Alleged Flight MH370 UFO Teleportation Videos [Hoax]

[Mendel]

looking as fake as it does and serving to explain the total disappearance of a plane now known not to have totally disappeared without a trace would make it harder for this one to go "mainstream," I think.

Plus the fact that it'd be hard to figure out who even holds the rights to the footage.

With the UFO stuff that goes mainstream, it's usually clear whose smartphone shot the shaky footage of a fuzzy blob, and the media can present them as a witness, which adds human interest.

 

[deirdre]

But I'd agree that some video going through periodic cycles of repost on Reddit or 4chan might not come to the attention of the major media, nor be taken seriously by them if it did,

i saw a Newsweek link posted i think yesterday. they just reiterated the French "debunk" (which i agree with th eposter on page 1 isnt much of a debunk at all) and 'dismissed' it.

 

[John J.]

It looks to me that the satellite name is NROL-22

spy satellites in LEO typically orbit at around 500 km

The alleged satellite (NROL-22) is in a Molniya orbit. If it passed over the target close to perigee it would have been much closer.

No idea if this is accurate (or helpful even if accurate), but for NROL-22 Wikipedia has

Orbital parameters
Reference system	Geocentric
Regime	Molniya
Perigee altitude	1,138 kilometres (707 mi)[1]
Apogee altitude	39,210 kilometres (24,360 mi)[1]
Inclination	63.2°[1]

Wikipedia, USA-184 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA-184 [USA-184 is NROL-22].
It states that NROL-22 is a signals intelligence (SIGINT) platform.

In addition to its SIGINT payload, USA-184 also carries two secondary instruments; the SBIRS-HEO-1 missile detection payload as part of the Space-Based Infrared System programme, and NASA's TWINS-1 or TWINS-A magnetospheric science instrument as part of the TWINS programme.

Content from External Source

There are some details (perhaps not useful to us) on this NASA webpage,
https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/display.action?id=2006-027A

The payload capabilities of NROL-22 are presumably secret, but I don't know if a SIGINT satellite would also have a visible-spectrum real-time film capability.
If the footage were real (which I doubt very much), whoever leaked it has effectively leaked information about the capabilities of a current generation NRO asset.

 

[slavishcrusader]

No idea if this is accurate (or helpful even if accurate), but for NROL-22 Wikipedia has

Orbital parameters
Reference system	Geocentric
Regime	Molniya
Perigee altitude	1,138 kilometres (707 mi)[1]
Apogee altitude	39,210 kilometres (24,360 mi)[1]
Inclination	63.2°[1]

Wikipedia, USA-184 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA-184 [USA-184 is NROL-22].
It states that NROL-22 is a signals intelligence (SIGINT) platform.

In addition to its SIGINT payload, USA-184 also carries two secondary instruments; the SBIRS-HEO-1 missile detection payload as part of the Space-Based Infrared System programme, and NASA's TWINS-1 or TWINS-A magnetospheric science instrument as part of the TWINS programme.

Content from External Source

There are some details (perhaps not useful to us) on this NASA webpage,
https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/display.action?id=2006-027A

The payload capabilities of NROL-22 are presumably secret, but I don't know if a SIGINT satellite would also have a visible-spectrum real-time film capability.
If the footage were real (which I doubt very much), whoever leaked it has effectively leaked information about the capabilities of a current generation NRO asset.

Given there's no other way to confirm the numbers. I would say it's accurate.
The NROL-22 was on other side of the planet at the time of its disappearance(if we trust the data of heavens-above).

And I don't believe it has any optical payload at all.
If we are to believe that the video is real, then it's primary source must be SBIRS-GEO 1 or SBIRS-GEO 2. Which then relayed it to NROL-22.
Due to classified nature of NROL-22, at this point we will have to make too many assumptions(with nothing to back them).
Thus, I would call it a very clever fake. Probably by Russian intelligence?

 

[Ann K]

Thus, I would call it a very clever fake. Probably by Russian intelligence?

No, surely it's far too amateurish for that. Unless, of course, Russian intelligence is staffed with twelve year olds who have run out of comic books to read.

 

[Mendel]

The NROL-22 was on other side of the planet at the time of its disappearance(if we trust the data of heavens-above).

