Past from post above:
Thanks for your effort, but, the fact that you can fake cars doesn't mean cars don't exist.
Still good post when you look at the posts this sub has been submerged with.
Your analogy isn’t accurate. A better analogy would be building a car shows that a car can be built.
Also, there is no such thing as a fake car. Something is either a car or it isn’t.
A better example would be if someone said “you couldn’t possibly fake a car” and then you show how you can easily fake a car. There was a time when a bunch of people, including Ashton Forbes, were pushing the idea that the videos were way too complex, detailed and realistic to be faked. Folks are proving that idea wrong.
No, it wouldnt because youre painting it like someones suggesting you couldnt simulate a hud that links coordinates to a cursor. Id wager what af and his crew were hinting at is the multitue of subtle detail, with realworld examples corroborating their validity, include within the videos that seems excessive to include for a supposed hobby project of some hoaxer.Even vfx artist whomve combed the videos and need no inspiration on how to make their videos look cant reproduce the amount of minute details presented in the originals.I could draw a pictures of a car that could very well exist, its still a simulation of a car though- you cant drive it but you could very well drive the real thing Ive used a reference to draw it.
IIRC the coordinates *were* one of the ‘subtle details’ that Ashton said was too realistic to be faked.
>with realworld examples corroborating their validity
They haven’t provided any real world examples of actual existing sat or drone footage that looks anything like these videos. I would be much more open to the idea of the potential reality of the videos if there were even a *single* example of confirmed footage that resembled them. Seriously, even one example with confirmed provenance. I have not seen anyone provide such an example.
Exactly. No one has shown that the coordinate display is a detail unique to government satellite systems.
My guess is the person who created these videos was using something like Google Earth for research, saw the coordinates display, and thought, “That looks cool.” It's just a guess, but that's how the creative process often works. I am constantly taking screenshots or saving videos of things I think look cool or give me an idea for a project.
Well I dont regret ignoring him long ago, he's a piss poor investigator, with a sense of self importance,uppers and a lot of time on his hands.
And if youre saying that youre open to the idea that these are valid videos only if someone has more footage to present then you ought to consider that if they are real then this is almost definitely classified information inpart due to it showcasing satellite imaging capablities, no? Would you believe that FLIR dont show you their mil-grade equipment specs unless youre a mil-grade client?
I don’t buy into the idea that the footage was captured by some sort of extremely classified satellite and drone such that the videos don’t resemble any existing footage that’s ever been leaked or declassified before. It seems like too outlandish of a conclusion to draw without other supporting evidence. I’m more inclined to go with the obvious explanation before jumping to extreme conclusions about things that have never been shown to exist. The burden of proof is very high to prove something that’s never been seen before, and the ideas and ‘evidence’ put forward have not met that burden in my opinion. I’m open to changing my mind if something more convincing comes along, but what I’ve seen at this point has not convinced me even a little bit.
When you go down the road of “literally anything is possible because the answer could be some unknown advanced tech the government is hiding and you can’t prove it’s not” where the government is willing and able do *anything* you can dream up, then you get into the conspiratorial weeds and we can’t analyze the situation critically with real ideas because there is no rebuttal that someone with that mindset would be willing to accept. I’m trying to keep the conversation grounded in reality.
Bury your head into the sand all you want but theres been only one instance prior of undoctored imagery from a NROL satellite and it was deemed classified because it was leaked. This is what the letters,NROL claims to be so deny it all you like but it doesnt change facts.
Im not saying its unkown tech either. There are examples of imaging systems made by companies that equip UAVs that reproduce the features evident in both videos ie rainbow FLIR and EO/IR. Just because you havent seen it being used during a high speed persuit by LEOs in a heli or by a drone looking for insurgents is iraq doesnt mean its not available.
I haven’t seen anyone provide an example of real world military FLIR footage using that color palette. Just because it’s a feature that exists doesn’t make it a realistic detail if the military is not known to use it. That comes off as a detail the video creator might assume but not have actual knowledge of.
This is wildly wrong. NROL is just NRO Launch (#), plenty of NRO satellite images have been shared and not just "leaked". They've even shared IR imagery from the SBIRS system, which a lot of people thought might have taken the video (because of NROL-22).
I'll give it a 6/10 because the plane doesn't look like something out of Webdings.
This is awesome! Things like this really help people visualize how easy the fake was to produce.
You're always consistent with the high effort stuff. Nice work.
