparked the rediscovery of the video)
The Ultimate Analysis: Airliner videos and the MH370 flight connection. (Part 1)
MH370 Airliner videos: a piece of the puzzle probably no one noticed. (Part 2)
MH370 Airliner videos part III: The rabbit hole goes deeper than we thought (Part 3)
MH370 Airliner videos part IV: New relevant information! (Part 4) (Great overall posts, covering a lot of other posts, this should be your starting point)
Objective and Thorough Analysis of the Airliner Data (original analysis, possible mh370 airplane and UAP, OP is a pilot)
NROL-22 (USA 184) satellite did pass near the coordinates shown in the video
Here are NROL-22 (USA 184) flight data from March 8th 2014
Boeing 777 Video: NROL-22 Satellite and MQ-1C Drone
New lead for proving the authenticity of the videos (WSPRnet data seems to suggest it is in fact MH370 in the video)
Airliner Satellite Video: View of the area unwrapped
Airliner Portal Video - A Mechanical Engineer's Thermal Suspicions (Top comment is worth checking out here, OP seems to dislike clicking links and informing himself on the topic)
The Curious Case of Speedbird777 (UAP Airliner) (Possible earlier upload of the video)
How to View that Stereoscopic Satellite Video of The Airliner In 3D
(confirmed) The airliner satellite video coordinates are over the Andaman Sea, not the Indian Ocean
4Chan Thread (includes cleaned and upscaled versions of the videos)
Here are links that aren't directly related to MH370, but provide insights on the details:
Former Marine F/A-18 pilot Mark Hulsey describes encounter with multiple orb UAPs flying in a circular pattern above his canopy (similar flight characteristics by UAP as shown in the video)
I tried to recreate the airline video, I think it is nearly impossible
"I made this while drunk" titled recreation YT video of alleged MH370 UAP abduction found on ATS.com
Boeing 777 Videos: Original YouTube Uploader (Video Source) (possible link between RegicideAnon and Luke Air Force Base)
Psychic remote-viewed MH370 being teleported by NHI on March 11, 2014, a day before video of abduction allegedly made available. (very controversial, depends if you believe remote viewing as being real or not)
Russian Pilot UFO encounter 1991 (UFO took over control of jet, disabled radio, similar movement to UFOs in MH370 video) - credits to Remsey of ufoB
Edit: So that people can keep track of new posts, I'll continue to add any new posts/comments down here:
Simulating the MQ-1 Camera Pose
whitecap swells from satellite view as debunk for mh370 video similar/related to Frame-stacking the Infamous Airliner Abduction Satellite Video (possible debunk based on whitecaps in the ocean)
HEO SBIRS USA-184/NROL-122 is confirmed TASKABLE. It can be positioned to view the globe ON DEMAND. Lockheed Martin file video confirms the ability. (Confirmation that satellites are capable of the recording we've seen in the video) related to:Officially declassified, degraded images from SBIRS HEO sensors. These are the only two images ever released from USA-184 and USA-200 sensors. Yes, HEO-1 and HEO-2 have very good eyes on Earth!
Airliner Video More information (4 day Earlier upload date than the youtube one by RegicideAnon)
MH370 discussion from video/vfx hobbyist point of view
MH370 Airliner videos part IV: New relevant information! (Also added at the top to keep the 4 parts together)
MH370 Discussion - Weather imaging satellite turned off from 2AM MYT for 2 hours on March 3, 2014 (Several satellites in the area were turned off because of "keep out of zone operations") Relevant Comment Followup Post: UFO Airliner Video: Weather imaging satellite turned off "keep out zone operations" during March 8, 2015 UFO sighting video timeframe.
Airliner video shows complex treatment of depth
MH370 Airliner video is doctored. proof included. (controversial opinions in the comments whether this is actually a debunk, post below might be a reason why it's not a debunk)
The MH370 footage appears to be missing fuselage fins and antenna from the video Related to 0:22 in this video -- the antennae are clearly visible in optical light, but then disappear in IR.
A perspective (no pun :P) from a professional 3D artist about the MH 370 footage
Physics Can Verify the MH 370 VIDEO with Teleporting Orbs - How to prove authenticity
Airliner video shows matched noise, text jumps, and cursor drift
Were the 3 UFO's in the investigation report from 2018?! See Page 59 (More info in comment)
MH370 - All the information we have with recent discoveries
Airliner Video Artifacts Explained by Remote Terminal Access
Just putting things in perspective
Requesting the community's help reviewing a few MH370 video anomalies.
There’s still no consensus on what plane/drone took the FLIR video
Possibly even earlier upload date? March 16, just 8 days after the incident video was not related
Speculation: Airforce is using XenClient XT to control access to Windows VM on Intel HW through the "Sureview 2.0 Architecture" for Confidential/Secret work. (There were some vulnerabilities in 2013 and 2015, indicating this video might've been leaked by a hacker)
FOIA Requests Compilation (8/15/2023)
Another wild detail. Objects in plane abduction video appear to be pulled from behindrelated comment debunking this
Massive new lead: Inmarsat data has been wrong all along - Incompetence or cover up? - peer reviewed report goes over the actual location of MH370 in r/AirlinerAbduction2014
Massive new lead: Inmarsat data has been wrong all along - Incompetence or cover up? - peer reviewed report goes over the actual location of MH370 in r/UFOs (after I posted this in the other sub I saw the mod message allowing us to post about this topic in here again, that's why I linked both posts here)
[Plane video]: A complete analysis of orb trajectories
Edit: Removed user links to create better visibility and gain some more space
2
u/pantsoffairline Sep 18 '23
Good work OP.
Have added an article to Medium linking here: https://mrfireside.medium.com/mh370-shadows-in-the-sky-the-unexplained-uap-connection-f723c2ff1171
9
u/Otadiz Sep 11 '23
So where are we at with this thing?
15
u/Helixite777 Oct 05 '23
The portal VFX debunk was brought under suspicious conditions and seemed to be altered to fit the portal in the video. More corroborating evidence has been dug up pointing towards the plane being abducted and brought to Diego Garcia airbase by the USAF employing possible NHI technology.
This interview with one of the lead investigators on the subject sums up all the recent developments
3
u/Responsible-Action-8 Sep 06 '23
why is there no side by side video with the black and wight video and the blue and green ? its a 3rd video not a mirror
13
3
u/_Filthy_Ranga_ Sep 02 '23
comparison to new footage from uap website https://reddit.com/r/UFOs/s/CgkJKpXbvK
3
u/wankeronthepiss Sep 02 '23
Aviation experts believe research may have uncovered the final resting place of flight MH370, which disappeared in 2014.
The Malaysia Airlines airplane disappeared roughly 38 minutes after leaving Kuala Lumpur airport, headed for Beijing, on March 8, 2014.
The plane was never found, and the fate of its 237 passengers remain unknown.
However, new research uncovered by Richard Godfrey, Dr Hannes Coetzee, and Professor Simon Maskell may uncover some of the many missing pieces.
A 299-page report released on Wednesday suggests the missing wreckage may be located roughly 1560km west of Perth, Australia. The theory comes from “ground-breaking” amateur radio technology known as a weak signal propagation reporter, or WSPR.