And I don't believe it has any optical payload at all.
If we are to believe that the video is real, then it's primary source must be SBIRS-GEO 1 or SBIRS-GEO 2. Which then relayed it to NROL-22.

Would these be able to see NROL-22, or would other satellites be involved? Is this a capability that these satellites have? Why would a video relay modify the video feed?

I'm pretty confident the video does not show MH370: the coordinates are wrong, the aircraft didn't actually disappear, and the provenance of the video is obscured. But in that case, time and date are also in question. And that means any satellite could've provided the footage, orbs or not.

 

[slavishcrusader]

No, surely it's far too amateurish for that. Unless, of course, Russian intelligence is staffed with twelve year olds who have run out of comic books to read.

The events in the video are amateurish.
The work itself isn't.
It displays very well rendered clouds+very real effect of flash on the clouds+parallex effect+Stereoscopic 3D effect(the original video from wayback contains two videos, each video is shot from two different cameras which are few metres apart on the same SAT, which is usually done for depth perception)+Accurate coordinates+Accurate 3D model of the plane and a US drone. All of this done by someone who harbours knowledge about how SATs work with mastery in classical physics, that too in 2014 and within 72 days or probably even less.

It's a very very sophisticated work, which is yet to be debunked as CGI in 2023. This has to be the work of some intelligence agency.
I am guessing Russian because there has been links to fake debris and them. This video could be an attempt to spread misinformation about Mh370s disappearance and they are responsible for its actual cause.

 

[MrSuperhate]

Would these be able to see NROL-22, or would other satellites be involved? Is this a capability that these satellites have? Why would a video relay modify the video feed?

I just looked up both of those satellites. Neither could have produced the video. Both are built off the A2100M satellite bus which is much too small to see such a high level of detail from geostationary orbit.

 

[JMartJr]

No, surely it's far too amateurish for that. Unless, of course, Russian intelligence is staffed with twelve year olds who have run out of comic books to read.

Or are testing the limits of our credulity.

 

[Scaramanga]

But we have no frame of reference to compare it to. It's not like we can say " When a REAL alien makes a jet disapear, no flash is seen."

I'm pretty sure we can....precisely because the flash is entirely a hallmark of hoax UFO videos. It's probably a cultural thing copied from scenes of Star Trek ships warping off. It's become almost a trope, with hoaxers feeling they have to add the flash to make the UFO more convincing to believers....but at the same time it is precisely what gives away the hoax to skeptics. I'm pretty sure if I dismiss all videos with flash as hoaxes...which I do...I'm not going to accidentally miss the Vulcans arriving to invite us to The Federation.

 

[Hugges]

Can anyone confirm whether the orb's positions relative to the B777 match up in the video where the two perspectives are sync'd up with the frame of disappearance? From my very brief analysis at moments in the video they seem to be spinning in different directions but I may be wrong.

 

[a_robot_kicker]

This reddit post is an interesting addition to this story
Source: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/15pfmwk/proof_the_archived_video_is_stereoscopic_3d/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/somethingsomethingbe:

---

Here is how to check the archived video from, http://web.archive.org/web/20140525100932/http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ok1A1fSzxY, to see if that video is actually stereoscopic which you can verify yourself with any editing program that lets you adjust the opacity on two layers of video.

So, these aren't 2D images to make realistic clouds. If it is satellite video, then I would think there are probably 2 satellites near each other to create the dimension present.

Edit:

Here's a download of the video in full resolution:


Source: https://drive.google.com/file/d/19UA5HTGfttr5CFaSWSHgFlzhHoBTJlgl/view?usp=sharing


Here is a shorter version of just the back-and-forth transition:


Source: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1L0Bu7nQivhW8UkIfDmp05bPoO3icax8S/view?usp=sharing


Here is a link of the archived video if you don't want to download it yourself:


Source: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SMDU9AG-GIXQMxYKz_9RAjlJFjj0h8hR/view?usp=sharing

Supposedly the original source file of this video is rendered in stereoscopic 3d? There is clear parallax on the clouds. I have no idea how that could be achieved unless it was a full 3d cg render, or if the stereo is synthetic structure-from-motion as the baseline of a stereo camera with that parallax would have to be massive (thousands of kilometers); so (maybe) 2 satellites? I'd wager that the orbital mechanics of keeping a pair of satellites in orbit with a fixed baseline like that isn't possible but I'm not a physicist.

