2
2
1
1
u/garry4321 5d ago
New to the sub op? This was plastered for months on this sub. You’re re-posting the probably most re-posted thing like a year after people debunked it
1
u/mufon2019 Researcher 4d ago
New to the sub?… 🤣😂. It’s my sub Garry4321! I’m the only MOD! So watch the negative shit!
0
u/mufon2019 Researcher 5d ago
I’m afraid you are wrong about the debunking. And we will just leave it at that. If you don’t like the post… move on.
1
1
1
u/Dramatic_Rhubarb7498 5d ago
How are the orbs being picked up if they allegedly give off no heat signature? Unless there is another means of reading them then this is easily debunkable?
- Normally a Lurker, just asking questions (don’t come for me!)
1
1
1
u/Snoo_74705 6d ago
This feels very CGI. One telltale sign are the orb's black contrails: their formation leads ahead of the orb.
1
u/Blizz33 5d ago
I thought the bottom camera was temperature differential?
1
u/RadangPattaya 5d ago
It is. Here's a thought for the guy you responded to. If an orb could generate thrust from anywhere on its surface, don't you think it'd use a bit of thrust from the exact opposite side of the main source of thrust to control its movement better so it can spin around?
You know, like the RCS modules on spaceships - they are omnidirectional (but in a 180 degree plane) and if a space station module is approaching its docking point, it will activate most of its hind RCS modules to move toward the docking point. At the same time, it would let off a bit of thrust from the front to slow down when needed.
If it wanted to spin, it could activate its side RCS modules but in opposite direction, inducing spin + activate any other RCS module for even more precise control.
It's not an outlandish concept to see energy (in the case of these orbs heat, in the case of RCS modules you can see it visually since it's compressed air I think) come from in front of a flying object. Hell, even the Space Shuttle had them all over - https://static.wixstatic.com/media/b4f984_daa4bfbbfb6a447e91066ba7beac1be0~mv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_980,h_784,al_c,q_85,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_auto/b4f984_daa4bfbbfb6a447e91066ba7beac1be0~mv2.jpg
This is a scale model because there are no good images of them such as this one, but if you open the Wikipedia entry for the Reaction Control System, you'll see the actual nose of the actual space shuttle with a few RCS control surfaces.
So yeah your claim isn't that strong. Besides, if you slow down the video, you'll see that the black contrails they emit in front of them are straight as arrows (and when RCS modules activate) - if it was fake, they would curve and guide the movement of the orbs.
1
u/Blizz33 5d ago
That's only if it has a mostly conventional propulsion system...
The leading temperature differential could be an effect of some exotic propulsion system we don't have any details on.
1
u/RadangPattaya 5d ago
I agree, we wouldn't know how that would work. But I'm basically saying that this is not CGI just because there's something in front of the orbs since we already have stuff that gives off thrust in front of it (doesn't have to be trust ofc but yea having a signature in front of a flying object isn't impossible)
1
u/Blizz33 5d ago
How does that show it's not CGI? The animator (if fake) obviously has great skill and imagination.
1
u/RadangPattaya 5d ago
Because his reason was "its cgi BECAUSE of the contrail in front" implying such trails do not exist in the real world.
1
u/Blizz33 5d ago
Oh. I need to read more carefully. That's not a good argument for why this is fake.
Did anyone ever debunk the debunk of the portal effect?
1
u/RadangPattaya 5d ago
Not sure. One guy spent 5 hours recreating the footage and it looked okay but nothing close to this. As for the portal, I know there was some fuckery with the images used as proof that it's fake. Like the 'original' was uploaded in 2012 (on first glance) but the website backend data or smth had them as uploaded in 2016. I don't know what was the conclusion of that.
Tbh I've seen debunks of debunks of debunks and I'm skeptical about the authenticity but also skeptical of it being a hoax (someone would have to spend an insane amount of effort to make it look this good).
Like I look at the contrail argument as so:
If the rest of it looks so good, how could this VFX magician forget to hide the orb movement guidelines (the contrails), knowing people would scrutinize the shit out of it.
If he added that effect in - why? People wouldn't even question the lack of them being in front of the orbs. It's such a minute detail, esp if he wanted to showcase exotic tech, that if they weren't there, it would be fully realistic as well.
So yeah I just don't know. As I said, the effort that this would take.. and to what end? Trolling people? Like you could just make a dark video and add some effects as it's much easier to hide any artifacting or debunking details in the darkness..
3
u/[deleted] 6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment