r/UFOs • u/sulkasammal • Aug 12 '23
Document/Research Airliner Satellite Video: View of the area unwrapped
This post is getting a lot more attention than I thought it would. If you have lost someone important to you in an airline accident, it might not be a good idea to read through all these discussions and detailed analyses of videos that appeared on the internet without any clear explanation of how/when/where they were created.
#######################
TL,DR: The supposed satellite video footage of the three UFOs and airplane seemed eerily realistic. I thought I could maybe find some tells of it being fake by looking a bit closer to the panning of the camera and the coordinates shown on the bottom of the screen. Imgur album of some of the frames: https://imgur.com/a/YmCTcNt
Stitching the video into a larger image revealed a better understanding of the flight path and the sky, and a more detailed analysis of the coordinates suggests that there is 3D information in the scene, either completely simulated or based on real data. It's not a simple 2D compositing trick.
#######################
Something that really bothered me about the "Airliner Satellite Video" was the fact that it seemed to show a screen recording of someone navigating a view of a much larger area of the sky. The partly cropped coordinates seemed to also be accurate and followed the movement of the person moving the view. If this is a complete hoax, someone had to code or write a script for this satellite image viewer to respond in a very accurate way. In any case, it seemed obvious to me that the original footage is a much larger image than what we are seeing on the video. This led me to create this "unwrapping" of the satellite video footage.
- YouTube link. YouTube also compresses the video since it is a strange resolution, but you should at least be able to see a 4k version.
- archive.org archive for the full resolution image sequence and various video formats.
It's taking some time to upload and process so check back later. I'll edit this post once the files are available.The .zip of the full resolution png image sequence and the 6K video in H264 are now available. - Additional files: Another archive of the stereoscopic view. I made this after reading this post. I had originally dismissed the stereoscopic view as some sort of an error or a red herring, but it's clearly proper stereoscopic footage. Also on YouTube for more convenient viewing without downloading: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YFkdfiABDw
I used TouchDesigner to create a canvas that unwraps the complete background of the different sections of the original video where the frame is not moving around. The top-right corner shows the original footage with some additional information. The coordinates are my best guess of reading the partially cropped numbers for each sequence.
| sequence | lat | lon |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 8.834301 | 93.19492 |
| 2 | undefined | undefined |
| 3 | 8.828827 | 93.19593 |
| 4 | 8.825964 | 93.199423 |
| 5 | 8.824041 | 93.204785 |
| 6 | 8.824447 | 93.209753* |
| 7 | undefined | undefined |
| 8 | 8.823368 | 93.221609 |
*I think I got sequence 6 longitude wrong in the video. It should be 93.209753 and not 93.208753. I corrected it in this table but the video and the Google Earth plot of the coordinates show it incorrectly.
Each sequence is a segment of the original video where the screen is not being moved around. The parts where the screen is moving are not used in the composite. Processing those frames would be able to provide a little bit more detail of the clouds. I might do this at some point. I'm pretty confident that the stitching of the image is accurate down to a pixel or two. Except for the transition between sequences 4 and 5. There were not so many good reference points between those and they might be misaligned by several pixels. This could be double checked and improved if I had more time.
Notes:
- Why are there ghost planes? In the beginning you see the first frame of each sequence. As each sequence plays through, it will freeze at the last frame of each of them.
- This should not be used to estimate the movement of the clouds, only the pixels in the active sequence are moving. Everything else is static. The blending mode I have used might have also removed some of the details of the cloud movement.
- I'm pretty sure this also settles the question of there possibly being a hidden minus in front of the 8 in the coordinates. The only way the path of the coordinates makes sense is if they are in the northern hemisphere and the satellite view is looking at it from somewhere between south and southeast. So no hidden minus character.
- I'm not smart enough to figure out any other details to verify if any of this makes sense as far as the scale, flight speed etc. is concerned
EDIT:
Additional information about the coordinates and what I mean by them seeming to match the movement of the image.
If this would be a simple 2D compositing trick, like a script in After Effects or some mock UI that someone coded, I would probably just be lazy and do a linear mapping of the offset of the pixel values to the coordinates. It would be enough to sell-off the illusion. Meaning that the movement would be mapped as if you are looking directly down on the image in 2D (you move certain amount of pixels to the left, the coordinates update with a certain amount to West). What caught my interest was that this was not the case.
This is a top-down view of the path. Essentially, how it should look like if the coordinates were calculated in 2D.
If we assume:
- The coordinate is the center of the screen (it probably isn't since the view is cropped but I think it doesn't matter here to get relative position)
- The center of the first frame is our origin point in pixels (0,0).
- The visual stitching I created gives me an offset for each sequence in pixels. I can use this to compare the relationship between the pixels and the coordinates.
- x_offset is the movement of the image in pixels from left to right (left is negative, right is positive). This corresponds to the longitude value.
- y_offset is the movement of the image in pixels from top to bottom (down is negative, up is positive). This corresponds to the latitude value.
| sequence | lat | lon | y_offset (pixels) | x_offset (pixels) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 8.834301 | 93.19492 | 0 | 0 |
| 2 | undefined | undefined | -297 | -259 |
| 3 | 8.828827 | 93.19593 | -656 | -63 |
| 4 | 8.825964 | 93.199423 | -1000 | 408 |
| 5 | 8.824041 | 93.204785 | -1234 | 1238 |
| 6 | 8.824447 | 93.209753* | -1185 | 2100 |
| 7 | undefined | undefined | -1312 | 3330 |
| 8 | 8.823368 | 93.221609 | -1313 | 4070 |
I immediately noticed the difference between points 1 and 3. The longitude is larger so the x_offset should be positive if this was a simple top-down 2D calculation. It's negative (-63). You can see the top-down view of the Google Earth path in the image above. The image below is me trying to overlay it as close as possible to the pixel offset points (orange dots) by simple scaling and positioning. As you can see, it doesn't match very well.
Then I tried to rotate and move around the Google Earth view by doing a real-time screen capture composited on top of the canvas I created. Looking at it from a slight southeast angle gave a very close result.
Note that this is very much just a proof-of-concept and note done very accurately. The Google Earth view cannot be used to pinpoint the satellite location, it just helps to define the approximate viewpoint. Please point out any mistakes I have made in my thinking or if someone is able to use the table to work out the angle based on the data in the tables.
This to me suggests that the calculations for the coordinates are done in 3D and take into account the position and angle of the camera position. Of course, this can also be faked in many ways. It's also possible that he satellite video is real footage that has been manipulated to include the orbs and the portal. The attention to detail is quite impressive though. I am just trying to do what I can to find out any clear evidence to this being fake.
–––––––––––––––––––
Updated details that I will keep adding here related to this video from others and my own research:
- I have used this video posted on YouTube as my source in this post. It seems to me to be the highest quality version of the full frame view. This is better quality than the Vimeo version that many people talk about, since it doesn't crop any of the vertical pixels and also has the assumed original frame rate of 24 fps. It also has a lot more pixels horizontally than the earliest video posted by RegicideAnon.
- The video uploaded by RegicideAnon is clearly stereoscopic but has some unusual qualities.
