Alleged Flight MH370 UFO Teleportation Videos [Hoax]

I am one of the newbies here.

Personally, I think there are gaps in both the UAP theory, outside of the obvious, well you'd have to prove UAPs, wormholes, the fact the videos are real, and that they are over MH370....sigh... but also of the debunkings.

Reason is, the videos are alleged to be from 2 US Government/Military orgs for defense and signals, highly highly doubt debunkers and conspiracy sleuths are going to find 100% public and accurate data to wage their battle with online, either that or the US has some really bad people working for the military and in signals.

In summary its a cool story, dunno what more to think of it at this stage.

Just feel sorry for the family.
External Quote:
hosting an archive of original UFO videos, without any re-encoding, and with a unique case number for each video.
MUFON?

The fact that this was never submitted to MUFON is the first indication that it's fake.

If this video was evidence, it would
• have provenance: a witness explains how it was published. The Navy videos have that.
• show recognizable UFOs
• not teleport an aircraft away where the debris later turns up here

The fact that the coordinates put the aircraft where it was believed to have disappeared in mid-March, but was known to not have disappeared after the INMARSAT data became public, is just the icing on the cake.

Anyone who is willing to believe this video is a conspiracy theorist at heart, because this video is not possible without a global conspiracy and cover-up. And that's before you regard any analysis on it.



Grusch has really been fuelling the conspiracy theory side of ufology recently, so this video re-surfacing is just a perfect example of Zeitgeist.

On the upside, Metabunk had more members join/become active, due to Grusch and this video.
 
Is there something to this?

I know the main parts of the "portal" are VFX, but there's some other unaccounted for bits in it.
The inside of the first frame is clearly different on the inside, because it doesn't match up at all to the rest of it.
1695603328803.png


But I was looking through the frames of SHOCKWV.mov and noticed something on the 2nd frame.
Ironically, the wrong thing, as I was looking for whatever was making the line at the bottom and dot on the left side. Instead, I (might) have found what is doing the fainter line/dot above the one on the left, and the mark on the bottom right
1695604295538.png


Adjusted some stuff with brightness and contrast and curves, tried to scale things to the right size, and then I ended up with this.
I also haphazardly put together something to try and make it look like the original, to show the similarity more.
gif2.gif
haphazard.png


I don't know if anyone else has found this yet, so I thought I'd post it here.
I still don't know where the other parts like the line at the bottom and dot on the side come from, which are present in about every frame in the FLIR video, nor the bright lines on the right and top of this frame. At this point, probably even some other frame from the same effect.
 
I believe this 'leaked' screen grab video was actually shot with a 3D camera / camcorder off of a lenticular display screen (computer or TV) running a image sequence.
In 2012 YouTube added a feature that automatically generated 3d videos for all 1080p short videos. I'm not sure when this feature was disabled, but it seems that it was still active as late as in 2015. "Satellite" video uploaded by RegicideAnon is fitting the criteria, so YouTube would have generated stereoscopic version for it. For some reason webarchive captured that generated 3d version. Another example of such video captured by webarchive on the same day as the satellite video is here. It would explain why the satellite video is squeezed, why overlay elements like text and mouse cursor are affected, why other reuploads are simple 2D and why UFO blogs that featured RegicideAnon videos in 2014 don't mention stereo effect at all.

Credit to author of this reddit post
Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/AirlinerAbduction2014/comments/16ui3c9/the_stereoscopic_footage_was_actually_created_by/
which goes into greater detail.

comparison.png
 
Here we go again...

External Quote:
I was also able to identify the leaker of the videos as being Lieutenant Commander Edward C. Lin. He checks every box to be the leaker. Our Government attempted to put him in prison for life as a traitor, but he is no spy. Edward C. Lin is a hero. He took a plea deal after he was convinced he damaged national security, but he never revealed this information to our enemies. He simply wanted to do the right thing and tell the world the truth of this technology and what happened to MH370. He was sentenced to 9 years in prison and likely is bound by his plea deal to never speak about the videos again. We can vindicate this man as well as everyone else who was lied to or discredited.
Evidence that the leaker is Edward C. Lin - https://x.com/JustXAshton/status/1710707813154988247?s=20…

I also got a tip from a source that told me that the nephew of Retired General Joseph F. Dunford has seen the videos and indirectly confirmed their authenticity. He was likely in charge of the operation as the commander of the International Security Assistance Force in 2014. He then served as the 19th Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the nation’s highest-ranking military officer, and the principal military advisor to the President, Secretary of Defense, and National Security Council from Oct. 1, 2015, through Sept. 30, 2019. He is now on the board of directors at Lockheed Martin.
 
External Quote:

Edward C. Lin is a hero.
Depends on one's definition, I guess.

