Salvatore Pais confirms science in MH370 videos are real during live stream

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Your explanation as to why the pilot acted like you suggest is certainly plausible and deserves consideration. But without supportive evidence, which if you're correct is pretty much impossible, then it can only be a possible reasonable explanation.
Perhaps we'll never know for definite what, if any, his motivations were.

I agree that some government(s) know more than what is being released to the public at present. Hopefully that will some day be revealed, probably when technology advances and/or military and political alliances shift.

As for the US being responsible; you should know by now that all the world's ills and problems are due to the US and/or UK and without them the world would be a place of utopian peace and harmony.

originally posted by: Lazy88
And has what to do with the contrails that unrealistically show up and jump around?

😂😂😂😂😂😂

b0kal0ka isn't going to address the poorly rendered contrails jumping around, because he can't. The jumping contrails alone debunk that "thermal image" video as fake/CGI, because real contrails don't do that.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

I did answer it but you guys choose to look past it. First off, it's not contrails. It's smoke coming from the cargo of the plane due to the 500 pounds of lithium ion batteries that were illegally stored right before departure.

the reason it looks like its jumping is because the drone that's filming it is facing some turbulence.

please explain to me how and why the hoaxer managed to create all this 10 years ago about a plane that just so happened to never be found.

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

...

As for the US being responsible; you should know by now that all the world's ills and problems are due to the US and/or UK and without them the world would be a place of utopian peace and harmony.

LOL! Yep...according to many! LOL !

originally posted by: b0kal0ka
a reply to: Arbitrageur

I did answer it but you guys choose to look past it. First off, it's not contrails. It's smoke coming from the cargo of the plane due to the 500 pounds of lithium ion batteries that were illegally stored right before departure.

Blatant falsehood. It wasn’t ignored.

From this post..

originally posted by: Lazy88

Your video…



Vs real aircraft…

Thermal Images

tyronefoto.com...

What was that you posted about fire?

originally posted by: b0kal0ka
a reply to: Lazy88


- I've already stated the vapor from the plane is actually smoke coming from the 500 pounds of lithium batteries.

That doesn’t show up on the thermal imaging?

And has what to do with the contrails that unrealistically show up and jump around?



😂😂😂😂😂😂

originally posted by: b0kal0ka
a reply to: Arbitrageur


the reason it looks like its jumping is because the drone that's filming it is facing some turbulence.

😂😂😂😂

This gif




From this video.



Where the sample video no the right shows turbulence doesn’t make the jet and contrails jump out of sync independently of each other.

Where if it was turbulence the jet and contrails would jump together.

Where my gift is a screenshot video of where the aircraft was stabilised, showing the contrails are jumping out of sync with and independently of the jet.

The video is debunked and a prove hoax.

originally posted by: b0kal0ka
a reply to: Arbitrageur

I did answer it but you guys choose to look past it. First off, it's not contrails. It's smoke coming from the cargo of the plane due to the 500 pounds of lithium ion batteries that were illegally stored right before departure.

How is something obviously rendered to be contrails from engines smoke coming from a pressurised and / or enclosed fuselage with no evidence of a fuselage fire on the thermal video?

originally posted by: b0kal0ka
a reply to: Arbitrageur

I did answer it but you guys choose to look past it. First off, it's not contrails. It's smoke coming from the cargo of the plane due to the 500 pounds of lithium ion batteries that were illegally stored right before departure.

the reason it looks like its jumping is because the drone that's filming it is facing some turbulence.

If turbulence was causing the drone that's filming it to jump around, then the image of the plane and the image of the contrails or "smoke" as you claim, would move together, but the plane is not jumping around like the contrails/smoke jump around, so no, you still haven't addressed it in a plausible manner, and you never can explain it away as not fake because the only way this happens is if the video is fake.

please explain to me how and why the hoaxer managed to create all this 10 years ago about a plane that just so happened to never be found.

It seems apparent to me that one of the pilots, probably captain Shah, intentionally ditched the plane is one of the most remote and difficult to access oceans in the world, where the water is deep, the seas are often rough, and even if they were tracking the plane as it flew real time, it could have been very difficult to locate the wreckage.

But, they couldn't track the plane real time, probably because the captain turned off the transponder, and even when Inmarsat found a probable course the plane took, and presented that to Malaysia, Malaysia ignored the data initially while they tried to verify the analysis, and continued to search in the completely wrong ocean. It took way too long for Malaysia to verify Inmarsat's analysis and finally get some searching started in more or less the correct area, but it was still a huge region to search and they would have to be very lucky to have detected the black box audio pings before the battery ran out of juice.

As wide as the search area was, it may not have been wide enough, according to someone who published a paper with the possible coordinates of the wreckage, outside the search zone.