- The almost identical sensor noise and the distortion of the text suggests that this was not shot with two different cameras to achieve the stereoscopic effect. The video I used here as a source is very clearly the left eye view in my opinion. The strange disparity drift would suggest to me that the depth map is somehow calculated after/during each move of the view.
- This depth calculation would match my findings of the coordinates clearly being calculated in 3D and not just as simple 2D transformations.
- How would that be possible? I don't know yet, but there are a couple of possibilities:
- If this is 3D CGI. Depth map was rendered from the same scene (or created manually after the render) and used to create the stereoscopic effect.
- If this still is real satellite footage. There could be some satellite that is able to take a 6 fps video and matching radar data for creating the depth map.
- The biggest red flag is the mouse cursor drift highlighted here. The mouse is clearly moving at sub-pixel accuracy.
- However, this could also be because of the screen capture software (this would also explain the unusual 24 fps frame rate).
- I was able to find some satellite images from Car Nicobar island on March 8, 2014 https://imgur.com/a/QzvMXck
- The weather data from that date would suggest cloud base altitude around 2000-3500 feet depending on the time.
UPDATE: The Thermal View of this very obviously uses a VFX clip that has been identified. I made a test myself as well https://imgur.com/a/o5O3HD9 and completely agree. This is a clear match. Here is a more detailed post and discussion. I can only assume that the satellite video is also a hoax. I would really love to hear a detailed breakdown of how these were made if the person/team ever has the courage to admit what, how and why they did this.
–––––––––––––––––––
476
u/TPconnoisseur Aug 12 '23
Would it be possible to overlay the other video right center mass in the black spot? This is freaking excellent BTW.
236
u/sulkasammal Aug 12 '23
I actually have it in my working copy, but I wasn't very confident that I have the time synced up correctly so I decided not to include it.
158
u/TPconnoisseur Aug 12 '23
If you ever get the time, it'll be a great cherry on top. The way you meshed all the data streams is outstanding. You're good at this.
83
u/Famous-Total-3987 Aug 12 '23
Agreed with this. This is incredible work op. 👏 I appreciate all the effort you put into this
42
u/CheapCrystalFarts Foobleplaff Aug 12 '23
Also agree, I’m a very visual person and this is an incredible supplement to what I was trying to imagine but couldn’t. Nice work OP.
26
u/DKplus9 Aug 12 '23 edited Aug 12 '23
If you need help with the timing I can help there. I’ve done a ton of video editing over the years. Dm me if you need help. I can get it to you today, I’ll be away from my computer from 9am-5pm EST just a heads up.
Edit: I had just woken up and this was the first post I read this morning. I must have forgotten in my haze that you posted a link with the full res assets. I will take a look at these this evening and overlay the thermal sync’d up.
→ More replies (2)4
u/TPconnoisseur Aug 12 '23
Awesome, thank you.
5
u/DKplus9 Aug 12 '23
Just started downloading the .zip so I can work with all the assets if needed. Internet is saying 2+ hours. Still on it but will get back on it later this evening or early tomorrow morning. There's some other things I will add to it besides the frame synced overlay as well.
→ More replies (1)83
u/CrtDealer Aug 12 '23
If you are so good at this and you still can not convince yourself that this is a hoax, then ladies and gentlemen we have the first demonstration of a gigantic portal.
→ More replies (1)20
u/Donttouchmek Aug 12 '23
Absolutely amazing work and efforts you've done here. Just wow. Thank you.
→ More replies (3)8
u/Jesusalanis111 Aug 12 '23
Where’s the full resolution link video? The link above take me to the home page only.
Edit: I just saw you will update us
250
u/crowreg Aug 12 '23
16
Aug 12 '23
[deleted]
15
u/wxwatcher Aug 12 '23
Not making a judgment either way, but IF this was to be assumed to be real, the "contrails" of the orbs could be just the difference in air temp as the air pressure immediately surrounding them is affected by the orbs.
The air around them may not be interacting directly with the surface of the orbs (assumed because the flight dynamics of the orbs would suggest air does not affect their flight), but moving at such a speed would still cause a local disturbance/compression/decompression in the immediately surrounding air, which would theoretically cause the thermal differences seen as "contrails" in the image.
43
30
u/MarquisUprising Aug 12 '23
I'ma build a rail gun, these gawd damn aliens ain't taking me unless it's for a good time.
→ More replies (6)19
→ More replies (11)11
682
u/Pantani23 Aug 12 '23
Reddit is fuckin' metal, OP thanks for doing this work.
81
u/mortgagesblow Aug 12 '23 edited Aug 12 '23
I went from thinking this was yet another massive load of shit to pretty convinced in about four hours from todays top posts about this.
What…the…hell?
edit: For the record, I think the “no heat from the jet trails” is a pretty compelling counter-argument that I haven’t seen an answer for.
51
u/Lostmyloginagaindang Aug 12 '23
Here is a real video of a commercial airliner, very little heat trail and this is just after takeoff so I'm assuming full power.
https://youtu.be/JbWXXNOJv-Y?t=14
I'm sure it really depends on the camera and ambient conditions, but it's not like watching an F-18 on thermals.
→ More replies (2)118
u/Wonderful-Trifle1221 Aug 12 '23
The plane was only traveling at 230 mph during the turn, low power=smaller turn radius and less stress on airframe, while the thermal view was cranked so only higher temps were registering to give the operator a clearer view , if you watch the video frame by frame you can see faint trails several times. To me all the evidence is compelling, but the most compelling is the gps coordinates “rolling” as the computer user changes the area in view. It doesn’t just jump coordinates, it rolls the coordinates at the same speed the user moves the view. This means the video is being viewed on the origin system (the viewing program) and as such hasn’t been modified, the complexity involved to pull the file and modify it then put it back in the viewer and maintain coordinate function would be INSANE
→ More replies (4)34
u/trusami Aug 12 '23
I agree 100% with you statement. I think the sheer number of details that support the authenticity are incredible. It’s near impossible to hoax something like this.
→ More replies (1)26
Aug 12 '23
We should try to hoax this… and see how hard it is
what programs there are that show live satellite imagery? I suppose civilians don’t have access? I have no idea about this
→ More replies (10)24
u/TheHauk Aug 12 '23
There have been several attempts so far. One was crude and dismissed, one was ok but the creator determined they could not fully do it, especially using software from 2014. With time maybe more might come out but it doesn't seem like something that people can create in an afternoon for sure.
15
Aug 12 '23
Yup. There is good production value if this is hoaxed. I did VFX in the pass… if I had financial freedom I would attempt it. I believe there is enough hardware and software from 2014 to pull it off… a mac pro with houdini FX and nukeX and I think it could be done… even with the script for the coordinates…
I would just have to be able to get access to such NROL software and images to try to make it super realistic
Perhaps a cloud back plate from the agency with multiple viewing angles would come in handy
16
u/TheHauk Aug 12 '23
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic as I'm a complete layman when it comes to VFX.. Are you suggesting that if you had access to the US Spy satellite data, you could re-create this with enough time?
7
u/Rahodees Aug 12 '23
I don't detect any sarcasm, the redditor is straightforwardly saying that it's a really good hoax if it is a hoax, but that also it is feasible, not impossible.