External Quote:

Lt. Cmdr. Edward Lin, 40, was sentenced to a nine-year sentence with the last three years suspended as part of a pre-trial agreement with the government. Along with a 646-day credit for time served in pre-trial confinement, Lin could be released from the brig in about four years.
...

The admission of guilt was part of a plea arrangement...

In exchange for admitting to the lesser charges, Lin did not face two instances of espionage and three instances of attempted espionage, which were the most serious charges the government preferred last April.

Instead, the government charged Lin under Federal law in communicating secret information with a U.S. citizen who worked for Taiwanese political party and an undercover FBI agent.
...
Lin, by his own admission before a military judge, was sloppy with handling classified information and arrogantly attempting to impress women with information he knew.
Source:
https://news.usni.org/2017/06/02/ed...ed-information-not-reporting-foreign-contacts
 
I don't know why, but for some reason I doubt that Ashton guy has top secret clearance as a contractor to the US government. Or at least that he still has it, considering he doesn't seem to have done anything but obsess over the MH370 hoax videos since August. As far back as twitter let me go, before he latched unto the UFO things (when Grusch first came out) he was promoting conspiracy theories about COVID and that the Tate brothers were being framed.
 
I don't know why, but for some reason I doubt that Ashton guy has top secret clearance as a contractor to the US government. Or at least that he still has it, considering he doesn't seem to have done anything but obsess over the MH370 hoax videos since August. As far back as twitter let me go, before he latched unto the UFO things (when Grusch first came out) he was promoting conspiracy theories about COVID and that the Tate brothers were being framed.
The point is that Ashton's opinion is not affected by his clearance in any way.

If it was, this would be him violating it (from the tweet quoted above):
External Quote:
Spy Satellite USA-229 which has a sister satellite next to it classified as debris. This allows for the proven 3D stereoscopic imagery
(But as we've shown upthread, the 3D stereoscopy is actually not "proven", as it seems generated from 2D video.)
 
External Quote:

Edward C. Lin is a hero.
Depends on one's definition, I guess.

Yea, I find the explanation that a mandarin-speaking officer being deployed in the Pacific gets arrested for allegations of having collated with mandarin-speaking locals for sharing highly classified intel also more reasonable, than that he tried to disclose a complicated story of the USG having used alien technology to save an airliner... But maybe this is what the 'cabal' just wants us to think. :rolleyes:

In any case, should Edward leave imprisonment Ashton has now crafted a nice cover story for him that he can use to cash in on and make the rounds on various podcasts...

Ashton also now claims that the MH370 case is "solved":


He doesn't explain for me though:
  • Why radio pings were recorded by satellites of the plane's maintenance electronics for the turbines miles away from the site where ground stations lost contact with MH370 (feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but this is big a point of critique as far as I recall)
  • Why the IR mode used by the drone is as if the USG was trying to use it to check whether local housing is properly isolated and in any case is not representative of the military-grade black-white filter that is normally being used
 
Last edited:
Ashton also now claims that the MH370 case is "solved":

• The aircraft changed course. This has nothing to do with a lithium battery fire, which makes pilots head for the nearest runway instead of avoiding them.
The report said that this kind of cargo is relatively ordinary. Between January 2014 and May 2014, it said, there were 99 shipments of lithium-ion batteries on Malaysia Airlines flights to Beijing.

• "to save the plane" is a tall claim for an aircraft that disappeared with everyone on board, only for debris to wash ashore in Africa months later. What would "saving" an aircraft in this manner achieve that is different from letting it crash into the ocean?

Ashton's theory doesn't make any sense.
 
Last edited:



there is no indication they were on fire. The ir camera (or blender weight painting fake) shows a 'typical' engine exhaust signature.

Screenshot 2023-10-29 114128.png


Screenshot 2023-10-29 115549.png


and the batteries weren't located inthat position anyway
External Quote:

page 255
https://web.archive.org/web/2018102...mot.gov.my/MH370SafetyInvestigationReport.pdf

The Motorola Solutions consignments were loaded in the Aircraft at
90348C (47R) and PMC5871 (23L, 23R)
as per Loading
Instruction/Report. Illustration as shown in Figure 1.18G (below).
There were two (2) different models of Li-Ion battery consignment
on MH370 on 08 March 2014:
• PMNN4073AR Li-ion batteries rated at 7.4V, 11.8Wh; and
• PMNN4081BRC Li-ion batteries rated at 7.4V, 11.1Wh.
Both of the batteries were not regulated as Dangerous Goods
because the packing had adhered to the guidelines as per Lithium
Battery Guidance Document (3. Section II - Packing Instructions
965-970). This document is based on the provisions set out in the
2013-2014 Edition of the ICAO Technical Instructions for Safe
Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air and the 55th Edition of the
IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR). The ICAO and IATA
documents are as per Appendix 1.18I

Screenshot 2023-10-29 120746.png


 
yea he is doing a live chat and he is claiming the red area is the indication (i dont have a time stamp yet because it still "live")

"yesterday when i realized, i knew that this heat signature was down here, and you can tell its COMPLETELY different than the heat signature of the engine.Not even close to the same, right?"