I do have a PhD in a computer-vision related field; and my opinion on what I'm seeing here is that it's a fixed stereo baseline almost perfectly on the x-axis of the image. You only get that with a true stereo rig and in this case the baseline would be way too big for that, so it's either a synthetic 3d reconstruction from motion or (wayyy more likely) a CGI fake. The stereo is actually really interesting from a debunking perspective because you could potentially get a 3d reconstruction out of this, and since you know the size of the boeing 777 you can get scale out of that reconstruction.

The other thing I considered is a weird rendering/rolling shutter artifact in the sensor, but it's unclear if that works.

EDIT: something that's really bothering me about this parallax is that the mouse cursor and UI elements are moving as well. Why would they have parallax? You'd expect them to be 2d projections onto a 3d image, maybe this is a 3d rendering of a 2d plane, like of a screen? Or maybe my idea of a weird artifact in the export of the video is closer, or the OP faked the parallax?

 

[Candy-O]

I'm pretty sure we can....precisely because the flash is entirely a hallmark of hoax UFO videos. It's probably a cultural thing copied from scenes of Star Trek ships warping off. It's become almost a trope, with hoaxers feeling they have to add the flash to make the UFO more convincing to believers....but at the same time it is precisely what gives away the hoax to skeptics. I'm pretty sure if I dismiss all videos with flash as hoaxes...which I do...I'm not going to accidentally miss the Vulcans arriving to invite us to The Federation.

You are going to feel pretty embarrassed when authentic UFO airplane-teleportation footage comes out and there is, indeed, a flash!

 

[deirdre]

I do have a PhD in a computer-vision related field; and my opinion on what I'm seeing here is that it's a fixed stereo baseline almost perfectly on the x-axis of the image. You only get that with a true stereo rig and in this case the baseline would be way too big for that, so it's either a synthetic 3d reconstruction from motion or (wayyy more likely) a CGI fake. The stereo is actually really interesting from a debunking perspective because you could potentially get a 3d reconstruction out of this, and since you know the size of the boeing 777 you can get scale out of that reconstruction.

what? whats a 3d reconstruction from motion?

i did find an old channel ...2012...that teaches you step by step how to make contrails (and the spinning orbs) and of course you could grab free 777s for pretty much all the software.



he makes the plane fly throughout..esp around 43 mins..but its his attention to detail of the contrail that i love



Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEp9fcHffTo&list=PLgZzNOsqmAL3FDZ_WLFmq8o1ab-LhtqEO&index=12

 

[deirdre]

one question... i went looking for old contrail vids due to this thumbnail popping up on my youtube home page


my question is what is these green bits on the mwir one? would a drone have a warm housing that would show like that?

 

[omaehamoushindeiru]

I know people have been dying to know and the answer is yes: You can watch this video in 3DVR. Not that this is going to get anyone anywhere because the stereoscopic effect is much too subtle to really make this look "3D".

To investigate this further, I created this video:


On the left side you simply see the left and right fields combined, shown in an alternating fashion at half speed. Synchronizing them was not as easy because the text in the lower left and the cursor seem to be part of the stereoscopic image. If I tried to synchronized them by overlaying the cursor in the upper part of the image, the cursor will no longer match when it moves to the lower part of the image. I'm still not sure if what we're seeing is an actual stereoscopic image though, as the effect almost disappears when applying a distort filter to the lower 2/3 of the image. I did this because as you can see in this gif, the encoding artifacts seem to be in sync between the left and right field, only moved to the side by a slight amount. I find this a bit odd:


I maintain my position that someone looked up the satellite that could have somewhat been in the area at the time of MH370s disappearance and saw on Wikipedia that the same device also carried a stereoscopic imaging device. That person then wrongly assumed that this was the camera of the spy satellite and went on to create this video.

 

[jarlrmai]

It's supposed to be a thermal camera which is the most red flag thing about it to me. What high altitude military platform uses your type of camera? Everything military/police we see uses IR cameras, like we see with ATFLIR etc.

 

[a_robot_kicker]

what? whats a 3d reconstruction from motion?