7
9
u/JazzisBAM Aug 23 '23
This ABC news video from March 12, 2014 shows what looks like 3 round objects in a equilateral triangular formation around a blurry mass. Captured by a Chinese satellite (SASTIND).
It's supposedly floating debris.
It's probably floating debris.
Based on these visuals, is it even possible that the objects in these images are in the air as opposed to floating on the water?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMoAuYRKpjQ&t=143s
Apologies if these images have already been discussed. I didn't see these satellite images on other posts about MH370 that I've seen on r/UFOs so far.
2
-1
u/LightningRodOfHate Aug 22 '23
Arguing in this sub has been my first exposure to the UFO community ...is it always this bad? I feel like these of all people should be hardened to hoaxes.
Instead I see doubling and tripling down on obvious quackery with a ton of upvotes. Terryology level shit. It's almost as if the goal is to frustrate logically-minded people into leaving the community.
On a positive note, it did introduce me to Mick West, who seems cool. Is there a community somewhere that more aligns his sort of skeptical style, but still indulges in discussions of obvious bullshit? I enjoy dissecting these things, but not being downvoted into oblivion by True Believers arguing 1x1=2
2
Nov 27 '23
And look at the downvotes 😂😂
they hate their ideas being challenged. Being here and feeling like their on the brink of discovery probably the most dopamine theyve gotten in years
genuinely, if you're a sane, rational adult you wont make wild conclusions from this INCONVLUSIVE evidence
2
u/LightningRodOfHate Nov 27 '23
3 months later I feel like I understand it a little better. One thing that's become clear: the engagement on this site feels anything but natural.
Manipulating reddit is unfortunately all too easy and undetectable. All of the "Eglin bot" rhetoric (as if the government gives two shits about these kooks) just seems like deliberate muddying of the waters by the real perpetrators of vote and discussion manipulation: profit-motivated grifters. Put MH370 and Nazca mummies at the top of the list.
I only stick around because unfortunately regular people still use this sub for information, so the astroturfing deserves some counternarrative. And it's fun.
10
u/S3857gyj Aug 23 '23
Perhaps Metabunk would be the type of community that you are looking for.
7
u/Thesquire89 Aug 23 '23
Yet again another comment implying if you are in any way skeptical, you are not welcome here
7
u/S3857gyj Aug 23 '23
Oh I certainly didn't mean it that way. I mean, I'm on the skeptical side myself. But the person I was responding to asked about a community that aligns with Mick West's style of skeptical analysis and I thought that Metabunk was exactly the kind of community they were asking about.
1
3
u/not-dot-6 Aug 23 '23
Don’t let it discourage you there are plenty of people in the ufo community who aren’t the worst. This video was just so absurd that people who have recently become believers or people who finally feel vindicated after years of perceived persecution couldn’t let it go. As disclosure has continued and reached more people it’s gotten worse but I’m hopeful as everyone becomes more educated on the subject we’ll move past these problems.
0
u/ra-re444 Aug 22 '23
i am willng to say this is fake.. if yall provide all us with hard copies of the original vfx cd. so we can compare with the ones on archives. with out the original files im not sure how anybody can say this is proof.since in all of our real lives we must provide hard copies to prove who we are and what we own. to protect against forgeries.
3
u/Thesquire89 Aug 23 '23
You're going on about hard proof like you have some that the video isn't fake or hasn't been altered in any way
3
u/LightningRodOfHate Aug 23 '23
So you admit that the shockwave matching the stock footage is not a coincidence?
0
u/ra-re444 Aug 23 '23
do you have the original cd?
2
u/LightningRodOfHate Aug 23 '23
Answer my question and I'll answer yours.
-1
u/ra-re444 Aug 23 '23
what is this a riddle. do you have the cd or no?
4
u/LightningRodOfHate Aug 23 '23
It's a yes or no question.
1
u/ra-re444 Aug 23 '23
i clearly asked a question in the post. now your trying to avoid by asking another question. do you guys ever answer anything?
7
u/LightningRodOfHate Aug 23 '23
Just copy and paste one of these responses in a reply and I'll answer your question.
Yes, I admit that there is no way the shockwave matching between the video and the stock footage is a coincidence
or
No, I believe that the shockwave matching between the video and the stock footage may yet be a coincidence
1
u/ra-re444 Aug 23 '23
the dvd from 2006 is out of stock on amazon. i thought;the vfx was from 1995
→ More replies
10
u/Nagarjuna420 Aug 22 '23
Stupid question: the airliner disappear around 1-2 AM, it shouldn’t be at night in the satellite video?
-6
u/Shoogazi Aug 22 '23
largely irrelevant now that the sat footage has been debunked also, but the prevailing theory was that the footage was taken at about 8AM, consistent with MH370's final INMARSAT ping. The lighting on the clouds were consistent with an early sunrise.
8
u/LightningRodOfHate Aug 22 '23 edited Aug 22 '23
Not a stupid question, it's a legit anomaly. I discussed this at length in another thread.
Some people claim it's some sort of advanced nightvision, but that doesn't explain the single-source directional shadows on the clouds and plane, the ocean reflecting the blue sky, or the lack of visible running lights on the plane.
There was no moon in the sky at that time and place either.
Even if the video was taken at the very end of MH370's fuel projection, it would be early sunrise and the direction of the shadows would reflect that.
1
u/Otadiz Sep 05 '23
I don't understand why it having to be the MH370 is relevant. It could be any other plane or test flight.
-1
Aug 22 '23
[deleted]
0
u/_dupasquet Aug 22 '23 edited Aug 22 '23
Obviously he wasn't talking about US. The time of disappearance denoted as 1-2AM is local so it was night there.
Edit: he downvoted me because he didn't like the factual truth lol
9
u/NoCollegeKids Aug 22 '23
Just posting pics. Do what you want with the info.
7
u/barelyreadsenglish Aug 23 '23
the satellite video was posted 4 days after the plane went missing. are you saying the hoaxer made the cgi in 4 days with classified satellite data not available to public?
4
u/NoCollegeKids Aug 23 '23
“Are you saying”? I didn’t say anything, I just posted photos. If your personal theory is the video is 100% authentic, you need to update your theory to include the fact that VFX were used to create the “wormholes” in both videos. That is a logical interpretation of the data. Scientific, if you ask me!
7
u/Dillatrack Aug 23 '23
The earliest video I've seen posted was uploaded May 19th 2014, that's over 2 months after MH370 disappeared
0
u/barelyreadsenglish Aug 23 '23
May was the flir video, the satellite was 4 days after
5
u/Dillatrack Aug 23 '23 edited Aug 23 '23
Can you link a video from March 12th? For Regicide, May 19th was the Sat video and a month after that was FLIR. Haven't seen anything actually uploaded earlier, Regicide just claimed "received March 12th" in the description which I'm really hoping people aren't blindly believing
1
u/ra-re444 Aug 23 '23
yeah that date surely cant fit yall narrative. has to be wrong
3
u/Dillatrack Aug 23 '23
"I totally got this video March 12 and just decided not to upload it for months"... people have this nasty habit of lying on the internet so until I see a link to those videos uploaded on march 12th, that isn't going to fly man
1
u/barelyreadsenglish Aug 23 '23
2
u/Dillatrack Aug 23 '23 edited Aug 23 '23
This video? This isn't the sat or flir videos, it also doesn't even match what's shown in them considering it was a left hand turn in those video's before disappearing not a right.