MH370 WSPR Technical Report

The alignment of the predicted position of MH370 with the great circle path of one or more anomalous WSPR links occurred at 125 different times during the flight, involving a total of 186 anomalous WSPR links out of a database of 76,097 WSPR links during the MH370 flying time. In 45 cases multiple WSPR links intersected at the predicted position of MH370. The crash location identified is 33.2°S 95.3°E.

I don't know if MH370 is near those coordinates or not, but unless they have better leads on where to look for the plane, maybe they should look there, and they haven't done so yet. So if you don't look for the plane where it actually crashed, you're not going to find the wreckage at the bottom of the ocean. Wreckage has washed up in Madagascar etc though.

The MH370 floating debris has been confirmed in 8 cases by part numbers, in 6 cases by stencil marks, in 4 cases by Malaysian Airlines System materials, laminates or livery and in 5 cases with conformity to Boeing 777-200ER drawings and specifications.

So they have found bits of the plane even if they haven't found what's left of the rest of it.

Because the transponder was off, and because of where the pilot decided to ditch the plane, it was always going to be difficult to find in such a remote area, regardless of whether someone made some fake videos or not.

Anyway you seem to be in denial about the parts of the plane already found, and you seem to be completely irrational and delusional if you think turbulence from the filming drone is going to make the plane and the smoke coming from it move independently from each other, as would happen in a bad CGI fake. Reality doesn't work that way, crappy fake rendering does.

There may actually be a conspiracy here, but it's not those crappy fake videos. I suspect the real conspiracy is that Malaysian authorities believe that Captain Shah ditched the plane, and the reason they continued to search the wrong ocean for so long after getting the correct search area information, is because they didn't want the plane to be found. Mayalsia is better off if everybody thinks it's a big mystery, where they can list possible fire or something other than pilot murder/suicide as a possible cause. But if the plane is found and reveals evidence of the captain's murder/suicide, then Malaysia would look bad and that's why I think they don't want the plane to be found.

WSPR technology provides credible new evidence to help determine the crash location of MH370 and we therefore recommend a further search be authorised. The offer by Ocean Infinity to recommence an underwater search in 2023 should be accepted.

Ocean Infinity offered to resume the search, and even though there are some possible locations where the plane might be found, one of which I just posted the coordinates for, the search has not resumed. While I can't prove my hypothesis that Malaysia doesn't want the plane to be found, I think a lot of evidence suggests that they don't want the plane to be found, and there is zero doubt they continued to search in the wrong ocean for a significant amount of time, after getting inmarsat's data informing them they were searching in the wrong ocean. This is the behavior of a country that doesn't want the plane to be found.

Because of where the plane was ditched, with no transponder sending the actual coordinates, it was always going to be hard to find, and that would be true whether someone made some fake videos or not.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Malaysian authorities definitely didn't want the plane found not so much because they had any complicity in the crash, but simply because they absolutely didn't want the FDR recovered and maybe even the CVR. This would have clearly proven what they likely already knew, that the crew deliberately piloted the aircraft out over the Indian Ocean where it would certainly ditch and likely never be found.

Malaysian officials obstructed this investigation every step of the way from the very start. I am of the firm belief they are still withholding critical information as to what happened. Their culture is such that they simply cannot accept blame for this incident. The country would dissolve MAS before they allow that to happen. They will do anything imaginable to avoid blame in this tragic incident. I've seen thousands of examples of similar denials from taking responsibility with my own eyes first hand.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

appreciate your post. you provide a much better argument than Lazy88 is doing so thank you for that.

If turbulence was causing the drone that's filming it to jump around, then the image of the plane and the image of the contrails or "smoke" as you claim, would move together, but the plane is not jumping around like the contrails/smoke jump around

the reason you're not seeing the plane jump around is because the footage was stabilized on the plane itself so that will always appear smooth. you can can see the jitter of the outer frame of that clip because it's stabilizing on the plane itself.

It seems apparent to me that one of the pilots, probably captain Shah, intentionally ditched the plane is one of the most remote and difficult to access oceans in the world, where the water is deep, the seas are often rough, and even if they were tracking the plane as it flew real time, it could have been very difficult to locate the wreckage.

I'm curious why you believe that. I've yet to find anything that would indicate Shah did anything but if you have any sources, I'm willing to consider it.
Not sure if you've heard of the US military base, Diego Garcia, but it's right there in the Indian Ocean. And if you think the US military would not have any surveillance in that area, you're fooling yourself. As I mentioned before, the Cope Tiger military exercise was taking place in that region of the world the moment the plane disappeared so we'd already have some of our most advanced equipment out there.

Air National Guard service links U.S. Cope Tiger Airmen with Royal Thai, Singapore brethren

Also, China confirmed separately a few days later that they were tracking the flight themselves. Not sure if you remember but they released the following image soon after the disappearance.