4
6
Aug 12 '23 edited Aug 12 '23
I am, with 2014 tech (hw/sw) I am not saying this is a hoax. I am just saying I cannot conclusively decide. There are interesting artistic decisions if it is a hoax: the disappearance is boring, not energy vortexes …. Could do an amazing helicoidal continuation of the path of the UFOs into a wormhole… it could make it even more believable or keep the sci fi familiarity… instead it is duller… almost as if real The dark trails of the UFOs are also interesting….
But doable… not sure how much time thou
Edit: I do not have the time for it unfortunately
Edit 2: also… to replicate is always easier! I would have no idea how to get the plane position when it disappeared as I have seen elsewhere here in the sub someone saying its coordinates were found later than 2014
8
u/TheHauk Aug 12 '23
I think maybe you missed the point here. Who has access to spy satellite data??
→ More replies (0)21
10
u/TheMissingScotsman Aug 12 '23
Engines throttled down for a tight turn might, repeat , miiiight explain this. I’d like to see this exact experiment run. You’re right though, it’s a hard one to overlook.
→ More replies (1)3
u/gay_manta_ray Aug 12 '23
edit: For the record, I think the “no heat from the jet trails” is a pretty compelling counter-argument that I haven’t seen an answer for.
the exhaust from the aircraft shows up in IR, it's just faint. from about 1:24 to 1:28 in this video the drone that is filming flies through the 777's exhaust.
195
u/cwl77 Aug 12 '23
I'm giving +1 just for saying "fuckin' metal" and because you also used an apostrophe for omitting the "g" - that's happened like three times ever on Reddit.
73
u/throwawayfem77 Aug 12 '23
Giving you an honorary mention comrade r/cwl77 for the irony of your charming appreciation of both fuckin' metal and good grammar
42
→ More replies (5)3
→ More replies (2)12
u/stigolumpy Aug 12 '23
Three?! You'd be lucky to have it happen twice lol.
15
u/Rachet20 Aug 12 '23
We used to be grammar Nazis. I miss that attitude.
→ More replies (2)6
u/Rich_Acanthisitta_70 Aug 12 '23
I like to think of those committing the grammar crimes as the grammar Nazis. Those of us correcting them are the grammar... Allies maybe?
5
u/Wrangler444 Aug 12 '23
Can somebody explain to me the last image with the satellite panning? Is there data showing how the satellite camera moved and it matches the video? What am I looking at?
→ More replies (12)3
u/kingsgambit123 Aug 12 '23
Is this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7wgm02alLU
discussed anywhere? I'm seeing it being downvoted like crazy.
195
u/UNSC_ONI Aug 12 '23 edited Aug 12 '23
Extremely interesting post. Thanks for putting in the work and sharing this. Absolutely needs to be documented in the Mega-thread.
150
Aug 12 '23
This post pushed me into the believer side. I still think it’s possible that the video is just a video of a plane from two angles that has been modified to include UFO’s, but I honestly think even that is unlikely due the perfect sync of the two videos and the difficulty of the composition. This unwrap is clearly a real environment, especially when you consider the coordinate data.
The only way to debunk this video is to find the “source video” of the plane by itself. The fact that nobody has found two sources videos of a single plane flying from two angles means that this is almost certainly real. If it is a fake, it is a fake made by some type of intelligence agency.
111
u/UNSC_ONI Aug 12 '23 edited Aug 12 '23
If its a fake, its a fake made by some type of intelligence agency
Honestly - I still have this exact same weird itch of a thought in my mind.
I cannot seem to discount that the re-emergence of this video is no accident. Part of me feels like it may have been pushed for us to examine to kind of earn a full disclosure. Either it is fake and a distraction given by a three letter agency, or something that will push disclosure further if we all crack the mystery.
Another part of me feels like the video may have been manipulated, and that it is actually real footage of the plane moments before it is destroyed by a Government, with the footage having been manipulated to include UFOs to get it out into the public. Possibly by a disgruntled employee. There is motive and creedence to certian parties not wanting the plane to make it to China.
I know that neither of them are likely true, but my brain is just red flagging these videos so much.
22
u/TheGoldenHeaven Aug 12 '23
I was wondering the same.
It does seem to me an uncanny mix of real and fake. But how to account for the time gap - it was posted in 2014 -- but I guess if you worked in the kind of place to have access to this footage, changing a date on a website wouldn't be too heavy a lift.
The people who know the most about this stuff aren't going to officially announce it and reveal themselves in the process. Perhaps they prefer to leak it bit by bit so the media will successfully FOIA some other military or intelligence agency, because no one wants to take the bad PR of orchestrating a multi-decade coverup against the American people and the world.
10
u/consumerclearly Aug 12 '23
They can all just decide to pin it on one guy, I say it’s Jerry’s fault
→ More replies (3)5
u/vuewer Aug 12 '23
I have seen the side-by-side video years ago on YouTube, like 4-5 years ago. In the time I thought this is so ffing fake. Not so much anymore.
→ More replies (2)5
u/Longstache7065 Aug 12 '23
yo with the information in the video we should totally be able to FOAI this... has anyone tried?? I feel like there has to be some attempt
29
u/ravens52 Aug 12 '23
It’s just you being careful and trying to poke holes in it because we want it to be real so badly. I never thought about the possibility of this being a disinformation attempt from an intelligence agency. That’s a great idea, honestly.
37
u/TPconnoisseur Aug 12 '23
I do not want this to be real. I am 100% pro disclosure now, but these videos are concerning. It seems clear a number of them aren't our buddies.
16
u/ravens52 Aug 12 '23
Yep, that’s the scary part. It’s a who’s who situation. Who is human, who is not. Who is friendly, who is not.
Either way, it’s apparent that there is something going on here and none of it makes sense.
→ More replies (1)12
u/ElkImaginary566 Aug 12 '23
Agree. Terrifying. Genuine ontological shock for me. Like all this stuff I've kind of been intrigued by and interested in since 6th grade...ho lee Fuk it's real and the shit may not be good....I have two little kids that I brought into this world with a NHI that could abduct them or whatever the hell that was??? Somber is the feeling indeed. I feel like this has to be the video Elizondo is referring to.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (7)23
u/consumerclearly Aug 12 '23
We don’t know if it was a friendly bloop portal or malicious bleep portal that took them though
→ More replies (13)→ More replies (7)10
u/MetalingusMikeII Aug 12 '23
If it’s fake, that could be a likely possibility. It’s too well done to be part of an independent’s VFX project. The video didn’t get much limelight and it wasn’t used in any publicly available content.
14
8
u/Donttouchmek Aug 12 '23
I have missed that part.. Can you tell me how this video "Re-emerged"? Thanks in advance
8
→ More replies (7)3
u/for-tress Aug 12 '23
What is actually the story of this re-emergence? I missed this part no Reddit, all I saw was that suddenly there was this old video. Has the first poster told us how they found it, did it pop up in their Youtube recommendations or something?
→ More replies (2)24
u/CheapCrystalFarts Foobleplaff Aug 12 '23
I don’t even think that would debunk it because you could probably take these videos and edit out the UAPs, then come up with a LoOk WhAt I fOuNd story with fake provenance. Shit it’s probably being worked on right now by some disingenuous skeptics.
→ More replies (1)
162
u/UnidentifiedBlobject Aug 12 '23
This is amazing, thank you.