Those compilation posts were filled with every possible argument they could find making the videos out to be real (even when they were really bad aruments...), meanwhile straight ignoring some of biggest criticisms at the time and handwaving away the few they even bothered to include. It was just confirmation bias
4
u/Thesquire89 Aug 23 '23
Yes
Edit: see if the "classified" satellite data was not available to the public, how do you know about it?
0
u/barelyreadsenglish Aug 23 '23
The report which included the trajectory of the plane was released a couple of months after.
3
3
u/Resource_Burn Aug 22 '23
The two frames match! I can go back to my life and not discuss this ever again!
Or
The two frames don't match! What the fuck is this video?!
2
u/_dupasquet Aug 22 '23
Why are you getting so tense over these frames?
4
u/Resource_Burn Aug 22 '23
How many of my comments are you gonna respond to today my guy
1
Aug 23 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/UFOs-ModTeam Aug 23 '23
Follow the Standards of Civility:
No trolling or being disruptive. No insults or personal attacks. No accusations that other users are shills. No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation. No harassment, threats, or advocating violence. No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible) An account found to be deleting all or nearly all of their comments and/or posts can result in an instant permanent ban. This is to stop instigators and bad actors from trying to evade rule enforcement. You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
3
21
u/Initial_Pension_1369 Aug 22 '23
A bit sad to see how easy it was to discourage this collective investigation just by spamming "debunk" with a ton of accounts and only have almost nothing to back it up with. Mick West at his worst debunks more believable than that "round things are round"-claim.
That said, I am still suspicious about the hype around the videos after so much time. It might be organic, but I suspect that there was people with insight helping us.
The debunk-wave made me much more convinced that it is real.
11
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
Mick West at his worst debunks more believable than that "round things are round"-claim.
It's not "round things are round." It's that it's literally the same image.
2
u/Fklympics Aug 22 '23
why did u suddenly have the urge to purchase reddit premium this month?
-1
Aug 22 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/UFOs-ModTeam Aug 23 '23
Hi, _dupasquet. Thanks for contributing. However, your comment was removed from /r/UFOs.
Rule 1: Follow the Standards of Civility
- No trolling or being disruptive.
- No insults or personal attacks.
- No accusations that other users are shills.
- No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation.
- No harassment, threats, or advocating violence.
- No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible)
- You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
Please refer to our subreddit rules for more information.
This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. Message the mods to launch your appeal.
7
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
I didn't. I had multiple posts gilded.
1
Aug 22 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/UFOs-ModTeam Aug 22 '23
Hi, Fklympics. Thanks for contributing. However, your comment was removed from /r/UFOs.
Rule 1: Follow the Standards of Civility
- No trolling or being disruptive.
- No insults or personal attacks.
- No accusations that other users are shills.
- No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation.
- No harassment, threats, or advocating violence.
- No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible)
- You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
Please refer to our subreddit rules for more information.
This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. Message the mods to launch your appeal.
1
u/covid_is_from_a_lab Aug 22 '23
I checked and it's a real post. Wow
2
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
Did you read the post? Because I stand by it.
Interestingly, other users point out that it actually is against Rule No. 1. Apparently the mods just don't enforce it equally.
2
u/Cycode Aug 22 '23
Apparently the mods just don't enforce it equally.
if you see a post or comment that breaks the rules of this subreddit, then please report it so we see it in our reports queue. we moderators are just normal people with lives, jobs etc. and can't read every comment and post made here in the sub (we're not paid by reddit and do this job in our freetime). if we browse the sub and see something that breaks the rules, we deal with it - but we can't see everything. so for us to notice posts who break the rules, you have to report them. if you won't, we are not aware they exist if we don't stumble over them ourself.
we can only enforce the rules for posts and comments we are aware about. so - please report such things. thanks!
1
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
I understand that. I just know I report it 100% of the time I see it, and only about 30% of the time are those posts ever actually removed.
I'm sure you get a lot of reports and many fall through the cracks, I'm just telling you as a user, it's very inconsistent even when I report.
1
u/Cycode Aug 22 '23
often it really depends. we already got new moderators to help us out (here i am :D), but they are usually starting out as comment moderators and are not allowed to moderatore posts. this means even if i as a comment moderator see a post that breaks the rules, i have to notify a full moderator about it or wait for one to clean it up. additionally to that, we have daily so many comments and postings that its difficult to go through them all since there are just so many.. and there are always new coming in - so it can take a while to go through them.
another factor is that a lot of users think a comment or breaks a rule, but then a moderator decides that its not the case and approves the comment or post. and then the user who reported it initially feels "ignored" even if a moderator already has seen the report & done something ^
so, it's often not easy as a moderator and we need the help of users a bit to be aware about posts and comment who break the rules. some users expect us to read ALL comments and posts done here in the sub, and that is just not possible for us to do.
i wish you a nice day! :)
→ More replies5
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
Maybe read the post.
6
u/UNSC_ONI Aug 22 '23 edited Aug 22 '23
Just wanted to note to people here that accusations like that is already against the rules. It breaks Rule #1, so report it if you see it ✌️
6
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
I report it every time, and I'd say there's maybe a 30% success rate lol
Clearly the mods are not all on the same page for that one
5
u/Yasirbare Aug 22 '23
Honestly?
I do not follow - it this the exact match, the debunk?
-1
6
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
Yes, they used the same portal effect in both videos.
https://twitter.com/528vibes/status/1693988637392900342?t=Oq1Jk7JF0bphQ1bQc0yvuQ&s=19
-2
u/ALF_My_Alien_Friend Aug 22 '23
So, can you explain exactly, what is happening?
7
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
What do you mean? Explain what?
-4
u/ALF_My_Alien_Friend Aug 22 '23
That video seems (doesnt say so im guessing) to have one frame from the vfx shockwv.mov over a frame of the flir "portal". The shockwv.mov is exactly 36 frames long and the flir portal consists exactly of 5 frames where it is visible.
What frame number (1-36) from the vfx set, is over the flir portal frames (1-5).
I want to understand whats happening. Im my view theres only one frame from the vfx set being made more brighter and thats about that.
5
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
If you watched the video in the tweet, you'll see that it's not the FLIR video. It's the satellite video.
0
u/ALF_My_Alien_Friend Aug 22 '23
That was not explained anywhere. Also the satellite video is almost a perfect circle while the vfx is oval. Also the "portal" is in 5 frames, the frame right after the partially matching vfx one, cant by matched by any frames from the 1-36 in the .mov file. Nothing explains where it comes. If it was a specific vfx stock video effect that they used, they should all match in a sequence.
1
u/Thesquire89 Aug 23 '23
If one of the frames of the portal has been shown to be from a VFX asset, does it not stand to reason that the rest of the portal is also VFX?
→ More replies7
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
That was not explained anywhere.
What do you mean? You can clearly see it's the satellite video at the end.
Also the satellite video is almost a perfect circle while the vfx is oval. Also the "portal" is in 5 frames, the frame right after the partially matching vfx one, cant by matched by any frames from the 1-36 in the .mov file.
Look at the tweet. It's the same image. Look at all the little outlying pieces.
→ More replies7
u/Yasirbare Aug 22 '23
Sorry, But I can skip the frames in that video and I do not see a match at all.