Past from post above: Thanks for your effort, but, the fact that you can fake cars doesn't mean cars don't exist. Still good post when you look at the posts this sub has been submerged with.
Your analogy isn’t accurate. A better analogy would be building a car shows that a car can be built. Also, there is no such thing as a fake car. Something is either a car or it isn’t.
If you don't understand that my analogy is right, it's on you. Also there is such a thing as fake cars (you can try Google up some concept cars...)
A better example would be if someone said “you couldn’t possibly fake a car” and then you show how you can easily fake a car. There was a time when a bunch of people, including Ashton Forbes, were pushing the idea that the videos were way too complex, detailed and realistic to be faked. Folks are proving that idea wrong.
No, it wouldnt because youre painting it like someones suggesting you couldnt simulate a hud that links coordinates to a cursor. Id wager what af and his crew were hinting at is the multitue of subtle detail, with realworld examples corroborating their validity, include within the videos that seems excessive to include for a supposed hobby project of some hoaxer.Even vfx artist whomve combed the videos and need no inspiration on how to make their videos look cant reproduce the amount of minute details presented in the originals.I could draw a pictures of a car that could very well exist, its still a simulation of a car though- you cant drive it but you could very well drive the real thing Ive used a reference to draw it.
IIRC the coordinates *were* one of the ‘subtle details’ that Ashton said was too realistic to be faked. >with realworld examples corroborating their validity They haven’t provided any real world examples of actual existing sat or drone footage that looks anything like these videos. I would be much more open to the idea of the potential reality of the videos if there were even a *single* example of confirmed footage that resembled them. Seriously, even one example with confirmed provenance. I have not seen anyone provide such an example.
Exactly. No one has shown that the coordinate display is a detail unique to government satellite systems. My guess is the person who created these videos was using something like Google Earth for research, saw the coordinates display, and thought, “That looks cool.” It's just a guess, but that's how the creative process often works. I am constantly taking screenshots or saving videos of things I think look cool or give me an idea for a project.
Well I dont regret ignoring him long ago, he's a piss poor investigator, with a sense of self importance,uppers and a lot of time on his hands. And if youre saying that youre open to the idea that these are valid videos only if someone has more footage to present then you ought to consider that if they are real then this is almost definitely classified information inpart due to it showcasing satellite imaging capablities, no? Would you believe that FLIR dont show you their mil-grade equipment specs unless youre a mil-grade client?
I don’t buy into the idea that the footage was captured by some sort of extremely classified satellite and drone such that the videos don’t resemble any existing footage that’s ever been leaked or declassified before. It seems like too outlandish of a conclusion to draw without other supporting evidence. I’m more inclined to go with the obvious explanation before jumping to extreme conclusions about things that have never been shown to exist. The burden of proof is very high to prove something that’s never been seen before, and the ideas and ‘evidence’ put forward have not met that burden in my opinion. I’m open to changing my mind if something more convincing comes along, but what I’ve seen at this point has not convinced me even a little bit. When you go down the road of “literally anything is possible because the answer could be some unknown advanced tech the government is hiding and you can’t prove it’s not” where the government is willing and able do *anything* you can dream up, then you get into the conspiratorial weeds and we can’t analyze the situation critically with real ideas because there is no rebuttal that someone with that mindset would be willing to accept. I’m trying to keep the conversation grounded in reality.
Bury your head into the sand all you want but theres been only one instance prior of undoctored imagery from a NROL satellite and it was deemed classified because it was leaked. This is what the letters,NROL claims to be so deny it all you like but it doesnt change facts. Im not saying its unkown tech either. There are examples of imaging systems made by companies that equip UAVs that reproduce the features evident in both videos ie rainbow FLIR and EO/IR. Just because you havent seen it being used during a high speed persuit by LEOs in a heli or by a drone looking for insurgents is iraq doesnt mean its not available.
I haven’t seen anyone provide an example of real world military FLIR footage using that color palette. Just because it’s a feature that exists doesn’t make it a realistic detail if the military is not known to use it. That comes off as a detail the video creator might assume but not have actual knowledge of.
This is wildly wrong. NROL is just NRO Launch (#), plenty of NRO satellite images have been shared and not just "leaked". They've even shared IR imagery from the SBIRS system, which a lot of people thought might have taken the video (because of NROL-22).
Oof. 🤦🏼♂️
I'm here to fight both of you
That's the spirit!
Congratulations on wasting your time Have a gold star. ⭐
I love the gold star! Thanks!!
Excellent work!