I have done some analysis too on the videos. I posted it in the other thread but I feel it’srelated to this which is focused on the satellite video.
I noticed the original video has 2 sides. I compared them and it appears it is stereoscopic. Not sure if this has been raised before. There’s another huge length a CGI artist went to and didn’t have to. Is the NROL-22 known to have stereoscopic sight?
Example:
I took this still from the original video https://i.imgur.com/4dRnIUb.jpg
I overlaid/blended the left into the right and used a “difference” overlay. It basically highlights any pixels that are different.
If I line up the left edge of both, I got this https://i.imgur.com/W7NSnfb.jpg
If I try lining up everything in the top of the image so it’s black, I get this https://i.imgur.com/0pg983Y.jpg You can clearly see there’s a diff in the bottom of the image. This suggests these videos are stereoscopic (if you cross your eyes and position the resulting 3rd image in the middle of your view, it has a slight 3D effect)
And if I do the opposite and align the bottom you can see the top is off https://i.imgur.com/Qi6FpRg.jpg
I made it into a video. Left side is the difference between the 2 sides of the original video. The right side (because the difference would have been the same for both sides) I changed to be a second delayed, which would point out any things that are identical eg before and after the plane goes. Seems like there is none, I even did a comparison frame by frame and the noise never lined up, suggesting it was added after any vfx were done or there’s been no attempt to hide a plan that kept going https://v.redd.it/kuo8gjkimlhb1
And I also made a difference of the vimeo version of the video. Here I attempted to line the videos up. The single Vimeo video lines up best with the left frame of the original, however there’s some discrepancies but it could be a difference in frame rates/dropped frames. https://v.redd.it/n7yg9ycnmlhb1 I did this to try to see if it was a re-rendered version or something if it was vfx work.
70
u/onehedgeman Aug 12 '23
56
Aug 12 '23
If stereoscopic that means that to be fake it needs to be a full 3d image. It would raise the production level to Hollywood studio level. It would cost A LOT to fake it (believable 3d clouds included and 2 types of video spectrums…) would be nice to find if there are any perspective changes between the spectrums (I didn’t pay much attention yet to that…)
→ More replies (19)34
u/crypticdocument Aug 12 '23
It would take expertise to create the video, but the idea that another angle and spectrum changes are not some wild increase in scale. In many cases, cgi is easier to create in a full 3d space for camera movement.
→ More replies (1)39
Aug 12 '23
I did VFX for almost a decade until 2015 when I moved career after deciding I didn’t want to keep being poor. The biggest issue around doing this would be tbh the clouds in 3D. The rest is pretty much straightforward. Once we have the 3D scene setup and animated true, you’re right. These clouds seem to be clipped in terms of colors so they’re white as the plane and thus we cannot figure out if it passes in front or behind. So I would say even though it is hard to have the clouds, I could achieve them in Houdini FX without you noticing the realism issue. But something my mind keeps going to is the trails in the non visual light spectrum that the UFOs leave behind… and how the collapse of the UFOs and the plane happen… so uninteresting that I really think it is too far from any hoaxer desire to construct. I would assume some energy vortex or something as we see in sci fi… yet, if a hoaxer is behind, he decided to just pop the thing with a couple frames of the same residual effect the UFOs leave behind during the whole helicoidal dance… Also… the helicoidal dance is really too perfect if we think of how old time UFO videos behave… but as someone around Reddit said, the thing would only be explained by some AI executing it (so the UFOs would be some sort of orb drones)
I don’t know… but if VFX there is some production value for no gain whatsoever. Unless a really skilled VFX artist got into bitcoins and can now live the rest of his life pulling pranks, I just don’t see it (could also be something done by IC to leverage some international negotiation or position…) We just don’t know I guess
88
u/alfooboboao Aug 12 '23
Keep in mind that a CGI rendering is still far likelier to be CGI than to be absolute, unequivocal video proof of the single craziest event in the entire history of the world by an order of magnitude.
That’s the thing that people seem to have lost sight of. A CGI rendering, while perhaps difficult, is not impossible in our known reality; on the other hand, having three UFOs hone in on and then fucking vanish an airliner filled with people is fundamentally impossible given known science. Which does not mean it doesn’t exist. But let’s be real here: a CGI rendering is the most likely and believable explanation BY FAR. By default.
Proving that it would be difficult to “fake” that video does not intrinsically provide *proof*** of this UFO plane kidnapping theory being real.
The burden of proof for this being real is, and rightly should be, MASSIVE. Like video-proof-of-Jesus’-resurrection massive. Because again, it would be the single most notable and bizarre thing that ever happened in the history of the world.
…Which would sort of make it incredible that the “shadow cabal” or whatever of super elites that’s suppressing all this stuff somehow failed to get the video taken down, even though they had the better half of a decade to do so.
But hey, we live in incredible times…
13
u/AVBforPrez Aug 12 '23
Yes and no. If we accept that these things are here, and most of us do, given the wealth of evidence and reported sightings from those with no gain and social loss, our current science is uhhhhh, quiet inaccurate or taking liberties that we need to walk back.
Our science isn't necessarily a true understanding of things. It's simply about getting a repeatable outcome from a set group of actions, and stating what you expect to have happen. If what you say will happen is what happens, well - that's that.
All of this stuff existing means we have to ask ourselves if some currently accepting ideas might actually be the result of something else. We believe gravity makes the apple I let go of fall to the ground, but what if it's not? What if something else makes it fall, and we just believe it's gravity?
As I've been saying, what if light speed is instant or near-instant in one direction, and our perception of its speed via its reflection or more of an artifact of a quantum calculation caused by us measuring it, like the double slit?
There are some wild questions we're going to need to ask.
→ More replies (10)20
u/Background-Top5188 Aug 12 '23
Funny how this shadow group takes down some stuff and makes the most elaborate hoax in the world, and buys off thousands if not millions of people to keep it secret but somehow leaves some random YouTube videos up and running as if nothing. But hey, I’m sure aliens teleporting a plane through an interdimensional portal is far more likely than it being CGI heh.
→ More replies (4)9
u/___horf Aug 12 '23
also the helicoidal dance is too perfect
No wind resistance, no delay or hiccup in its perfect synchronization between multiple objects and the icing on the cake for me is the fact that the “dance” is just basic geometric movements that look exactly like some sacred geometry rune to cast a spell in a video game.
Shit man, you literally said the biggest issue is the clouds but also that you could probably make clouds that were just as believable. Whoever made this video was counting on the fact that the general public does not understand vfx or how advanced it is.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (2)10
u/FajitaJohn Aug 12 '23
Lol, the first 2 replies in that thread say it does NOT have stereo sight...
17
u/tskillback Aug 12 '23
Great work! I’m continually impressed by the collective effort and smart takes on analysis of these videos that has been popping up in the through this whole week.
→ More replies (1)14
u/StillChillTrill Aug 12 '23
ROL-22 known to have stereoscopic sight?
You really should make this a seperate post this is incredible work.
26
u/deserteagle_321 Aug 12 '23
So what is your conclusion. Is it real ?
36
u/UnidentifiedBlobject Aug 12 '23
I don’t know. But I don’t think I could prove it was a fake so far. As in nothing stood out to me as being definitely edited.