China images spark new search for MH370 plane

Anyway you seem to be in denial about the parts of the plane already found

I'm certainly not in denial of the parts. The only parts that were actually confirmed to be from MH370 were a few small parts from the right side wing. I'll actually take their word that these are actually from the plane. Hell, I'll even go along with saying that all the pieces that have been found are from the plane.

How does that prove the videos are fake? We don't fully understand what's happening to the plane during or after the zap. What's to say a few pieces fell off the plane when the zap occurred? or perhaps, it was damaged at some point after the zap?

originally posted by: b0kal0ka
the reason you're not seeing the plane jump around is because the footage was stabilized on the plane itself so that will always appear smooth. you can can see the jitter of the outer frame of that clip because it's stabilizing on the plane itself.

You can't have it both ways. If turbulence is moving the camera around, then the plane and the smoke would both move. But if the plane is stabilzed, the contrail or smoke would be a pert of the stabilized image. You can't have one stabilized and the other not stabilized, unless it's fake, so, it's fake. It's just bad rendering anyway, has nothing to do with stabilization.

How does that (parts of the plane found) prove the videos are fake?

The jittery contrails prove it's fake. The reason I mentioned parts of the plane were found, was in response to this statement of yours:

please explain to me how and why the hoaxer managed to create all this 10 years ago about a plane that just so happened to never be found.

I mentioned parts of the plane being found to rebut your statement about the plane never being found. Parts of it were found; it sounds like we can agree on that. Some of the people who think the plane was abducted by UFOs deny the parts of the plane found are actually parts of the plane, so if you admit those are really parts of the plane, you are a little closer to reality than some of the other victims of this hoax, but you're still living in fantasyland if you think stabilizing the plane would allow the contrail to jump around like that.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk
I agree with everything you said there 100%, Malaysia wasn't complicit in the incident, but they obstructed the investigation actively by continuing to search in what they knew was the wrong location, and I think there's good evidence they are withholding other information they uncovered in the investigation too, as you say. I also think it's not hard to understand their motivation for doing all that.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

excuse my ignorance when it comes to stabilization effects, but why would the smoke be part of the stabilized image? it's completely separate from the plane so why would the software try to stabilize it

you still haven't addressed how or why the hoaxer managed to create this 10 years ago about a plane that just so happened to never be found.

CIA Whistleblower Kevin Shipp was on Candace Owens' podcast yesterday and he claims the CIA was involved in this operation from the start. it was never aliens, it was us.

a reply to: b0kal0ka

excuse my ignorance when it comes to stabilization effects, but why would the smoke be part of the stabilized image? it's completely separate from the plane so why would the software try to stabilize it

Two reasons. First, because that's not how image stabilization works. Image stabilization has two components; the first is 'optical' and the second is sensor analytics based or 'sensor shift' stabilization. Both do essentially the same thing, but go about it using different methods. Most modern cameras contain both types. Optical is usually utilized first, and sensor shift is used outside the limits of optical. Optical is the better of the two, but has tighter tolerances for movement. Sensor shift usually kicks in when lenses are zoomed in. The principle is the same for both; with optical the camera physically moves the lenses to keep a targeted object stable in frame. Sensor shift does the same thing, but uses the camera's onboard analytics to accomplish the task. A stabilized image is often cropped as a result (regardless of optical or sensor shift). The cropping is much less with optical, and this is why it is preferred as it results in a higher quality image. If you removed the cropping on a sensor shift image what you would see would be the edges of the frame moving both horizontally and vertically. If you turn the stabilization off, what you will see is the target moving horizontally and vertically.

So, in response to your question; the reason everything in a stabilized image moves in unison is because the target is fixed (to the extent possible). Therefore, anything associated with the target is also fixed. Consequently, the contrails could never move independently from the image because that's not how the image was stabilized to begin with.

You have to remember, a camera's image is the whole image, so without stabilization if the edge of the frame moves then the target moves also. Stabilization holds the target image stable and excludes the edge movement from your view (with sensor shift). With optical stabilization the actual lens moves to compensate for camera shake.

One more thing about the images, and this deals with thermal or infrared (IR) imaging.

As others have noted, jet blast doesn't always show up on a thermal image, and there's a reason. Thermal imaging has to image something with enough mass to detect the temperature of that mass in comparison to the area surrounding it. So, a thermal image of a jet engine will show the engine components in reverse color from the rest of the image. However, jet blast and contrails don't always show up, and part of the reason is there is no mass for the image sensor to compare against other surface temperatures. So, why does it show up sometimes and not others? It has to to with moisture (humidity) in the air. In a high humidity environment the mass of the water in the air has sufficient density and therefore mass to show up in a thermal image, but in a dry environment there is not sufficient air density to register on the IR sensors in the camera.