I honestly thought that it was a joke. And the seizure presentation was making me think that. I thought why not a slow fade, it would make it more convincing seeing the exact match.
The I noticed I could skip frames in your video. And it is even worse than I thought. This can not be the debunk. I am all for debunking but this is just a very bad presentation of the debunk - It almost seems deliberately bad.
I am baffled. And Just to be sure. If I skip the frames in the first video you provide the one "white frame" is the one I compare with the rest right?
5
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
I didn't make the video, so I have no idea.
But it's clearly a match.
1
u/Yasirbare Aug 22 '23
And just to sure, If I skip the frames in the first video you provide the one "white frame" is the one I compare with the rest right?
8
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
What?
0
u/Yasirbare Aug 22 '23
Well I cannot in the world see how that video should convince anybody that is not fully up to date. I see a blinking seizure with one white frame blinking strobe light.
And then I thought it was switching between the VFX pattern and the "Wormhole" - because, as I said, I had to skip frames to see what was what.
I just do not understand what it tries to show I guess.
I think it must be possible to make a better presentation than this blinking hell.
-1
u/Fklympics Aug 22 '23
you seem awfully interested in something that already been debunked.
2
u/Yasirbare Aug 23 '23
Because I got the feeling it was a slam dunk when reading and then I see this.
I just do not see it and I asked if I was supposed to, It is like I can even ask what I am looking at - I'm no expert but I can see this is not made to make it obvious.
When I got play on the video it is a seizure show as I describe, could even start a epilepsy attack.
I am just asking how am I supposed to see the exact match the one frame is obviously not that ..or?
6
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
Because lots of people are continuing to spread misinformation about that video, trying to make it seem real, for some reason.
7
u/LordAdlerhorst Aug 22 '23
You too.
3
Aug 22 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Cycode Aug 22 '23
Hi, Fklympics. Thanks for contributing. However, your comment was removed from /r/UFOs.
Rule 1: Follow the Standards of Civility
- No trolling or being disruptive.
- No insults or personal attacks.
- No accusations that other users are shills.
- No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation.
- No harassment, threats, or advocating violence.
- No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible)
- You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
Please refer to our subreddit rules for more information.
This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. Message the mods to launch your appeal.
5
u/Sergiogiogio Aug 22 '23
Many argue that creating the CGI videos with extreme detail is too difficult. But what if these videos come from military-grade simulators?
Operators of drones and satellites need training to recognize objects in various conditions: different perspectives, at day and night, different weather and cloud conditions, and using different sensors. It's likely the military has advanced simulators for this. You can't launch dozen of ICBMs just to capture how it looks for training purposes - plus this might only tell how your ICMBs look like, not the enemy's.
Consider that the below similators exist (there are certainly many others):
Predator Drone Simulator: https://www.ga-asi.com/training-and-support-services/predator-mission-aircrew-training-system.
SBIRS Satellite Simulator: https://www.buckley.spaceforce.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/322794/successful-simulator-move-for-sbirs/
I do not know their capabilities, but it's reasonable to think the predator simulator can generate realistic FLIR images (it is used to train sensor operators) and that the SBIRs simulator can generate relatistic stereoscopic images (how else would learn to recognize a steretoscopic missile launch).
Now yes these are two simulators, but there is evidence that such simulators can be interconnected in order to simulate integrated war games. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268059885_The_DIS_vs_HLA_Debate_What's_in_it_for_Australia "Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS) enables the interconnection of real-time platform level simulators for participation in simulated exercises)."
These capabilities if real would explain the extreme accuracy, level of details and consistency between the 2 videos.
So, here's a thought: What if someone created the plane abduction scenario and loaded it in these simulators (by also injecting a random 3d model of the orbs and an explosion) and recorded the output? They would be then able to capture not only accurate images but also the UI elements including panning cursor, etc. since they are part of the simulators features.
This might not have been the military theselves as I am sure the use of such systems are audited, but it could be someone working on the integration of these simulators "just for the fun of it".
Has anyone any experience in such systems ond their capabilities?
2
u/USFederalReserve Aug 22 '23
Many argue that creating the CGI videos with extreme detail is too difficult
The problem with this argument is that its easy to make when you don't have any experience with VFX.
Creating CGI videos like the now debunked MH370 video is not even remotely difficult for anyone with experience working in programs like blender or Cinema4D.
People confidentally argued that it would take weeks or months today or in 2014 to make these videos, but its simply not true.
What makes a good hoax is the story surrounding it and the way that story provides context to the footage. I believe that if MH370 had never gone missing, the video would've been easily written off as fake by the community. But because the video could be associated with an already mysterious happening, it gave the video more credit than it ever deserved.
2
u/Rex--Banner Aug 23 '23
The amount of small details in the video is what added up to the amount of time it would take not just the execution but the research behind it as well and how to do it right and being good in multiple areas of cgi and editing, post production, video editing.
With all these small things and looking over them and see something isn't good would then meaning rerendering at least twice.
Yes one person can do it but in 2 months? It's a bit of a stretch unless they are really good and didn't have a job.
As someone mentioned the hard looking parts are easy and the easy looking parts are hard.
1
u/USFederalReserve Aug 23 '23 edited Aug 23 '23
You’re wrong. Let me guess, you have no professional VFX experience?
There are hardly any details at all. Most of the details were confirmation bias results discovered from this sub. A lot of the “details” were just from the free 3D model assets that the creator used.
Want to make one? Go to turbo squid, grab a 777 model and a drone model, use procedural clouds, and add some filters. Congrats, you've now acquired all the assets required to make this fake in less than an hour. All you need to do now is some simple compositing and tracking and some frame rate reduction, all of which can be done either within blender or in after effects.
I’m sorry but you’re just totally off base here.
7
u/Rex--Banner Aug 23 '23
I actually do have experience. That's the reason I made the comment. What is your experience? The details weren't just free assets, I literally said the hard looking parts are easy. To non 3d people they think the plane is hard because you have to model it etc but there was a 777 model in 2012 on turbo squid. Have you ever made clouds before? Especially in 2014 they were possible but not the level they were in the video especially volumetric clouds. If you think this was done in a few days you are off base as well. Try and make the exact same quality by yourself on blender and after effects from 2014 and the equivalent GPU from that time. Go on if you think it's so easy. This was a big project and for what reason?
1
u/USFederalReserve Aug 23 '23 edited Aug 23 '23
I actually do have experience. That's the reason I made the comment. What is your experience?
Then I'm shocked that you find the video difficult to make. I work in television and handle a lot of VFX responsibilities depending on whether or not I'm hired to work post or production. From creating environments for interview backdrops shot on greenscreen to special VFX such as hiding cameramen, adding objects into scenes, mapping screens, I do it all. I have even created 'found footage' for viral marketing campaigns. Having nearly a decade of combined time spent in blender, Cinema4D, and after effects, I speak with confident authority that the "MH370" hoax video would be extraordinarily simple to make. It gets a lot of points for being a creative method of fabricating UFO footage to allow low effort compositing to take on a more impactful product (versus say a fake 3D plane tracked in the night sky shot from a virtual cell phone camera).
The details weren't just free assets, I literally said the hard looking parts are easy.
