We can argue about the physics, I have $5k in BTC for anyone who wants to try recreate the videos given a 2 month timeframe without using the original footage as a reference and the entire process has to be live streamed.
Discussion
Hello Kim dot com junior...! 😝
lol
From experience I can't see how it would be done, not in that time-frame and all the little details like variable frame-rates for different assets.
The debunker who spread the idea that it was from the cloud stock photos and claimed to have been the creator got exposed by the textures account.
#AshtonForbes’ argument to prove that the cloud image wasn’t from a texture website is to point us to wayback machine showing that this photo wasn’t saved on there. However, he’s pointing us to the new URL to which the site was migrated to after the #MH370 incident. It takes little research to figure out the discrepancy, how can Ashton Forbes get it so wrong when he works full time on the matter? He’s just being disingenuous IMO.
The whole clouds thing IS the red herring. But, what's this?
The timeline of the videos release alone is all the evidence you could need.
Intel agencies would have the capability to fabricate this type of evidence. Either by backdating the content or through psyop planification (planting evidences way in advance). I suspect the same process was used to build the narrative that Peter Todd is Satoshi when referring to an old reply of Todd to Satoshi on Bitcointalk.org
We have the proof via the website API that the images didn't exist prior to October 2014 and the people who were claiming they made the videos got exposed, and the answer to that is it was intel agencies faking things... on a hunch? Is that why Sierra Nevada Corp deleted information relating to Gorgon stare off their website as soon as the connection was made?
Not sure why this such a big cope for people. Everything about the footage is entirely consistent with the GS system, and all the evidence points to the fact it's authentic.
I think there is some confusion about what the API indicates. It seems like a website wide update was made on this date (maybe related to the URL migration). If you check for cgtextures.com (former url) on wayback machine, you’ll see that most of the galleries redirect to banned.php which doesn’t allow to see the picture that were available at the time. As I said previously, Ashton always refers to the new website that was online around 2016 which can only be a disingenuous point considering how deep he is in this rabbit hole.
What are you referring to when say: « the people claiming they made the videos got exposed »?
For Sierre Nevada Corp deleting some Gordon Stare data, that doesn’t indicate anything regarding the clouds picture/orbs video. Probably, they tried to hide something but who knows what.
#MH370
I posted a picture in another reply of how the guy claiming to have used the cloud textures to make the footage was caught with his pants down when the textures.com account shared their DMs showing that the guy had been lying and trolling all along.
There is no confusion. The API clearly shows the two images in question were added months after the footage was already online, and years after the other images in that library existed. The API has nothing to do with the domain migration. If it was, then ALL of the images on that gallery would have the same date, but those two specific images do not. They were added after the fact.
Similarly with the explosion, there is just ONE matched frame if you apply a bunch of effects to the so called original explosion animation. Anyone who suggests is a perfect match is lying to you because it isn't. Try it for yourself.
SNC deleting references of Gorgon Stare is pretty damning evidence. Why remove it and close your phone lines just as the system gets associated with the videos? The videos are a precise match to the GS system. Dual cameras for a stereoscopic image, two different imaging types (normal and thermal), remotely accessed via a session, the GS system is shared by the navy and air force so the leaker would have had access. All the obvious evidence is there.
If you consider that Ashton is a psyop, it’s not inconceivable that some « damning evidence » have been planted to support the psyop. I have seen enough of them to realize how sophisticated they can be.
Regarding the explosion, I know that Ashton says it’s not a match but honestly I don’t see how this match can be due to chance. That’s one of this case where your belief on the case will alter your perception one way or the other but I think that if your were to ask random people whether or not the two images match (outside of the context of the #MH370), most of them will they it does.
Also, when I hear the guy who took the picture versus #AshtonForbes, there is no doubt in my mind who’s the one pushing a narrative. Maybe the photographer is a fed and great actor but highly doubt it whereas Ashton displays a lot patterns of someone gaslighting his audience. He’s been pretty successful at it that’s for sure but he won’t fool everybody.
Well, seeing as some of the people trying to debunk the footage have been exposed as frauds who are lying... what are the odds that there are honest people trying to do a debunk? So far, the only liars have been on one side of this story.
It's not just Ashton saying it's not a match. The match is achieved on ONE frame of the animation AFTER applying multiple effects.
Anyone suggesting the footage is a match has been duped. The alleged explosion animation has been used in films and video games, but it's never been altered. I would agree if the animation was a complete match for the duration. But it's not even close, it's a single frame and it needs to be manipulated for an approximate match on the single frame. So why doesn't the rest of the animation match? Come on, be honest and explain that.
As I said previously, I’m not as interested in the arguments related to video editing because I don’t have the expertise and time to assess the claims being made but when I go back to this clouds picture, I still don’t see a debunking of it besides calling the photographer and KimDotCom feds. And again, because I have good reasons to believe that Ashton is disingenuous on this point (has he ever tried to debunk that the picture wasn’t available on cgtextures.com?), that’s enough for me to draw the conclusion that Ashton is the actor of a psyop. Ashton doesn’t act as a researcher since he avoid/ignore some piece of evidences contradicting his narrative. I smell propaganda and not truth seeking when I look at his positions. Obviously, we won’t agree here.
Yeah, that's clear.
The cloud images don't exist anywhere online prior to October 2014. Not sure what other evidence could be required.
I do have expertise in video editing and compositing, and I'm telling you that regardless of the clouds and explosion, the timeline of the video makes it impossible to have been faked, and I'm willing to put money against that claim for anyone who wants to make the video from scratch.