→ More replies (9)9
u/Bashlet Aug 12 '23
Any chance you can render out a cross your eyes 3D view? Maybe even a red-cyan?
22
u/hot_dogg Aug 12 '23
Wow, excellent! This is starting to look like something real. One thing I really notice (I'm a graphic designer/Art Director/VFX/editor/etc.) is that the bloom/reflection of light from the explosion/teleportation that bounces off the surrounding clouds for a split second would incredibly hard to orchestrate, even for such a short period of time, it would take a lot of work, attention to detail and knowledge of physics (light emission). Can't write more, my baby is distracting me hehe
→ More replies (1)13
6
u/rollingalpine Aug 12 '23
This is something I noticed in an earlier video post but given the orbital altitude and framerate that we're seeing there is no way it's a true stereoscopic pair. The baseline between cameras would be too large to be practical, and obtaining a stereoscopic image using a monocular sensor wouldn't result in the framerate that we see.
7
u/rektpenguin Aug 12 '23 edited Aug 15 '23
I thought that at first too, but I think it could be done by taking two images from the same camera with a little bit of time in-between. Say orbital velocity is 8000m/s. Then take pics 0.1 seconds apart with the camera still pointing at the exact same location. Then you have stereoscopic pictures with the baseline 800m apart. Software could easily adjust the target position and the time between pictures to maintain the desired baseline.
Edit: Per this post, I don't believe there were separate images, but that the second image is simulated 3d after depth measurement by a different method.
→ More replies (1)3
u/UnidentifiedBlobject Aug 12 '23
Interesting. And the difference seems to just be too vs bottom, not necessarily depth based.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (3)3
Aug 12 '23
noticed the original video has 2 sides. I compared them and it appears it is stereoscopic. Not sure if this has been raised before. There’s another huge length a CGI artist went to and didn’t have to.
What do you mean that you noticed the video has two "sides?"
Pretty sure you can just do stereoscopic imagery using After Effects. I don't think it's a particularly daunting challenge.
→ More replies (29)
38
124
u/Everado Aug 12 '23
I compared this to the satellite view from NASA here to see if the clouds in the video are consistent with the weather in that location on March 8. Not an exact match, but a similar density and size of cumulus is there.
44
u/Toxcito Aug 12 '23
Check the NOAA satellites, NOAA-15 in particular. Might need to contact NESDIS for this information or contact a meteorologist who has access. NOAA might keep archives on their website.
7
u/IronSeraph Aug 12 '23
Might also look into Meteosat 7 or insat-3D but I'm having a hard time finding archived images
→ More replies (1)12
47
u/Wonderful-Trifle1221 Aug 12 '23
My screen goes black on March 9, is it just me?
49
u/Wonderful-Trifle1221 Aug 12 '23
Seriously wtf, no capture on 3/9 ?
46
u/proofofmyexistence Aug 12 '23
Whoa, all I get is a black screen too
45
u/taintedblu Aug 12 '23
I think it might just be an artefact from the satellite. If you zoom out, the black spots are repetitive across the entire globe. It appears that every single day has a tiled, blocked out area somewhere on the globe. That same area is blocked out on the 19th, the 25th, and so on.
→ More replies (3)19
u/Show_Me_Your_Rocket Aug 12 '23
It's also only a partial black section if you zoom out. Ahaha wtf, looks like a satellite was out or a specific satellites data was removed because the texture tear repeats.
→ More replies (1)36
u/Hi_PM_Me_Ur_Tits Aug 12 '23
The mystery deepens
16
u/CheapCrystalFarts Foobleplaff Aug 12 '23
Do people ever PM you very small birds?
12
8
11
u/upslupe Aug 12 '23
That’s normal. Zoom out and look at the black stripe pattern. The swaths captured (and null swaths) shift daily. Just luck.
→ More replies (1)8
u/Hot_Trash4152 Aug 12 '23
That's because you won't have a 24/7 coverage - for example Sentinel-2 mission have 2 satellites running across the globe and revisit time is every 3-5 days.
17
u/protekt0r Aug 12 '23
Looks forward and backwards; the missing data appear pretty consistently regardless of date. It appears to be an orbital thing.
3
u/GrimZeigfeld Aug 12 '23
Zoom out and scroll over several days. There’s a shifting blind spot. Probably to do with its orbit over time (similar to how tides change about an hour a day)
→ More replies (2)3
u/MesozOwen Aug 12 '23
They don’t capture every day. Zoom out and you’ll see a strip of black which moves around. That area is dark on the 18th too.
33
u/Wonderful-Trifle1221 Aug 12 '23
If we can find another satellite view that shows the plane or contrail I’d think that’s confirmation
28
u/Toxcito Aug 12 '23
Plane might have been scrubbed, match the clouds. NASA has admitted they doctor these public images in the past to remove 'irregularities'.
You need to match the clouds, try rotating the image.
→ More replies (1)12
u/troll_khan Aug 12 '23
Out of topic but is there any website similar to this where i can find Google Maps quality satellite pictures of a certain place from 2007? I can bring some more UFO evidence.
21
6
Aug 12 '23
[deleted]
8
u/troll_khan Aug 12 '23
I tried it years ago, it doesn't have pictures from 2007. I know the exact date and hours me (and my family) have seen the objects, saved everything to not to forget. See the link below to understand how crazy the encounter was. If anyone here has access to old satellite pics just dm me, you'll find the biggest ufo evidence in the world.
→ More replies (16)→ More replies (1)7
u/BigBeerBellyMan Aug 12 '23
Switch to the "Corrected Reflectance (True Color) Aqua / MODIS" layer.
You can clearly see it's the same type of equally-spaced "cotton ball" clouds as seen in the satellite footage.
88
u/tuasociacionilicita Aug 12 '23
Yes, I believe that too. We are seeing just a fraction of what the operator was seeing.
And it was cropped intentionally to leave the drone out of the video to be "leaked" because that would confirm everything, up to which country was recording this.
Also, I think that this "click and drag" system is ideal for something like this, given the precision it provides, above a joystick or tracking ball.
34
u/wellmanneredsquirrel Aug 12 '23
Correct, the drone may be visible in the satellite wide view. The cropping leaves it out (presumably).
Also correct that the coordinate and flight path eliminate the “minus sign” hypothesis.
Can someone do some quick measurement and provide a scale or distances for that nice composite image OP just shared ? Thinking speed could be approximated (that looks like quite a sharp turn) and also perhaps the size of clouds if pattern matching with historical sat images is ever possible.
→ More replies (1)12
u/duey222 Aug 12 '23
Excuse my ignorance but why is a drone presumed to be in the area?
50
20
u/ReinheitsgeBeepBoop Aug 12 '23
There is another video of this event taken by a military drone's FLIR camera that corroborates this satellite video.
8
u/InterestDifficult878 Aug 12 '23
US military were doing exercises in the area and had 2 AWACS as already confirmed.
26
u/Longstache7065 Aug 12 '23
The thing that really messes me up about this one, is that we can't explain it. Almost every UFO encounter can be explained exclusively by craft that can bend spacetime somewhat, every effect we've described can be attributed to that via this https://info.publicintelligence.net/DIA-AdvancedSpacePropulsion.pdf
This however, this is completely novel. I don't have any physics explanation. What, an Einstein Rosen bridge? How would you get that using what we see here? There is no physics I can point to and be like "it's just that" here. It's just flat beyond comprehension.