Maybe not free for download but free for piracy? Absolutely could be free. The point I was making by even referencing the models is to showcase that the accessibility to being able to make a hoax video of this kind is extremely high, meaning you wouldn't need to be particularly skilled nor require a high budget to produce something like this.
Have you ever made clouds before?
Yes, procedurally generated clouds are one of the things most VFX artists learn as a first lesson when developing the procedural effect skillset, ironically enough.
Especially in 2014 they were possible but not the level they were in the video especially volumetric clouds.
It was absolutely possible. You clearly weren't working in the industry professionally in 2014 because this is not some secret sauce that was enabled only in the last few years. You could argue that the render times in 2014 were longer, and of course you'd be right, but that's not even remotely the same thing as suggesting that it wasn't possible to achieve the level of clarity present in the fake FLIR and fake satellite videos in 2014 with consumer grade software.
To counter that point even further, here is a 15 year old volumetric cloud demo build in blender (for free!) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubUiD6qRYwk
If you think this was done in a few days you are off base as well. Try and make the exact same quality by yourself on blender and after effects from 2014 and the equivalent GPU from that time.
Please tell me how I am wrong? The "satellite" video runs at a shockingly low FPS and the "flir" video by default has most of the difficult lighting calculations removed from its render by virtue of the fact that its not displayed in a way that requires ray traced or convincingly calculated lighting. And this assumes the entire video was created from scratch. It is also possible that the FLIR video was the source material and only the orbs were added, leaving only a low FPS "satellite" view to be created from scratch, cutting down on the rendering even further.
I honestly feel like you're either pretending to be experienced in VFX or you're conflating your hobby work in VFX as professional experience. I can assure you in 2014 an assistant VFX artist on a C tier film would be capable of producing that.
In 2014 we already had GPUs capable of running games at 4k (it was expensive, but consumers had total access to GPUs that could do this and the GPUs were relatively cheaper compared to the highest end GPUs available to us today). In addition, there were services available for server rendering VFX projects that anyone could pay-as-you go with, and that doesn't even mention the community built versions of those services that still exist to this day.
This was a big project
Here's your problem. It was a big project from the perspective of someone with your current or 2014 skill set. But this was by no stretch of the imagination unachievable by even the most average VFX artists at the time. Please refresh yourself on what was possible even as far back as 2008 with the UFO Haiti video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLRbTtd8IKM
This suggestion that this would've been a large undertaking by a single individual in 2014 is completely baseless and hinges entirely on a narrow perspective of what was and wasn't possible at a time when you were not even active in the VFX scene (based on your now deleted submission to r/blender for advice ~4 years ago).
and for what reason?
The same reason why UFO Haiti was released in 2008 and why hundreds of fake UFO videos have been released since: people like to troll this crowd of people because of their willingness to accept what they want to be real as real.
4
u/Rex--Banner Aug 23 '23
Look the fact is you can claim you are super great at vfx but it's easy to look at a finished video and think about how you would do it and how easy it would be because you have a reference for it. Doing it from scratch is a whole different scenario and coming up with all the background, all the research, who knows what else. Getting all the detail right so much that people had to analyse it frame by frame. There were vfx artists with 10 or 15 years experience that said yea maybe they can do some parts well but some they had no idea. Just because you think it's easy doesn't mean it is and you can write a massive essay because you think you are so good but it doesn't mean you are or know what you are talking about. You think you are so good then recreate it and I'm assuming you could do it in a few days I'm guessing?
1
u/USFederalReserve Aug 23 '23 edited Aug 24 '23
Look the fact is you can claim you are super great at vfx but it's easy to look at a finished video and think about how you would do it and how easy it would be because you have a reference for it.
Yeah dog, that's my point. People in this sub without experience are confidentially asserting that this would be impossible to produce which is incorrect. This is only obvious if you do have experience which is coincidentally the same kind of experience one would need in order to create the video.
Doing it from scratch is a whole different scenario and coming up with all the background, all the research, who knows what else.
What research would be required? Creating this from scratch is fundamentally simple. Clearly whoever made it does have several years of experience under the belt considering that they were using VFX assets from the late 90's/early 2000's.
Getting all the detail right so much that people had to analyse it frame by frame.
The analysis at the beginning already revealed it was fake, this sub just didn't want to believe it. The frame rate, the contrails, the lack of detail on the 777 model...this hoax was not exceptionally high quality relative to say the UFO Haiti video. What made it exceptional was (1) the story attached to it and (2) the fact that is lacked so much detail that there was not a lot to initially chew on compared to a 60FPS video shot from the ground.
There were vfx artists with 10 or 15 years experience that said yea maybe they can do some parts well but some they had no idea.
Yeah, the VFX artists who claimed to be experienced while simultaneously believing the video was real were obviously upvoted in this sub, this is confirmation bias at play. There were plenty of people debunking it, myself included, who were subsequently ignored/downvoted until the smoking gun from the VFX asset matching became publicly known.
Fun fact: Working in VFX doesn't mean you have a perfect radar for VFX. The adage in the VFX industry is "if the VFX is good, no one will ever even realize VFX work was done". Its supposed to be invisible.
Just because you think it's easy doesn't mean it is and you can write a massive essay because you think you are so good but it doesn't mean you are or know what you are talking about
Funny how quickly you're abandoning your "experience" now in this argument. I know for a fact it would be easy to produce and I have explained why it would be easy to produce. All of your counter arguments (which you've now abandoned) failed to stand up to scrutiny because they were rooted in a narrow understanding of the industry.
You can write off everything I'm saying but it won't change the reality that its true. And we know its true because the goal posts have moved from "this video is 100% real" to "this video is fake and it only could have been created by {INSERT LARGE ORGANIZATION HERE}".
If you think anything I've said here is wrong I encourage you to reply with a counter argument but if your best angle here is to ad hom me rather than my argument then you've already lost.
You think you are so good then recreate it and I'm assuming you could do it in a few days I'm guessing?
I could definitely create something of this level of quality. The difference would be that I wouldn't have the built-in lore of the video existing on youtube back in 2014.
I think you need to take a step back and recognize that using your personal, hobbyist-tier VFX skillset as a measuring point for what is or isn't possible is a ridiculous method of evaluating the production required to produce the video.
Myself and so many others told you all that it was fake but it wasn't until the evidence was put right in your face (in the form of the VFX assets being discovered and matched) that users like you finally started to move the goalposts to where they are now.
At this point in time the only thing that would make you believe that your current belief is unfounded would be the creator himself revealing and proving that he made it and that is very unlikely to happen considering that they have already not come forward. And in the event that he/she did come forward? A percentage of you would move the goalpost even further to "They're lying, they're with the CIA, they're XYZ" to continue this limp and tired narrative that this video is really real or really produced by a government entity hellbent on trolling some subreddit in a grand 10 year plan. Its divorced from reality.
Edit: OP blocked me before I could reply (classic bot behavior). Here was my response to his comment:
You keep making these assumptions like that I'm a hobbyist or don't know what I'm talking about
Well you're the one that brought your personal experience into your argument, which seems to defy what an experienced VFX worker would think.
It's easy to look back on it now and say oh yea that was obviously fake. The whole point was to find out if it was a fake. Did you even try and prove you were right or did you just sit there and keep saying obviously? The only evidence that is 100 percent is like 2 frames from a 90s vfx effect and has been modified. Did you figure that out?