Your only saving grace is the clouds, while you ignoring the mountain of evidence opposing that claim.
The API screenshot doesn’t prove that the picture was online before 2014. That’s the interpretation made of a data with no digital chain of custody.
That said, I understand that all of these can be convincing elements if you haven’t seen the interview of the photographer.
I know you said that you can’t watch the video of KimDotCom interviewing the guy who took the clouds picture back in 2009 but I still haven’t seen a debunking of this conversation. Ashton never debunked it and just stick to his argument about the new website not showing that the picture was uploaded prior to when the videos were online.
For me this is the main evidence that proves me that the video was faked so until it is debunked, I’ll have little reason to believe that the video is legit. Then, there are also some analysis of the video which are interesting and to which I don’t think Ashton has responded convincingly.
I'm not sure you're working with the latest information.
https://x.com/JustXAshton/status/1930076427929423912
Either way, the clouds are a red herring since the videos couldn't possibly be made in that timeframe. That's all you need.
And this is the best evidence they can produce...
Just look at some of the recreations people have attempted. It's hilarious.
You're getting played by disinfo agents like kimdotcom trying to do damage control because this crushes their bullshit disclosure narrative they have been working so hard on.
Again, I really don’t understand how this proves that the photographer didn’t take the photo back in 2009 and that the photo was!’t available on cgtextures.com. A form of manipulation is to overload your audience with peripheral information rather than addressing the pieces of information that contradict your argument, that’s exactly what Ashton does and why I stopped following his updates.
The story has evolved, your referencing old information that has been conclusively discredited.
So has Ashton (or anyone else) ever proved that the cloud picture wasn’t available on cgtextures.com ? That’s the only evidence that could change my mind.
Yes, I shared the API data. You don't seem to want to accept that.
That doesn’t prove much. There is no digital chain of custody that allows for a solid interpretation. Someone has noted that this date was associated with a wide site update but that doesn’t seem to catch Ashton’s attention because he’s not trying to get to the bottom of it but rather to push a particular narrative.
It is awfully convenient that those two specific photos in question have dates that don't match up. Just a coincidence, I'm sure. Not to mention the somewhat sketchy owner of the texture website.
To believe these are fake one would have to believe a hoaxer made the most epic fake videos in the most insane time frame, predicted the plane would never be found, understood the physics of the plane and orbs perfectly in order to recreate them, went to the effort of creating multiple framerate assets, which would then have to be added to the scene, rendered, added again at a different frame rate, then rendered again, they made no mistakes and to top it off they never came forward for a sizeable bounty.
I really would like to hear your opinion on the photographer/Kim Dotcom interview. I’m sure it would change your perspective a bit. Too bad your government don’t let you see it. You may wonder why this video is only available on an uncensorable platform that is censored by governments.
Okay, I pulled down the video and watched it.
Of course this argument has to have a strong amount of plausibility, which it does. The problem is the people involved in this and all the debunks. Kimdotgov has no credibility, and him being involved at all is suspicious.
There is evidence the photos could have been tampered with, but that still doesn't change much because the opposing evidence is far stronger.
https://x.com/vasileikon/status/1843872486401946104
It would be way harder to fake details like the below than it would be to plant or manipulate images after the fact.
So you think that the photographer lied about him taking this picture?
I think that the evidence for the videos being authentic is substantially stronger than the opposing evidence. The photographer said he would sign an affidavit and then he never did, so yeah, he probably lied.
What’s for sure is that either the photographer is lying or #AshtonForbes is and I think most people would agree that Ashton is most likely the one lying based on body language and rhetoric.
I saw that the photographer made his X account private. He probably didn’t measure the kind of harassment he would be the target of by getting involved in this story and probably got scared when he realized the shockwaves his testimony created.
In the meantime, Ashton commented on the interview by misrepresenting the photographer’s statements. For instance, he said that the photographer agreed to 10K in exchange of an affidavit. If you watch the interview you’ll see that this is inaccurate. The photographer wasn’t looking to get paid and his commitment to sign an affidavit wasn’t agreed in exchange of a payment.
That’s just one of the many examples where Ashton is caught bending the facts to fit his narrative. He’s not a researcher but a propagandist.
You're seemingly clutching at straws. I'm not a fan of Ashtons personality, he has ego issues and his framing wasn't great, but he absolutely said he would sign an affidavit and provide a bunch of evidence and kim was going to pay him in crypto, whether or not this was incentive, the point is he never signed anything and then conveniently stepped out of the picture.
It's would be exponentially easier to lie about and forge two photos than it would be to fabricate the videos. The only person who tried to claim he made them was caught lying about it.
Consensus fallacies are just cope at this point. Most people believe it's possible to have made those videos, when it isn't, and the little details that wouldn't be known to the public only make a stronger case for authenticity.
Of course forging the photo metadata would be easier than forging the two videos but that’s irrelevant because either can be done by a state actor.
I’m not aware at the guy who claimed having forged the videos but he could be part of the psyop (reverse psychology) or he could just be seeking attention.
Again, either Ashton or the photographer is lying. This can’t be contested and to me it’s pretty clear which one is the liar. After anyone can make his own determination. It’s not clutching at straws. Psyop can be hard to figure out due to the mountain of noise but if you have a good sense of who is lying, you’ll have a good odd be right on which side of the story is correct.
#MH370
The debunkers are so obsessed that they have repeatedly lied about all sorts of things. Congratulations, their psyop worked on you.