You will notice I've stayed away from citing colors, and the reason for this is most thermal / IR cameras have multiple registers to vary the color of the thermal images being sensed. These can be green-red, or white-black, or reverse black-white, and several other variations. The reason for this is because it allows the user to switch modes to obtain the best contrast for the object being imaged. Some contrasts work better than others in certain environments and conditions.

So, in the one video it shows 'orbs' moving with apparent swirling shadows behind them. You know this is a false image because of two things. First, the object (the orb) doesn't emit a heat signature all, and second, the swirling trail behind the object is not how an IR image would be displayed. There is either a heat signature, or there isn't; shadows don't show up.

So, aside from many other reasons and elements, this is how you know the two videos are not real. They are composite images assembled using some clever video effects, but whomever put them together did not understand how thermal imaging works, and they didn't understand how image stabilization worked.

I don't have any emotion in what I say here, I am merely explaining how the technology works in real life, and how this differs from what is being shown in the videos.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I appreciate your response but it still doesn't make sense to me. The contrails are an entirely different color and shape in the video so I don't see why the software would choose to stabilize that as well.

Even if you're right about the technicalities though, one minor thing like that is not sufficient enough to completely discredit everything. If you're able to find more evidence of it being fake, then we can compile that altogether and compare. but as of right now, there's still way more evidence out there towards it being real than fake.

originally posted by: b0kal0ka
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I appreciate your response but it still doesn't make sense to me.

Because it proves the video is a hoax generated by CGI. Along with the proven static backgrounds and effects proven to be from stock footage.

Along with real infrared imaging..



Vs this where you think it’s leaking smoke from a cargo fire..



Again. Your videos have been soundly debunked by many people at many levels.

Has no one actually looked into where this supposed video came from? Just someone saying it's a satellite imaging does not hold water as the attitude of the image shows the camera to be nearly on the same height plane, not from higher up as a satellite would be. Therefore IF and I say with a big IF this is real (which I don't for a minute) it would have been a land based system.
Now as I've said numerous times (if you would care to talk to any combat cameramen) the chances of being in the exact place at the exact time are trillions to one. But more importantly why follow and film the plane at exactly that moment?
As for the pilot committing suicide, why would anyone think it was a slow death? As someone has already pointed out it would be quick and painless. Turn off the oxygen supply to the main cabin Which would result in all in the cabin (passengers and crew) drifting off to sleep then dying in their sleep. The pilot, on his own oxygen supply, set the autopilot to fly straight down the centre of the Indian ocean, then turn his own oxygen off and with him dead a full plane of dead people flying on till the plane ran out of fuel the crashed into the ocean.

a reply to: b0kal0ka

How about this explanation of stabilization.

The software is locked onto one part of the image in the video. It adjusts the frame position to compensate for the movement of the camera. By this it eliminates all relative motion caused by the camera moving around. All images in the frame stay unaltered relative to each other. Just the outer frame moves.

Now, in this video, we see the eliments of the image move relative to each other. The aircraft and trails being contrails or smoke, do not stay consistent from video frame to video frame. That means that one eliment or the other was not created at the same time in the vdeo. One part was added or altered before stabilization.

This can not be done without editing or just rendering parts of the video as separate elements then combining them together into the finished video.

I have done some multi channel digital video editing in the past so I have some experience with this technology. The software was publicly available at least 20 years ago.

All the separate motions mean this video is fake as it is an assembly of different parts made as different elements.

Does this help you understand how this video is obviously fake?

originally posted by: crayzeed

Turn off the oxygen supply to the main cabin Which would result in all in the cabin (passengers and crew) drifting off to sleep then dying in their sleep.

Interesting. Wonder if a pilot could rig something to slowly decrease the amount of oxygen?

Oxygen makes up approximately one-fifth (or 20.9%) of the air we breathe, with the remaining four-fifths of the atmosphere being comprised of nitrogen.

Most air monitors will be set to trigger a warning alarm when the oxygen in the air reduces to 19.5% which is the level at which the atmosphere is considered to be oxygen deficient.

When the oxygen level drops even by just a couple of percent there is an immediate reduction in the delivery of oxygen to human cells has an adverse physiological effect on an individual's ability to function.

At an oxygen level of 16%, individuals are likely to experience an increased pulse rate, more rapid breathing, compromised thought processes, reduced attention span and impaired coordination.

At an oxygen level of 12.5%, respiration will likely be affected, there may be nausea or vomiting and there is also a risk of permanent heart damage.

www.argonelectronics.com...

a reply to: crayzeed

I asked about the video source in the first page of this thread but got no answer on it.

Your explanation of how this was carried out is the most logical and simplest one. I see no other explanation without further evidence of something else happening and these abduction videos are far from evidence.

As to why the pilot did it and if it was the actual pilot or someone else can only be speculated in without further evidence.