Wrong. The contrails aren't tracked properly, there are no dropped frames for only certain elements in the video...yes I called out some of these as being fake.
If you could create it then go right ahead, it should be super easy, you can do it in the exact same detail but you won't because there is always some excuse. It's always easier to claim you are so good you can do it but won't because it will take too much of your time. You probably won't even show your portfolio.
I don't need to recreate a fake video simply to prove that this video wouldn't have taken long to make. The evidence that it wouldn't take long to make is literally built in. It took a few days for the video to be released, which tracks with my claim that it would only take a short period of time to produce.
All im saying is your judgement is impaired and you come across as quite arrogant and rude not willing to accept that maybe you don't actually know how the video was all put together.
Still waiting on you to point out anything I've said that is wrong. Please draw on your personal experience in VFX to disprove what I'm saying.
You can make assumptions all you like but a lot of the details were very hard to prove fake and it makes you look like a fool to say obviously it was fake.
It was obviously fake. Its 3 orbs circling a non-descript plane and teleporting it out of the air. That's the easiest fake to call out.
1
u/DerpetronicsFacility Aug 25 '23
I don't know anything about VFX and would be interested in a recreation for demonstration purposes.
3
u/Rex--Banner Aug 24 '23
I haven't abandoned anything. You keep making these assumptions like that I'm a hobbyist or don't know what I'm talking about. It's easy to look back on it now and say oh yea that was obviously fake. The whole point was to find out if it was a fake. Did you even try and prove you were right or did you just sit there and keep saying obviously? The only evidence that is 100 percent is like 2 frames from a 90s vfx effect and has been modified. Did you figure that out?
It's also easy to say it's vfx because it's 3 orbs going around a plane and teleporting it away. That's insane and automatically goes into the not real category. If you watch a movie and see a spaceship explode, even if it looks super real you will know it's vfx and cgi but there are other shows that when you see the background and a lot of items were vfx that you thought it was shot on location etc then yea of course because that's in the realm of possibility.
If you could create it then go right ahead, it should be super easy, you can do it in the exact same detail but you won't because there is always some excuse. It's always easier to claim you are so good you can do it but won't because it will take too much of your time. You probably won't even show your portfolio.
All im saying is your judgement is impaired and you come across as quite arrogant and rude not willing to accept that maybe you don't actually know how the video was all put together. You can make assumptions all you like but a lot of the details were very hard to prove fake and it makes you look like a fool to say obviously it was fake.
-3
23
u/Shoogazi Aug 22 '23
Can anyone explain how u/IcySlide7698 was able to post a thread on here with a brand new account? I thought this board had a 2000 karma limit for posting threads?
-2
Aug 22 '23 edited Aug 22 '23
Automod removed it for "New User". https://i.imgur.com/HKGChtU.png
Then it was approved. Maybe it was an alt of a mod. Or a mod just saw that it was a good post.
-7
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
Because the truth is more important than an arbitrary karma threshold.
If someone had definitive proof of NHI, would you want them not to be able to post it because of a karma threshold?
4
u/Shoogazi Aug 22 '23
If someone had definitive proof of NHI I would hope they wouldn't use r/UFOs as the only avenue to get that proof out.
8
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
And what avenue would you have suggested the OP of the VFX reel to use?
2
u/Shoogazi Aug 22 '23
It's not as though Twitter/X, YouTube, Metabunk etc. don't exist. FWIW I do believe the debunk. However the situation as a whole reeks of a social-engineering campaign. A literal who pops out of the woodwork somehow, bypassing a karma limit, with a claim of "yeah I recognize that specific particle effect from a 30 year old vidya"? And the company responsible for said VFX also has ties to DoD and DoE? I'll buy that the FLIR is fake but something here absolutely stinks and warrants further investigating.
2
u/Thesquire89 Aug 22 '23
So you're saying if you want to debunk a video, don't come here? So this is just an echo chamber for blind faith?
4
u/Shoogazi Aug 22 '23
That's not what I said at all?
u/candypettitte stated:
If someone had definitive proof of NHI, would you want them not to be able to post it because of a karma threshold?
to which I replied:
If someone had definitive proof of NHI I would hope they wouldn't use r/UFOs as the only avenue to get that proof out.
to which they replied:
And what avenue would you have suggested the OP of the VFX reel to use?
to which I replied:
it's not as though Twitter/X, YouTube, Metabunk etc. don't exist.
Ergo I was suggesting alternatives for someone to get their research/analysis out without bypassing a karma threshold.
The issue is the OP of that VFX thread did so with a brand new account with 0 karma, which shouldn't have happened to my knowledge. The same scrutiny should have been applied if it was a pro-MH370 post as well. Sorry to break it down obnoxiously like this but I want to make sure we're on the same page.2
u/Thesquire89 Aug 22 '23
Does the fact that icy had a new account really, really matter if the information he shared led to a general consensus debunk of this video?
1
u/Shoogazi Aug 22 '23
The fact that icy somehow bypassed rules that the rest of us are adhered to in order to give us this info is suspect. The fact that this information completely ceased discussion into this topic (outside this mega) is suspect. There's still many questions and avenues worth exploring in this topic despite the FLIR being fake.
0
u/Thesquire89 Aug 22 '23
OK I will agree that if there are rules that new accounts cannot post, and he's managed to post them that's strange. I guess that's a question for the mods on here though. Have they given an answer/reason as to how that's happened?
In terms of it killing the discussion though, I don't find that strange because the information they shared has generally debunked the video, and been authenticated and replicated now by multiple people. Peer reviewed of you will.
5
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
I think too many people are going into this looking for there to be a conspiracy, rather than extrapolating how Reddit works.
Every subreddit I've ever been in works the same way. People get super obsessed with something, and the echo chamber forms, then someone pierces the echo chamber with irrefutable evidence, and a new echo chamber forms in opposition to the original.
It's not a conspiracy, just the nature of Reddit. This was the only thing this subreddit was talking about for over a week. It wouldn't surprise me at all if a VFX artist saw one of these threads on r/all, recognized the image, didn't want to associate their other account with this, and made the account to post.
4
u/Shoogazi Aug 22 '23
It wouldn't surprise me at all if a VFX artist saw one of these threads on r/all, recognized the image, didn't want to associate their other account with this, and made the account to post.
Thats fine and all, but the issue is how the user that posted the decisive debunk that ended all discussion on the airliner was able to do so, despite the karma limits implemented on this board. I think people are right to think that's suspect. Couple that with the obvious bot activity from BOTH sides and the seemingly scripted debunk-rebunk cycle, and the confirmed fact that Eglin AFB has a huge presence here, I don't think it's off base to speculate that there's something going on behind the curtain.
1
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
Thats fine and all, but the issue is how the user that posted the decisive debunk that ended all discussion on the airliner was able to do so, despite the karma limits implemented on this board.
If people here want the truth, no matter what it is, I'm confused as to why people are now upset that they got the truth, no matter what it is.
the confirmed fact that Eglin AFB has a huge presence here
I keep hearing this but I don't think that post is really evidence of it. Have you ever met someone in the air force? They're bored as shit all day.