Stereo requires 2 cameras looking at the same thing. A moving camera with frames taken at two times can be seen as a stereo camera and depth can be inferred from this if the motion is known. From there, you can reconstruct what stereo from a fixed vantage point would look like. This assumes the scene doesn't move between the two frames. To be clear I don't think that's what we're looking at here because the scene is moving and the image is too clean to be a reconstruction; only that people have mentioned some satellite imagery getting stereoscopic treatment via this method.

 

[a_robot_kicker]

I know people have been dying to know and the answer is yes: You can watch this video in 3DVR. Not that this is going to get anyone anywhere because the stereoscopic effect is much too subtle to really make this look "3D".

To investigate this further, I created this video:


On the left side you simply see the left and right fields combined, shown in an alternating fashion at half speed. Synchronizing them was not as easy because the text in the lower left and the cursor seem to be part of the stereoscopic image. If I tried to synchronized them by overlaying the cursor in the upper part of the image, the cursor will no longer match when it moves to the lower part of the image. I'm still not sure if what we're seeing is an actual stereoscopic image though, as the effect almost disappears when applying a distort filter to the lower 2/3 of the image. I did this because as you can see in this gif, the encoding artifacts seem to be in sync between the left and right field, only moved to the side by a slight amount.

Cool! So my intuition of "parallax on the clouds" may actually just be one of the images being oddly distorted maybe intentionally?

 

[testchamber1]

Was hoping someone would post these here. UFO reddit has gone nuts over these lately.

I just had a very frustrating experience in THAT subreddit trying to make people come up to their senses (debris, anyone?). Post got deleted, never again.

 

[Theferäl]

I just had a very frustrating experience in THAT subreddit trying to make people come up to their senses (debris, anyone?). Post got deleted, never again.

Apparently the debris was "planted" as part of a cover-up...

 

[captancourgette]

/r/whyweretheyfilming

Yes its obvious they were focusing on filming the plane and not the UFOs
At any one time theres about 10,000 commercial planes in the air.
Which is higher than the number of active satellites currently above the earth also most satellites don't have camera's.
Though I suppose you could argue a satellite could have more than one camera.
Are we led to believe all planes are constantly being watched 24 hours a day? Or is it only during daylight hours? (now thats the true conspiracy /s)


Another thing that strikes me is the UFOs orbiting the plane.
Why? I assume because they are trying to get into the right position to touch the plane all at the exact time, the thing is though, I a mere earth idiot that could knock out some software program that would be able to do it first time, How are beings that can cross half the galaxy not able to accomplish this trivial task. The whole thing strikes me more of a visual that a director would think oh this looks cool, I'll add that into the clip, then again I suppose the aliens could just be showing off

EDIT: Watched the 2nd video, so this is filmed out of the planes window I take it, again why were they filming and judging by the planes vapour-trail wow they were pretty close to the 2 planes colliding, somehow I don't think air traffic control would be happy

• The black thermal trails from the orbs don't seem to behave consistent also.
• Also though this could be a trick of the angles, FPS, in the thermal videos the orbs look like they are orbiting the airplane more than the other video
• Also after the plane disappears with the thermal video and the camera zooms out where is the vapour trail?

 

[a_robot_kicker]

Yes its obvious they were focusing on filming the plane and not the UFOs
At any one time theres about 10,000 commercial planes in the air.
Which is higher than the number of active satellites currently above the earth also most satellites don't have camera's.
Though I suppose you could argue a satellite could have more than one camera.
Are we led to believe all planes are constantly being watched 24 hours a day? Or is it only during daylight hours?

Another thing that strikes me is the UFOs orbiting the plane.
Why? I assume because they are trying to get into the right position to touch the plane all at the exact time, the thing is though, I a mere earth idiot that could knock out some software program that would be able to do it first time, How are beings that can cross half the galaxy not able to accomplish this trivial task. The whole thing strikes me more of a visual that a director would think oh this looks cool, I'll add that into the clip, then again I suppose the aliens could just be showing off

If the presupposition is that this is MH370 I think the idea is that this footage was captured as part of the search effort after it started acting erratically. After 9/11 you could imagine why a military might be interested in tracking a plane that has gone rogue.

 

[captancourgette]

If the presupposition is that this is MH370 I think the idea is that this footage was captured as part of the search effort after it started acting erratically. After 9/11 you could imagine why a military might be interested in tracking a plane that has gone rogue.