[well, red is red. so they are really close to the same.]

"and i've been staring a this and i didnt put two and two together. this is in same location as where landing gear is and if you look at the piece i did yesterday, you'll see that he situation with this is that there's two exhaust vents.Those are the exhaust vents that we see the smoke come from. It's not coming from the engine, its coming from the belly of the plane"

[the vents, if on htis particular model, are not under the wing where we see the alleged smoke start]

1698596893339.png





edit add:
Using the engineering term to find photos yielded this from a maintenance manual, confirming they're the exhausts of the air used by the air driven hydraulic pumps:
1698597810493.png


— Boeing 777 "knocking" query, pprune.org

And this:
1698597829622.png

 
Last edited:
Additionally he now also claims that the 90s VFX frame sequence is not matching the one in the video and implicating Mick in having used a sock puppet account to propagate the 90s VFX library origin claims :rolleyes::D :

 
Last edited:
I don't know why, but for some reason I doubt that Ashton guy has top secret clearance as a contractor to the US government. Or at least that he still has it, considering he doesn't seem to have done anything but obsess over the MH370 hoax videos since August. As far back as twitter let me go, before he latched unto the UFO things (when Grusch first came out) he was promoting conspiracy theories about COVID and that the Tate brothers were being framed.

Chiming in as someone who has TOP SECRET (NV2) clearance... It's not unusual that he has it at all, in fact it's most likely the baseline requirement for his job supposedly designing databases that hold confidential health data. Getting one isn't particularly difficult if you don't have a criminal history, don't have contact with foreign officials and aren't open to being blackmailed though debt, gambling, etc., and you have a handful of people that can vouch for you. It gets revalidated every 5-7 years and having a few oddball beliefs about genuine mysteries like MH370 doesn't really qualify as grounds for revoking it.

As far as how much time he spends on this, I'm going to assume he's "working" from home.
 
Additionally he now also claims that the 90s VFX frame sequence is not matching the one in the video and implicating Mick in having used a sock puppet account to propagate the 90s VFX library origin claims :rolleyes::D :



He's really being quite disingenuous.

He is actually arguing that the "90s version" of the VFX comes from a video game. Additionally, he is actually trying to persuade people into thinking that a Youtube video of this "low quality 90's video game" accurately represents the resolution, pixelisation and framerate of the "90s version", which can't possibly be the same as the remastered video due to the low quality.

He's trying to ignore the fact that the VFX is a reusable asset, and that the "90's video game" is just one example of its use.

 
Chiming in as someone who has TOP SECRET (NV2) clearance... It's not unusual that he has it at all, in fact it's most likely the baseline requirement for his job supposedly designing databases that hold confidential health data. Getting one isn't particularly difficult if you don't have a criminal history, don't have contact with foreign officials and aren't open to being blackmailed though debt, gambling, etc., and you have a handful of people that can vouch for you. It gets revalidated every 5-7 years and having a few oddball beliefs about genuine mysteries like MH370 doesn't really qualify as grounds for revoking it.

As far as how much time he spends on this, I'm going to assume he's "working" from home.
I'm doubtful he has a clearance or is a contractor. He does healthcare IT consulting for relatively small medical offices.

His first reference as such was through himself on a podcast, post-introduction to the public UAP discourse community. He has an online presence before then, absolutely none of which includes reference to him being a government contractor or holding a clearance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm doubtful he has a clearance or is a contractor. He does healthcare IT consulting for relatively small medical offices.

Do you have any more than that? Because I'm a contractor with access to sensitive healthcare data and I also have a NV2 (TOP SECRET) clearance, so I'm not sure that I follow your logic.

I don't talk about my job online either.
 
highly highly doubt debunkers and conspiracy sleuths are going to find 100% public and accurate data to wage their battle with online

I don't even bother. The minute I see the classic UFO 'flash before disappearing' I chuck the entire video in my mental bin and 100% know it is a hoax....as that flash is such a trope of hoax UFO videos as to be all one needs to dismiss them these days.
 
"I cannot conceive that someone might have slightly scaled the fx and added some overlay blending options" therefore aliens.
"I'm in denial, therefore bunk". Happens more often than we'd like.

(Many people who see something extraordinary are not in denial about it. Some are.)
 
I don't even bother. The minute I see the classic UFO 'flash before disappearing' I chuck the entire video in my mental bin and 100% know it is a hoax....as that flash is such a trope of hoax UFO videos as to be all one needs to dismiss them these days.
I thought that when I first saw the videos. Basically they either disappear in a flash of light or speed off in a fake motion blur.
 