2
u/Shoogazi Aug 22 '23
Yes the truth is important, and I'm convinced the FLIR is doctored. iron clad. Not disputing that. However the context of the truth and how we got it is still important and worth looking into. You seem to be sidestepping my main thesis statement that the account in question was able to do so by somehow bypassing a rule that the rest of us are suppose to adhere to. The karma limit is instituted to filter out trolls and bad actors. The circumstances surrounding that post and how it was able to post in the first place are suspect, regardless if it gave us the truth or not. I would expect the same amount of scrutiny of someone who posted images of a dead alien in their backyard.
They're bored as shit all day.
I would be to if i signed up for the airforce but then got stuck shitposting propaganda on Reddit all day ;)
1
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
You seem to be sidestepping my main thesis statement that the account in question was able to do so by somehow bypassing a rule that the rest of us are suppose to adhere to. The karma limit is instituted to filter out trolls and bad actors. The circumstances surrounding that post and how it was able to post in the first place are suspect, regardless if it gave us the truth or not.
Because I'm not a mod, so I have no idea how the post got approved. What I do know is that if I was a mod, and I saw that post in the automod filter, I'd approve it because it's a smoking gun.
I would be to if i signed up for the airforce but then got stuck shitposting propaganda on Reddit all day ;)
I would venture a guess that most of the people in this sub are bored at work, which is why they're on here. The same is true of the armed forces. One old article that just says that base is "addicted" to Reddit does not constitute proof of anything, and yet I hear this repeated non-stop.
5
Aug 22 '23
The sub has rules for a reason. The reason it was broken to allow this post is because the DoD posted it.
-3
u/UNSC_ONI Aug 22 '23 edited Aug 22 '23
The reason it was broken to allow this post is because the DoD posted it.
Just going to add this as I posted half of it on another thread.
For all of those trying to claim that the DOD is behind debunking this, take a good hard look at some of the people trying to claim it is still real. Especially with comments like this, which is stating that facts and data about UFOs do not matter for UFO Disclosure, only the plane video does and now that same user is making posts on another sub saying that David Grusch is RegicideAnon with no real solid proof and trying to implicate him in something shady.
(And now that known sub hoaxer Punjabi-Batman is the real deal)
Even "Think Tank" (@528vibes on twitter) who was 100% betting his entire reputation on these videos being real is now admitting its a fake.
Tell me, are you so absolutely positive in your convictions that you havent been duped youself?
4
Aug 22 '23
[deleted]
0
u/Shoogazi Aug 22 '23 edited Aug 22 '23
My current headcanon is that DoD/IC/Eglin AFB/Glowies
manufactured the FLIR footage to discredit the sattelite footage as an insurance policy in case the sattelite footage became viral. (EDIT: It appears the sat footage has been debunked as well, I didn't know. the following points still stand) Fast forward 9 years later and the said footage pops back up and becomes viral. After about a weeks worth of bot organized social-engineering for both sides they pull out the VFX card as the killswitch. the results?-
FLIR is debunked and the satellite footage as well by proxy.Most discussion and investigating into MH370 ceases.-The UFO community is delegitimized even more
-(most importantly imo) Any future legitimate leaks will be largely dismissed as fake, with the MH370 incident being cited.
1
u/UNSC_ONI Aug 22 '23 edited Aug 22 '23
I know you're going to hate this video, but it covers the sat footage too my guy. If you hate Mick West you can just scrub along a little. He shows that the portal in the sat footage is also the same asset and provides why.
Skip to like 1:13 or so. https://youtu.be/hMu187Et1qc?si=9qfh7WGmt05FAoyL
2
u/Shoogazi Aug 22 '23
Damn I guess that really seals it. I haven't seen the sat footage debunk so i thought that one was still in the air. And yeah definitely not a Mick fan but he's not twisting himself in a pretzel with this one. It's right there. Thanks for sharing.
That said, both footage being fake and there also being a coordinated social engineering campaign to stir the pot can both be true. There's a vested interest into making anyone interested in this topic look silly.
0
Aug 22 '23
Are you daft?
3
Aug 22 '23
[deleted]
2
Aug 22 '23
To discredit a real video.
0
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
What real video? Both videos were fake.
https://twitter.com/528vibes/status/1693988637392900342?t=Oq1Jk7JF0bphQ1bQc0yvuQ&s=19
2
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
Wow, DoD posted it?! That's crazy! I can't wait to see the evidence you have of that.
3
Aug 22 '23
Who else would be able to break the subs rules by posting from a brand new account to debunk a highly contested UAP video?
0
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
Aw man, I thought you actually had evidence for your claim and now I'm just disappointed.
3
Aug 22 '23
Now you know how I feel about MH370 being debunked by a half frame
4
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
2
u/Thesquire89 Aug 22 '23
Nothing says mental stability quite like [deleted]
3
u/UNSC_ONI Aug 22 '23
Its my fault, I posted this to them and they deleted their account less than 5 mins later.
→ More replies6
Aug 22 '23
Because the mods are being paid by the DoD.
5
u/overprotectivemoose Aug 22 '23
Why did this account get deleted?
-4
u/_dupasquet Aug 22 '23
Cause he's a FBI agent.
0
Aug 22 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/UFOs-ModTeam Aug 22 '23
Follow the Standards of Civility:
No trolling or being disruptive. No insults or personal attacks. No accusations that other users are shills. No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation. No harassment, threats, or advocating violence. No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible) An account found to be deleting all or nearly all of their comments and/or posts can result in an instant permanent ban. This is to stop instigators and bad actors from trying to evade rule enforcement. You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.0
Aug 22 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/UFOs-ModTeam Aug 22 '23
Follow the Standards of Civility:
No trolling or being disruptive. No insults or personal attacks. No accusations that other users are shills. No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation. No harassment, threats, or advocating violence. No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible) An account found to be deleting all or nearly all of their comments and/or posts can result in an instant permanent ban. This is to stop instigators and bad actors from trying to evade rule enforcement. You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
1
u/reigorius Aug 22 '23
Forgive me if this has been addressed as this is so much information and links propped into one post.
Has latency been subjected to scrutiny in regards to a human operator handling the imagery of these satellite captured videos?
My main question though, why would a drone and satellite observe a civilian airplane?
13
u/covid_is_from_a_lab Aug 22 '23
A civilian airplane that has veered off its normal course is a potential national threat, as NYC can attest
2
u/reigorius Aug 22 '23 edited Aug 22 '23
Over the Andaman Sea? It's a far stretch in regards to US national interest, but perhaps plausible.
The why (tracking a civilian passenger plane manually by two different observers) is quite interesting. I hope it is answered properly somewhere.
I hope someone will delve into the latency question.
3
u/Dillmatic Aug 22 '23
According to the data, the plane flew to the Andaman Sea but flew over an Australian Air Field in Malaysia. It would explain the military drone footage.
-9
u/EmpathyHawk1 Aug 22 '23
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMu187Et1qc its fake.
proven.
hoax and nothing more
be mindful of people who died during the crash posting such childish nonsense only harms everyone
7
Aug 22 '23
Not proven, not even slightly.
"Random statement about people who died in MH370 to make people feel bad about posting about it"
This is a DoD tactic. Pathetic.
5
u/EmpathyHawk1 Aug 22 '23
dude, I recommend a visit to a good psychiatrist because youre getting seriously paranoid. Tomorrow you will start suspecting your neigbours are CIA agents
11
u/LightningRodOfHate Aug 22 '23
People are saying these shockwaves don't match: https://imgur.com/a/dlviDbY
What do your eyes tell you?