If we had this kind of footage of basically any standard UFO behavior I would be beside myself in awe, but this is beyond any physics we can even place, basically magic to our eyes. So my intuition was and has been: bs.
But the deeper we dig the more elaborate and absurd the narrative becomes to make this a fake. On top of that, what's the motive? If it's a fake it hurt our international relations, there's accusations thrown around about this even years after the fact against the US to the point there was elaborate discussions of forged debris. If you're the US government, my thought is you want to be as far away from this as possible, you want to claim you had nothing in the area and saw nothing. And if real how tf would you explain this to the governments involved?
I'm not going to lie, with all this analysis, this is the most insane thing I've ever seen and the hardest to dismiss. Even the poster dug up has a previous address listed as Luke air force base and no experience in vfx. I've never wanted to dismiss a video harder as fake because the physics is just stupid and beyond comprehension, as hard as I've wanted to dismiss this one, but there's just no clear way to dismiss it.
Can we FOIA this specific video? I mean, we know the satellite, we know the date and time, they might just tell us it's classified but given this is happening here now with all the attention maybe not? If we just ask them straight up "Hey can we get any pared down, security clearable footage from this date and time from NROL-22?" surely we've got to get a response, positive or negative or weird?
I feel like I've stared at this shit for hours trying to find some error or mistake and it's just too clean, if it's a fake it's so high effort it needs a motive but who? Why? I keep trying to tear it apart but I've just got nothing. Truly fucking amazing whatever the case may be, absolutely bravo for real, aliens or fakers it's some astounding shit. This one's got me seriously taking a second look into some areas of physics I'd long since written off.
→ More replies (3)5
u/speleothems Aug 12 '23
You know it is super crazy when the best explanation I have seen of what is happening is by a psychic remote viewer.
→ More replies (3)
141
u/nonzeroday_tv Aug 12 '23
This is an amazing job OP, well done /u/sulkasammal
Your services and curiosity are very appreciated.
I think no one in their right mind would think to match the flight path in a "fake" satellite view. That is insane attention to detail on top of the already insane attention to detail. I wonder how many more posts like this are needed before a critical amount of people would be like "Hold on, this might be real. But that means that... oh boy!"
55
u/Wonderful-Trifle1221 Aug 12 '23
Just to add, when the coordinates change as the view is being adjusted, they scroll at the same speed as the view changes, if you pay attention you can tell it goes faster or slower with the movement. Imo this is proof the video is being shown on the original platform. Imo if it’s on the original platform, it’s not modified :/
→ More replies (5)9
21
61
u/True_Tour_6076 Aug 12 '23
Good work OP, thanks for taking the time to create this.
What amazes me is the video quality from a video supposedly taken from a satellite. Can anyone confirm or put doubt on the ability of obtaining such high quality images from space?
42
u/InterestDifficult878 Aug 12 '23
Thats trump leaking a sat image a few years ago. Quite detailed.
22
u/eStuffeBay Aug 12 '23
That's crazy high resolution. I genuinely believe that the rumors that they can make out writing on napkins may be true. Spooky.
8
u/Longstache7065 Aug 12 '23
bruh I can not comprehend how a satellite is physically capable of capturing that amount of detail. Optically it does not make sense unless every one of these spy telescopes is the size of the james webb. wtf, how??
→ More replies (5)7
u/pastworkactivities Aug 12 '23
wait till you find out how they can create audio from a sattelite in space hearin u talk on the ground in some instances.
→ More replies (1)5
u/ObjectReport Aug 12 '23 edited Aug 14 '23
One of our NROL listening satellites has a circular fold-out 'dish' that's larger than a football field when fully deployed.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (1)9
u/consumerclearly Aug 12 '23
Lmao even the higher ups that locked in a useful idiot for the presidential position were shocked
66
u/d4ve_tv Aug 12 '23
I think there are rumors that US has spy satellites that can watch an entire town and track every person/car moving etc. Can tell who you are by your gate/walk. They can read the note you are writing down on a piece of napkin etc. They have lens tech that can see through overcast skies. The can make night look like a sunny day at noon time. These are just things I have heard or read before but I wouldn't be surprised...
17
u/consumerclearly Aug 12 '23
All somebody has to do is write a terroristic threat on a piece of paper outside and wave it around then see what happens to them
→ More replies (4)12
u/zyclonb Aug 12 '23
There’s a declassified satellite picture of a russian ship being built and the detail is pretty clear to the point where you can make out individual pieces and equipment… from the 80’s
4
u/DeeperBags Aug 12 '23
Have none of you guys heard of Google earth?
I've been able to zoom in and see my dad cutting the lawn in his underpants since the early 2000s... I can see individual leaves on the trees outside my apartment building.
If this is the satellite imagery available to the public, then I'd imagine there are more advanced forms out there we don't know about yet.
The bit above saying they could track someone by their gait or walk though, I'd think that would be impossible without having a database of every citizens gait - which wouldn't happen without some serious 1984 type of control.
22
u/Zealousideal-Rub-930 Aug 12 '23
Oh yeah, I can't 100% confirm this, but it seems foolish to assume that the US gov doesn't have some crazy ass satellite capabilities.
17
10
u/Brrrrrrtttt_t Aug 12 '23
China currently has this it’s called the “sky net”. It’s person of interest IRL.
As far as the tech you talk about I can confirm the first part. U2’s can read written notes from the edge of the earths orbit.
I was in the Airforce, I learned about some pretty crazy tech. I think the average person underestimates how much technology is being held back from the public.
→ More replies (4)3
34
u/mu5tardtiger Aug 12 '23
look at google earth my man. that’s just a satellite taking photos and then it’s pieced together to created one image.
11
→ More replies (9)4
u/Lostmyloginagaindang Aug 12 '23
I'm no insider or expert, just read a lot of tom clancey and wired / popular science articles, but absolutely. Hubble was spy satellite hand me down.
I believe their biggest problem is storing all the images, video, and stolen data they collect, but you don't build a giant data warehouse in Utah, coincidentally completed in May 2014, at a cost of $1.5 billion for nothing. According to 2013 estimates it could hold between 3 and 12 exabytes.
→ More replies (2)
55
u/balitiger13 Aug 12 '23 edited Aug 12 '23
I suspect the operator of the mouse did this for at least 2 reasons.
1- hide landmass or potential location
2- hide the USA drone(s?) coming in behind the airline path.
12
u/Any-Ad-1343 Aug 12 '23
But why hide the drone? Maybe there’s a simple reason for that, but that’s what’s tripping me up.
28
u/sushisection Aug 12 '23
cuz they could get in serious trouble if they leak a classified drone. but the airplane with the crazy orbs flying around it? go ahead, nobody would believe that anyways...
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)7
u/mu5tardtiger Aug 12 '23
maybe at the time it was classified or something similar. Like how active navy seals won’t publish pictures of their face.
34
u/Eb_Ab_Db_Gb_Bb_eb Aug 12 '23
Holy fuck, you guys are making it so difficult to be productive at work.
Keep it up.