A counter argument that I heard was that the videos are authentic BUUUUUTTTT the VFX was added to make them look fake. I mean. At some point you have to accept the general consensus unless you can find some concrete proof of the contrary.
 
A counter argument that I heard was that the videos are authentic BUUUUUTTTT the VFX was added to make them look fake. I mean. At some point you have to accept the general consensus unless you can find some concrete proof of the contrary.
If they concede that the VFX were added, they're halfway there.
Because then it's possible that the 3 rotating dots were added as well. And what is there to say they weren't?
 
I'm not saying "Corridor says it's fake therefore it must be" but they're just better at explaining why it is than I am.
I generally like Corridor Crew stuff, but that was quite weak. A couple of goofs slipped out, and given how edited that was, they had plenty of opportunity to remove the bits where they say stuff that's not correct. They're right that once you've found the stock asset that went into the production of a faked clip, the clip is beyond worthless as evidence. The butthole comment from the true believer was quite fun though (ts=549s) "That is like saying my butthole is your butthole because they're similar" - that vid's made my morning.

(Did have cool new details, though - I didn't know that the university of bean-paste mummies had lost its accreditation in 2019.)
 
Last edited:
I generally like Corridor Crew stuff, but that was quite weak. A couple of goofs slipped out, and given how edited that was, they had plenty of opportunity to remove the bits where they say stuff that's not correct. They're right that once you've found the stock asset that went into the production of a faked clip, the clip is beyond worthless as evidence. The butthole comment from the true believerwas quite fun though (ts=549s) "That is like saying my butthole is your butthole because they're similar" - that vid's made my morning.

(Did have cool new details, though - I didn't know that the university of bean-paste mummies had lost its accreditation in 2019.)
I noticed that one of the Corridor Crew guys said that contrails don't show up in infrared, in which case someone had better delete the pages and pages of IR contrail photos here on Metabunk!

There seems to be an issue over whether the clouds etc in the video show parallax, as you would expect if they are filmed from a moving platform. There might be arguments about whether they should show any noticeable parallax, which depends on the distance and motion of the camera, but surely it is possible to check objectively whether they do show parallax? I don't see any myself, but I'm just using my poor old naked eyeballs. Has anyone tried overlaying different frames of the video and lining them up to see how closely they match?

Re buttholes: I dare say to a proctologist they are as individual as faces, if not more so!
 
I noticed that one of the Corridor Crew guys said that contrails don't show up in infrared, in which case someone had better delete the pages and pages of IR contrail photos here on Metabunk!

There seems to be an issue over whether the clouds etc in the video show parallax, as you would expect if they are filmed from a moving platform. There might be arguments about whether they should show any noticeable parallax, which depends on the distance and motion of the camera, but surely it is possible to check objectively whether they do show parallax? I don't see any myself, but I'm just using my poor old naked eyeballs. Has anyone tried overlaying different frames of the video and lining them up to see how closely they match?

Re buttholes: I dare say to a proctologist they are as individual as faces, if not more so!

Yeah, the biggest booboo was the IR stuff, they were in a simplified "all things opaque to visible light are the same in IR" mindset, their (Derek's) "smoke" machine was an irrelevant diversion, contrails aren't "smoke".

Parallax has been discussed at reasonable length in this very thread, quite early on. Because the visual footage was binocular 3D, whoever made it did create it with some "real" parallax on the plane and balls (IIRC), but for each individual camera there was only a trashily faked pseudo-parallax effect that basically put all clouds onto once single plane - it was nothing more than a shear, the bottom of the frame moves more than the top of frame. I don't remember any evidence of any cloud/surface parallax being presented, and of course that should have been the bigger effect, as the distance a satelite moves is much larger than the distance between the two cameras. (Theoretically, we might be able to Fermi-calculate the distance between the two cameras given the pseudo-parallax, as I have a nasty feeling it would come out better measured in kilometres than metres, which would mean there's no craft it could have been taken from.)
 
Parallax has been discussed at reasonable length in this very thread, quite early on.
Thanks. Yes, the images in post #22 are the kind of thing I was looking for. They do show some change between the beginning and end of the supposed satellite video, but:

a) the changes are very small, compared either with other satellite images or theoretical expectations from the speed of a low orbit satellite

b) the changes are strangely selective, in the sense that some parts of the clouds show movement while other nearby parts don't. This seems difficult to explain by parallax, but the movement might be due to actual evolution of the clouds - though in that case it also seems suspiciously selective.

c) there is a change in brightness of most of the image but again rather difficult to explain by any actual change in the scene. Unless we suppose that there are unseen clouds at an even higher level which are periodically blocking the sunlight!

Overall, it looks as if part of the image has been slightly 'squished' upwards. It would be difficult to justify saying bluntly that there is no sign of parallax, but reasonable to say that the movement looks odd, compared with known genuine images, and the onus is on anyone who wants to claim parallax is the explanation.
 
Back
Top