16
u/covid_is_from_a_lab Aug 22 '23
My eyes tell me that you're only showing a tiny portion of an image. This is like comparing two noses to make the case that it's the same person. Please show the entire image. Since it's a stereotypical physics phenomenon, control images will also be helpful to make your case.
9
u/LightningRodOfHate Aug 22 '23
It's the entire visible shockwave from the original video: https://imgur.io/a/rFsKyAW
→ More replies9
u/NoCollegeKids Aug 22 '23
I think this is the best look at a FLIR overlay with the VFX. It’s identical, just with a skew edit. The core of the “wormhole” was completely edited, because the VFX used a fireball. That wouldn’t have looked right. The ring, and every little detail of it, is a precise match. Anyone denying it is deluding themselves.
https://twitter.com/lukejagodzinski/status/1693029578216812599
1
9
u/covid_is_from_a_lab Aug 22 '23
It must be a precise 100% match, especially since many natural phenomena (raindrops, for example) look alike due to physics.
12
u/NoCollegeKids Aug 22 '23
No, it doesn’t. Because the artist did make edits to the original. But they are basic edits, relative size and skew. The pattern match is all that matters. You can still keep your theories about the rest of the video, but it’s a FACT that the Pyromania VFX asset is used in frames for both wormholes. This isn’t a “pattern in nature”.
2
u/ra-re444 Aug 22 '23
i think the Dod clearly made edits to the originals. you cant prove anyone else made edits. your assuming that to fit your narrative
8
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
Why would DoD make edits to the originals instead of … just not leaking it
-4
u/ra-re444 Aug 22 '23
im talking about those vfx. i think those are doctored. i want the ones from the cd.
6
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
Then how was it used in a video game in the 1990s. https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/15vsaj1/mh370_portal_effect_used_in_diablo_1/
-1
u/ra-re444 Aug 22 '23
the effect is real. the archive is modified. i think;they changed those assets. nobody;has the actual hard copy from 95
1
u/ra-re444 Aug 22 '23
i want the cd. not the game. i want the og vfx cd. wouldnt trust the dod;and;digital assets to save my life. have yall only been using the Dod link or what
7
u/candypettitte Aug 22 '23
So you're suggesting that DoD forced Blizzard to include this image in Diablo 1 just on the off chance that 20 years later, they'd need it to discredit a video on Reddit?
→ More replies13
Aug 22 '23
The description posted with the tweet you linked.
"I've tried to overlay one over another and it's impossible to match all the points/edges. Also radius of the circle is different. Is it similar? Yes. Is it identical? No. Could someone distort it. Yes. Could two unrelated images be similar? Yes. For me it's not the proof of hoax."
and you can visually see, in your own example that it is not a precise match. Especially not "every little detail".
-6
u/NoCollegeKids Aug 22 '23
And yes, the guy who created it is hilarious in his inability to see the match. As if people can’t comprehend the slightest skew in an image, when the EXACT pattern matches from top to bottom.
7
Aug 22 '23
5
u/covid_is_from_a_lab Aug 22 '23
Many of these come, in my opinion, closer than the original 'debunk'.
6
u/LightningRodOfHate Aug 22 '23
Those don't match. This does https://imgur.io/a/dlviDbY
How is this even a debate?
5
Aug 22 '23
Just liek we discussed 10 minutes ago further down. Thats a tiny segment of a larger image. The only part of it you were able to match.
Tell me how this doesnt match just as well. Hell, it covers a larger matching area than your tiny little snippet.
-2
u/_dupasquet Aug 22 '23
Lol comparing this to supernova is like saying a fake photo of a car is real because there are genuine cars with 4 wheels driving on the street.
2
u/LightningRodOfHate Aug 22 '23
It's the entire visible shockwave from the original video: https://imgur.io/a/rFsKyAW
Like, you're saying they match because they're both roughly circular? I don't see a distinct pattern of matching curves like I do here: https://imgur.io/a/dlviDbY
10
Aug 22 '23
So again. you say "t's the entire visible shockwave from the original video" and post..the whole frame. but then you post your comparision...and its...JUST THIS which is CLEARLY not the full frame you just posted. Im arguing with chatGPT arnt I.
5
u/LightningRodOfHate Aug 22 '23
Yes, that's the part of the frame that contains the entire visible shockwave
→ More replies7
u/NoCollegeKids Aug 22 '23
None of those come close. Stop being dishonest to your own brain. You can see the pattern with your eyes. The odds of a match, in BOTH videos, are infinitesimal.
9
Aug 22 '23
ugh im so sick of having this argument. Your quarter of a frame doesnt match any better than This.
tell me, how your 1/4th of the circle matches any better than that. this argument is so tired and old. Youve looked at a quarter of something ,in a single frame and dismissed everything out of sheer ignorance. This whole thread is filled with this nonsense.
Or better yet, line up the rest of your circle with the effect. You CANT just like the tweet you posted is trying to show you but you seem to be to obtuse to see. Have a great night.
7
u/NoCollegeKids Aug 22 '23
It’s not a quarter, JFC. It’s the entire frame from the FLIR video. Just because something is “circular” it doesn’t mean it’s a match. I’m talking about the DETAIL. It’s like I’m holding up 4 fingers and you are telling me it’s 3.
Look at the pattern.6
Aug 22 '23
JFC. heres the full frame. Right here
heres the portion your comparing. Right here
Heres my shockwave image that matches up a larger area. Right here
Be as thick as you want about it.
7
9
8
u/NoCollegeKids Aug 22 '23
Bro, it’s the full frame….
I’m not talking about the core. I’m talking about entire pattern, top to bottom, full frame, of the halo. Every little detail is there.
→ More replies4
u/LightningRodOfHate Aug 22 '23
It's not a quarter of a frame, it's the entire visible shockwave from the original video: https://imgur.io/a/rFsKyAW
0
Aug 22 '23
Lets have this whole convo again shall we? Like you and me JUST had this exact conversation almost word for word.
Right here. Where you keep just posting this same thing.
I implore everyone to have an actual look for themselves and not trust me. Go check the 20 images posted above. In my opinion many of them match better than the visual effect, which again only shows a small portion of the frame.
3
4
8
u/NoCollegeKids Aug 22 '23
Anyone with eyes and a brain can see it’s a precise match. There are some edits to the original VFX, so yes those are obvious. But the pattern match cannot be denied. The overall theory needs to be updated with the knowledge that AT LEAST both wormholes were created using VFX. Whatever else you choose to believe about the videos is your call. But the VFX are not debatable in good faith.
→ More replies
•
u/darthtrevino Aug 16 '23 edited Aug 17 '23
Update: We've had massive community feedback on using a Megathread in this case, and the mod team is listening. Our actions so far have been the result of extensive internal deliberation as a result of the volume and quality of MH370 posts. We will stop redirecting new posts to the Megathread, IF the new posts provide unique analysis or cite significant relevant sources. Posts that are repetitive or duplicates will continue to be removed and directed to the Megathread. One of our goals is to try to improve the quality of information on the sub and help find the most efficient ways this information can be shared with everyone here. We recognize that this is sometimes at odds with the will of the community and it’s often impossible to please everyone.
-UFO Mods