I can buy that, but that raises another question

How many planes go 'rogue'? this one, german wings, others I have forgotten? Its not many, theres approx 100,000 commercial flights a day, So the chances of a flight going 'rogue' are say 10 in a million at least, I think we can all agree on

How many planes get teleported away by aliens, well god thats got to be even less likely, lets say 1 in 100s of millions

now the odds of both these events happening to the same plane (*) is astronomically miniscule
vs
The odds of this being CGI

the odds are many orders of magnitude more likely that its just some guy having a laugh

(*)unless they are both related

 

[a_robot_kicker]

I can buy that, but that raises another question

How many planes go 'rogue'? this one, german wings, others I have forgotten? Its not many, theres approx 100,000 commercial flights a day, So the chances of a flight going 'rogue' are say 10 in a million at least, I think we can all agree on

How many planes get teleported away by aliens, well god thats got to be even less likely, lets say 1 in 100s of millions

now the odds of both these events happening to the same plane (*) is astronomically miniscule
vs
The odds of this being CGI

the odds are many orders of magnitude more likely that its just some guy having a laugh

(*)unless they are both related

Oh I def agree that this is way more likely CGI than anything else. That said, your analysis only holds if the two events (going rogue and getting teleported by aliens) were independent. For example, the airplane flying off course and losing comms could be *caused* by the aliens (to be clear I don't think this is the case, only that the two events could theoretically be related).

The video makes most sense in the time that it was published: when MH370 had disappeared but before the debris had been discovered or the flight path into the sea was discovered on the pilots computer. That would have been the time for a creative vfx artist to create these two videos and put them online for laughs.

 

[Daves!]

Someone with VFX skills tells why its prety hard to fake this.


Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/15pxdf6/mh370_discussion_from_videovfx_hobbyist_point_of/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2

 

[jarlrmai]

Didn't someone else in the UFO subreddit recreate it in 6 hours?

 

[Daves!]

Didn't someone else in the UFO subreddit recreate it in 6 hours?

tried yes but came not near to the actual videos.
Maybe mr West with his vfx skills can do it ?

 

[Daves!]

Apparently the debris was "planted" as part of a cover-up...

because one of the debris show no signs of age nor detoration of salt water after 16 months. Its why it sparkled the idea that it was planted. No one realy understood why the debris wasnt aged and looked as if it was pretty new, although it was indentified as part of MH370 fuselage.

 

[deirdre]

Maybe mr West with his vfx skills can do it ?

i could do it. but did you watch that vid on how to make contrails look realistic? no way im doing that! Plus ive never studied lighting effects in Blender.

anyway Mick isnt a Blender guy.

add: which means nothing..anyone with skills can recreat any ufo video, doesnt mean the ufo videos aren't "real" in the first place.

yes but came not near to the actual videos.

can you link it? did he offer his file, so others can modify it without starting from scratch?

 

[tjskep]

because one of the debris show no signs of age nor detoration of salt water after 16 months. Its why it sparkled the idea that it was planted. No one realy understood why the debris wasnt aged and looked as if it was pretty new, although it was indentified as part of MH370 fuselage.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-37820122.amp

alot of the wreckage looks pretty old this is from a bbc article about some of the found pieces of the plane with pictures

 

[PublicStranger]

Let's grant everything claimed;

let's disregard the debris found, let's disregard the timing of the flight, let's disregard the question of mechanics and optics of the satellites used to take the footage, let's say it is MH370.

So aliens have used teleportation (something that is yet to be proven in the realm of science) to transport a plane to where and for what purpose? Why MH370? And why have no other planes disappeared similarly since?

The plane is now travelling at speeds of 400mph+ and has been teleported mid-flight onto another planet? A new dimension? What will they do with the plane once it arrives at it's new destination? It's out of fuel and travelling at incredibly high speeds, it seems a pretty dangerous thing to attempt, why not attempt this while the plane was stationary on the tarmac?

It seems a claim that is very hard to comprehend.

 

[jarlrmai]

because one of the debris show no signs of age nor detoration of salt water after 16 months. Its why it sparkled the idea that it was planted. No one realy understood why the debris wasnt aged and looked as if it was pretty new, although it was indentified as part of MH370 fuselage.