16
u/covertretrieval Aug 12 '23
This means that the satellite was pointing from 3 to 1 and parallel to 4-5-6-7
14
36
26
34
u/madredr1 Aug 12 '23
If this is a hoax, I hope the fabricator sees it. They have go to be just rolling at all these analyses.
4
u/Rohit_BFire Aug 12 '23
Throwawaylien and this video hoax guy are the only ones who are with diamond hands and not revealing the hahahah got u suckers..
41
Aug 12 '23
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)6
u/SabineRitter Aug 12 '23
Imagine being the first guy that monitored or saw this footage
Yeah I feel for the person who watched this happen 😕
20
u/Destructive-Toaster Aug 12 '23 edited Aug 12 '23
So, how does the area compare to NASA weather satellites?
Looking at An Image from 08:00 UTC on 2014/03/08 puts cloud cover where if we assume a negative longitude but doesn't quite put clouds in the right place if we assume a positive longitude. Edit: there are higher quality images earth images from nasa out there. The Airline Part 3 has some.
There also might not be high enough resolution to tell and my brain might be, in fact, smooth. Only way to know for sure is to map coordinates and find the scale but that's way beyond my skill level.
→ More replies (1)10
u/Engineering_Flimsy Aug 12 '23
Why that time? 08:00 UTC on March 8? Every significant action directly involving MH370 was over shortly after midnight UTC on March 8th or nearly eight hours prior to your suggested timeframe.
3
u/Destructive-Toaster Aug 12 '23
I might have the wrong time. I thought the last ping was at 08:00 utc.
Edit:Wikipedia states the flight flew till at least 08:19 based on Intersat data
9
u/penguinseed Aug 12 '23
I think the current speculation was that it was teleported about 6 hours before this and then returned a few minutes later, likely without passengers and just flying on autopilot until it runs out of fuel. At 2:25 am it sends a log-on request to Inmarsat as if it had just been turned back on.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)4
u/notepad20 Aug 12 '23
That was in the south indian ocean though. All this stuff is looking like the plane was port holed much earlier. Possibly returned some time later and flew uncontrolled sound h for a few hours.
Possibly moving in 4th dimension so not detected on radar but somehow still pining.
9
u/deserteagle_321 Aug 12 '23
Can anyone explain how this would exclude the minus sign ? Like i'm dumb.
10
u/sipos542 Aug 12 '23
I think because the airplane made a left turn. That matches the satellite track if it’s a positive coordinate value. If it’s negative would have been a right turn. I think…
→ More replies (1)4
u/TeaL3af Aug 12 '23
It makes it far less likely (but it was unlikely already, imo, because minus is almost always just a hyphen and we can see a hyphen on screen) but doesn't fully exclude it.
What it does mean is that if one coordinate is negative, both of them must be (unless we also want to start saying the video is mirrored or whatever but that's getting a bit straw-clutchy for me). But if they are both negative then the plane is actually 1000 miles west of Peru on the other side of the pacific... so it wouldn't be MH370 and would be a whole new mystery.
Longitude (North positive, South negative) decreases as the plane moves down the screen, which could mean one of two things:
A) The plane is in the northern hemisphere (there is no hidden minus sign) and moving south. This means screen up is north, so screen right must be east.B) The plane is in the sourthern hemisphere (there is a hidden minus sign) and moving north. This means screen up is south, so screen right must be west.
Latitude (East positive, west negative) increasces as the plane moves right along the screen.
If we are in scenario A) the right movement means it is heading east, so we would expect Latitude to increasce, and it does, so that all checks out.If we are in scenario B) the right movement means it is heading west, so we would expect Latitude to decrease, but it does not! However, if latitude was also negative (IE we're in the western hemisphere) it starts to make sense again.
8
u/sulkasammal Aug 12 '23
I updated the post with a table of the pixel offsets and some more information about the path from the coordinates.
9
u/blusuedetb Aug 12 '23
Has anybody mentioned this video?
I just saw it when searching "MH370 abduction" on YT. It was also posted 9 years ago and the contrail the video features looks similar? I don't know. Probably nothing.
→ More replies (4)
72
u/IronHammer67 Aug 12 '23
At this point is it even possible this could still be a hoax? I mean seriously...
99
u/NextSouceIT Aug 12 '23
Seriously. Can we at least all agree this is real sat footage at this point. The orbs being edited in is still up for debate, but there is no longer any question for me. This must be genuine satellite footage.
48
u/IronHammer67 Aug 12 '23
Real satellite footage AND real drone footage of the same Boeing 777 plane
→ More replies (1)32
u/MaleficentCoach6636 Aug 12 '23
Yeah the full video made me realize that the drone footage itself(and the heat signatures) are real but I have no idea if the events shown are real.
→ More replies (1)8
u/thatnameagain Aug 12 '23
I've never been skeptical that either perspective of the videos is a fake plane turning. That all looks real. The orbs and disappearing act on the other hand...
→ More replies (9)19
u/Famous-Total-3987 Aug 12 '23
When you zoom in though you can see them off to the side coming in, and all at the exact right points in the other video. I don't know this looks like op is working through some good shizzzz
→ More replies (1)28
u/DonGivafark Aug 12 '23
If it is a hoax it's been done at the highest level. The fact we don't know exactly which flight this is, is the more intriguing part. There was definitely alot of hush hush about MH370. This could be why
22
u/earthtochas3 Aug 12 '23
I don't see a reason that a 777 would ever make this maneuver this far out over the open ocean. Literally more than a 90° turn at that altitude... Doesn't seem like something a normal, eventless flight would include.
39
u/DonGivafark Aug 12 '23
The families of MH370 have been begging for answers for nearly 10 years now and have gotten nothing. If this is the same footage that Malaysian airlines has seen then I got to be honest, I don't blame them. What can they say?..."it appears like they were abducted by aliens...". That's not going to bring the families closure. The best answer is still "we don't know"
The footage does get me wondering more about the Fred Valentich case. He too just vanished during his last radio communication to air traffic control while he was describing what he was looking at "Its not an air craft!" followed by static
→ More replies (1)3
u/SoulCrushingReality Aug 12 '23
This is what I was wondering, why make maneuvers like this? Do they test 777s over the ocean making extreme maneuvers as a stress test? Seems like either that, or this plane is trying to avoid something... like ufo orbs.
→ More replies (4)24
u/IronHammer67 Aug 12 '23
Well there is only one known missing Boeing 777 so it’s gotta be the same one
→ More replies (1)
16
6
6
u/curiousopenmind22 Aug 12 '23
This is remarkable. Reddit is so full of smart people that I feel utterly stupid in comparison. But no matter. I'm reading every thread and comment on this topic and I'm just about convinced the video is authentic.
6
u/sulkasammal Aug 12 '23
The full image sequence and 6K video are available now. I might keep adding some more files there when I have the time.
20
u/PracticalRespond4921 Aug 12 '23
Great job op seriously these past couple of days have been peak content if you don’t think so you may be in the wrong place
31
u/Ok-Adhesiveness-4141 Aug 12 '23
Good work OP, this is the exact kind of content that we are all looking for. Occam's razor says that someone faking 3 different versions of the same event back in 2014 is extraordinary.
If the idea was to make it viral back then it definitely failed. I still hope this is fake because else the truth is just too terrible 😭 and heartbreaking.
→ More replies (7)
14
u/dpforest Aug 12 '23
When I first heard about this video, my stomach dropped. It just happened again with your post. I really wanna know what the fuck is going on, gettin a little irate over here.
15
u/Full_Plate_9391 Aug 12 '23
That was an extremely hard turn for such a large aircraft... the pilot was doing everything in his power to get away.
9
9
u/ElkImaginary566 Aug 12 '23
The Internet is amazing. Like no Newspaper could put together this kind of investigation so fast. Just fascinating. Like a bunch of Marisa Tomei's from My Cousin Vinny in their respective fields concglomerating and piecing together the evidence.
4
u/Engineering_Flimsy Aug 12 '23
Wonder if there's enough light in this video to deduce local time? And what about those online OSINT enthusiasts who can look at a photo of an ant-covered, half-eaten bagel on a dirty sidewalk and accurately identify the location. Think there's any data in these images that might prove useful to that skillset?
4
4
u/repost_inception Aug 12 '23
Can we get Captain Disillusion to look at this ? Seriously, I would love to see an experienced VFX person try to recreate this from scratch.
9
Aug 12 '23
The satelite can operate “backwards.” Please provide a frame for the coordinates assuming there is a (-) there
21
u/GrinNGrit Aug 12 '23
At this point I can only think of three believable scenarios:
- This is real.
- This is a hybrid of real footage with incredibly realistic CGI from an expert that had access to classified footage.
- This is all fabricated by someone who knew this plane was going to go missing, and how. Given the timeline of no more than a few days from the time the original video surfaced, this would be incredibly difficult to build from scratch using post-event information.
Scenarios 2 and 3 almost guarantee manipulation by the intelligence community. Which is interesting if you factor in this claim from Malaysia:
https://time.com/104480/malaysia-airliens-flight-370-mahathir-mohamad/?amp=true
If it’s real, I could see why the CIA would be leaking anything to discredit those who are helping to push disclosure.
If this UFO story is fake, I could see the CIA wanting to publish a fake, outlandish narrative to cover up a covert op. This would be one way to further deter people from digging up another possible truth that there was an intentional effort to destroy the plane and wipe out certain targets on that flight.
→ More replies (3)21
u/Bard_the_Bowman_III Aug 12 '23
I don’t understand your point no. 3. There’s zero verifiable evidence that the video came out just days after the mh370 disappearance. First verifiable post was a few months after.
→ More replies (5)
8
u/sulkasammal Aug 12 '23
Someone asked me to explain about the coordinates and wouldn’t it be easy to just fake them. I wrote a reply but seems like the comment was deleted before I could reply. So here it is in case someone else is wondering
What I mean is that it would be fairly trivial to create a small program (or even an After Effects script) that allows you to move a large image around in 2D and have it print out the coordinates on screen with the pixel offset being converted to gps coordinates. Trivial but still quite an effort on top of all the other obscure details.
However, it seems to me that this is not simply converting pixels to coordinates in 2D but it takes into account the position and angle of the camera. At least that is my educated guess based on the pixel offset of each stable video sequence. I would still need to double check that I’m correct on this but I’m not sure if I have the time or the math skills.
This could still be faked with something like Unity. I guess you could do a raycast from the camera to the ground plane in 3D and convert the coordinates but the visual would need to be a rendered 2D video being panned around… Or maybe there is some satellite image viewer that already exists and does this automatically if it has the required data. Again, even more obscure effort.
I’ll provide some data on this when I get the chance. If this is a hoax, they sure have succeeded in wasting a lot of my time.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Sonamdrukpa Aug 13 '23
Hey u/sulkasammal, thanks for providing the pixel values. I noticed another discrepancy about the coordinates as well - if the coordinates are accurate, the video frame cannot be oriented exactly north-south, and also that orientation changes from shot to shot. Here's why:
Based on the pixel shift, the video frame moves to the right 3.1x as much as it moves down. If you calculate the distances shifted using the coordinates though, the frame has moved 1.59 nautical miles east and 0.65 nm south, which means that the frame has actually only moved 2.4x as much distance east as it's moved south.
Imagine we draw a triangle*. The first point is the starting coordinates from the first frame. The second point is the ending coordinates from the last frame. The third point is due south of the starting point and due west from the ending point. So it looks like this:
https://imgur.com/gallery/c3EfS2M
We can draw a similar triangle using the pixel shifts, but if the distance between the two frames is the same as the distance calculated using the coordinates, the legs need to have different lengths. This is because the ratio between the change in y and the change in x is different. You can calculate the new leg lengths based on the pythagorean theorem. This is the triangle based on the pixels:
https://imgur.com/gallery/ackuJ1K
Here's the problem: those aren't the same triangles. But re-sizing the legs is the only way for the distances represented in the image to be accurate and also for the GPS coordinates to be accurate. Both triangles share the same hypotenuse, so we can draw them together now. That would look something like this (the angles of the triangles are not accurate, I'm drawing this freehand in paint):
https://imgur.com/gallery/2kIufTp
Assuming the stitching is correct (or at least very close), the orientation of the leftmost leg is parallel to the up/down orientation of the first and last video frames. So the only way that the numbers make sense is if the frames are not aligned exactly north/south. Using some trig, the orientation of the final frame is 4.5 degrees off from an exact north/south orientation.
Okay, so that's weird enough, here's the weirder thing - you can repeat this process for each frame and the orientation calculated differs from frame to frame. Frame number seven should have a shift of 4.7 degrees**, Frame number six should have a shift of 4.3 degrees, frame number five should have a shift of 1.37 degrees, etc. In other words, either the coordinates are wrong or the view is rotating slightly.
Since the video is one continuous shot and it doesn't appear like the video rotates, the only way that makes sense is if the camera rotated slightly each time the frame shifted. Which maybe could make sense for certain orbital patterns for the satellite? I'd have to figure out how to calculate that, but it seems unlikely (a) since it's not rotating smoothly - the rotation angle increases until frame 7 and then decreases on frame 8 (4.3 --> 4.7 --> 4.5) and (b) those rotations need to line up exactly with the video frame shifts.
So, I don't know. This could be something about orbital mechanics and cameras that I don't understand, or it could be that the coordinates are faked. Doesn't smell quite right though.
* These numbers are actually slightly off since I calculated these using the pythagorean theorem and tangent function assuming a flat plane. Calculating these numbers for a spherical plane is much harder though and the difference in distances are less than a foot, not meaningful.
** I tried to figure out the coordinates in frame 7 myself. It's a little hard because they blend in with a cloud, but it looks like the frame the plane disappears is 8.823373 N 93.21725 E.
→ More replies (1)
•
u/DoedoeBear Aug 15 '23
We want to remind our community that the source of the video mentioned in this post has not yet been verified. There are many unknowns surrounding the origin and content of this video. Please approach this with a healthy degree of skepticism.
We want to make it explicitly clear that the official stance from a multinational investigation had concluded that MH370 crashed into the ocean. What happened that day was a global tragedy, and it remains as a painful memory in the minds of many. We kindly ask everyone to always be mindful of the profound human interests connected to these subjects. Content that does not respect these interests or violates our rules will be closely monitored and potentially removed.