What is the source/evidence for this statement?

 

[cptreynolds]

because one of the debris show no signs of age nor detoration of salt water after 16 months. Its why it sparkled the idea that it was planted. No one realy understood why the debris wasnt aged and looked as if it was pretty new, although it was indentified as part of MH370 fuselage.

Was one of the parts of debris not aged, or were none of the parts aged?

 

[Easy Muffin]

People seemed quite happy to accept that the plane likely fell into the ocean and sank without a trace so I don't understand the motive behind planting fake debris? When the first piece was found 15+ months later the story had already started to fade from public memory so what could the reason be for dragging it back into the spotlight like that? There was no need to sway the general public's opinion. Why go through all the effort and open yourself up to renewed interest and further inquiries? Doesn't make a lick of sense to me. Just let sleeping dogs lie and do... absolutely nothing instead.

 

[jarlrmai]

Can anyone else see if they think this is wierd or not

Take the video and scrub back and forth the part right at the beginning where the plane appears in the left and moves to the right before the camera starts to try and track the plane, why do the clouds and horizon roll and zoom so much even though there is no motion of the camera? (as per the relation to the part of the fuselage of the filming aircraft? Is this more movement than we'd expect from aircraft movement?

 

[PublicStranger]

People seemed quite happy to accept that the plane likely fell into the ocean and sank without a trace so I don't understand the motive behind planting fake debris? When the first piece was found 15+ months later the story had already started to fade from public memory so what could the reason be for dragging it back into the spotlight like that? There was no need to sway the general public's opinion. Why go through all the effort and open yourself up to renewed interest and further inquiries? Doesn't make a lick of sense to me. Just let sleeping dogs lie and do... absolutely nothing instead.

Also think about the logistical nightmare required to manufacture identical debris and have it planted in the middle of the ocean. The Malaysian government or factions of would need to be in on it, Boeing in some capacity would also need to be in on it in order to have identical debris sent to the Malaysian government and then the Navy or somebody who was used in the transportation of the debris into the ocean would need to be in on it also. All of this just to fan an idea that was already pretty much accepted.

 

[a_robot_kicker]

Let's grant everything claimed;

let's disregard the debris found, let's disregard the timing of the flight, let's disregard the question of mechanics and optics of the satellites used to take the footage, let's say it is MH370.

So aliens have used teleportation (something that is yet to be proven in the realm of science) to transport a plane to where and for what purpose? Why MH370? And why have no other planes disappeared similarly since?

The plane is now travelling at speeds of 400mph+ and has been teleported mid-flight onto another planet? A new dimension? What will they do with the plane once it arrives at it's new destination? It's out of fuel and travelling at incredibly high speeds, it seems a pretty dangerous thing to attempt, why not attempt this while the plane was stationary on the tarmac?

It seems a claim that is very hard to comprehend.

I dunno if they're aliens or interdimensional beings or fairies or some other fantastical thing they could have any type of motivation. It reminds me of that Stephen King novel "The Langoliers" about weird interdimensional toothy aliens eating a plane because that's what they do I guess?

 

[Amathia]

tried yes but came not near to the actual videos.
Maybe mr West with his vfx skills can do it ?

Why the arbitrary limit of 6 hours? And why must it only be done by 1 vfx artist and not a team? And why are people using the difficulty and complexity of creating such a vfx video as evidence against its having been faked? Hoaxes span the gamut from highly sophisticated to very crude attempts and everything in between.

Also, just out of curiosity because I haven't seen anyone mention this yet, has anyone considered the possibility of this being done as a video game mod? I don't play flight simulators so I don't know the full extent of what's out there beyond Microsoft Flight Sim, but the thermal video struck me as something one could potentially do in a game engine. The thermal effect would serve to obscure the fact that the plane is being rendered in a game engine. Just throwing it out there as a possibility.

 

[JMartJr]

Digression:

The Langoliers exist just behind the wave front of time moving through reality -- they eat the leftover existence once time has passed on. That includes, but is not limited to, the airport and plane; they eat leftover reality. For some reason when time rolls past, everything is left except the people, who are surfing along the wavefront, as it were. Our Heroes wind up getting left behind for reasons I forgot and can't be bothered to go look up.

/Digression