Debunked: this photo shows a Ukraine Mig-29 shot down MH17

M

mvdb22

Member
Russian TV just released a satellite photo which shows an Ukraine Air Force Mig-29 just as it launches a rocket to a plane supposed to be the Boeing 777 of Malaysia (MH17)

The article is here
http://www.1tv.ru/news/leontiev/271824
b2a86bc14e47ce53717ff17410da49fb._.jpg
 
Mick West said:
Can you post translated sections of the article that describe where they got it?
Click to expand...

The article is a transcript of the video. It says that the photos were attached to the following email, signed by a George Bilt:
Screen shot 2014-11-14 at 17.10.31.png


The presenter suggested that these photos possibly were taken by an American or British spy satellite.
 
Mi3 said:
On image is Su-27 and not MIG-29 how its said in article.

Su-27
2fee0b4b72119d380ccc377ed5028253.jpg

08691a1e86a8ea23c080303aa655b916.jpg
Click to expand...
I'm not sure that can be confidently stated. I think the angle of the tail section more resembles a MIG than the SU
upload_2014-11-15_7-37-0.png

upload_2014-11-15_7-36-18.png

But this is the first time that a MIG and not an SU has been mentioned in connection to the incident.
 
mvdb22 said:
debunked by many people. See this blog for many evidences this is a fake by an amateur http://www.whathappenedtoflightmh17.com/proof-the-russian-tv-satellite-photo-of-mh17-is-fake/
Click to expand...
Not all those points seem solid (no contrails behind the plane doesn't prove it's not in flight for one) but the map photo showing fields with no change from 2012 (or 2002, it's not clear) is the simplest and most obvious debunk.
I couldn't find the exact same image on google earth, the one closest resembling the pattern in one of the fields was a black and white photo from 2011. I think the yandex map may be an original image then not used by google, not sure how to check their image dates though.
 
The airport image (thin horizontal rectangle) is definitely post-2012 as the runways weren't finished before then
But what's weird on google earth is what looks like a wrecked plane in the parking area, between the images 4/28 and 6/19.
Screen Shot 2014-11-15 at 10.56.48 am.png

.
Screen Shot 2014-11-15 at 10.57.04 am.png
 
Last edited:
From post #3: Photo of English-language transcript. (Paragraph three):

"...aiming right and sharp at the pilots' abdomen region." Nonsense. Their heads are the most obvious targets, through the windows.

On further reflection, one might wish to 'argue' that the "abdomen region" of the two pilots was guessed at...this type of accuracy is also not believable. In addition, in any case "IF" it is as claimed in that transcript? I.E., "(To silence killing them instantly - not even a scream)". Just wrong. People hit in that manner may well cry out in pain, and thus the CVR would have recorded it. Only way to NOT hear a pilot make a sound is when the main electrical power for the whole airplane is shut off, thus stopping the CVR recording capability.

So agree, this is a hoax.
 
Last edited:
Another feature debunked ('cause this is kind of fun)...
Detail from claimed 'sat image' from July 17th.
Screen Shot 2014-11-15 at 11.49.12 am.png

This feature on July 16th.
Screen Shot 2014-11-15 at 11.49.49 am.png

The last time it looked like the claimed image.
Screen Shot 2014-11-15 at 11.48.49 am.png
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2014-11-15 at 11.49.12 am.png
    Screen Shot 2014-11-15 at 11.49.12 am.png
    63.4 KB · Views: 614
Last edited:
External Quote:
Ivan Adrievskiy, vice president of Russian Engineers Union, said: 'We see a photograph taken from space from a low orbit. Usually such images are taken for the sake of general reconnaissance of the air and the ground.

'The coordinates of the photograph mean we can suppose that the image was taken by an American or British satellite.

'We have studied this picture in detail and did not find any sign proving it to be fake.'
:p
At least no-one official is endorsing this.
 
Pete Tar said:
The airport image (thin horizontal rectangle) is definitely post-2012 as the runways weren't finished before then
But what's weird on google earth is what looks like a wrecked plane in the parking area, between the images 4/28 and 6/19.
View attachment 10183
.View attachment 10182
Click to expand...
Presumably damage from the battle at the end of May?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Battle_of_Donetsk_Airport

That airport (which was only rebuilt a couple of years ago) has since been more or less completely destroyed by fighting.

76a1af0ab84f003d6fb791d25ca03af4.jpg


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...says-331-killed-month-s-ceasefire-agreed.html
 
Last edited:
Well, maybe not so weird when you take it being an active warzone into account then. :)

External Quote:
Thirty-four of the dead insurgents were Russian nationals and Donetsk insurgents claimed the bodies were returned to Russia.[30] It was later revealed the bodies were returned covertly to hide the fact that they were Russian, eventually ending up in a Rostov-on-Don morgue in the Russian Federation.[31]
 
Seems to be debunked. A couple of thoughts, the US spends almost a 100 billion dollars on intelligence, isn't it logical that unless they're only spying on the western world, that they would have genuine images of the shootdown? Also how reliable is Google Earth? This image has been out there for a while and the head of Google is very close to the US government, I've heard. Could the images simply be altered at google?
 
  • Dislike
Reactions: Rob
Severed said:
Seems to be debunked. A couple of thoughts, the US spends almost a 100 billion dollars on intelligence, isn't it logical that unless they're only spying on the western world, that they would have genuine images of the shootdown? Also how reliable is Google Earth? This image has been out there for a while and the head of Google is very close to the US government, I've heard. Could the images simply be altered at google?
Click to expand...
It's not exactly logical that $100 billion on intelligence = they must have footage of the moment of attack.

You'll have to flesh out your thinking a bit more on your second point. Reliable in what way? Why would google alter the images in google earth to include parts of the fake picture, and what does 'being close' to the US government mean exactly and why does it have any bearing on this fake?
The one conspiracy theory in regard to this that might have some merit is that it was an obvious fake put out to discredit the report it supposedly was in support of, but I don't really think it requires any effort like this to do that.
 
Severed said:
Seems to be debunked. A couple of thoughts, the US spends almost a 100 billion dollars on intelligence, isn't it logical that unless they're only spying on the western world, that they would have genuine images of the shootdown? Also how reliable is Google Earth? This image has been out there for a while and the head of Google is very close to the US government, I've heard. Could the images simply be altered at google?
Click to expand...
First claim: what are the chances that a spy satellite would just happen to be in exactly the right position at exactly the right moment to take a photo of such an event? Pretty astronomically tiny! However large the US government spying budget is, they don't have a live view of the planet that they can just zoom in on any spot at any time. Spy satellites don't work like that.

As for the claim of altered images at Google. Well there is no evidence that it has been altered. And Google doesn't generate its own satellite imagery, of course. All the satellite images on Google Earth are from commercial image providers, and can be checked with the providers, so if anyone is doing the altering, it wouldn't be Google.

And there are plenty of other reasons it is fake. For one, the size of the plane is ridiculously huge. If you measure the plane on the image, then plug in the altitude of the satellite that took the image and the altitude of the plane, the airliner would have to be about two and a half miles long!
 
Last edited:
Pete Tar said:
It's not exactly logical that $100 billion on intelligence = they must have footage of the moment of attack.

You'll have to flesh out your thinking a bit more on your second point. Reliable in what way? Why would google alter the images in google earth to include parts of the fake picture, and what does 'being close' to the US government mean exactly and why does it have any bearing on this fake?
The one conspiracy theory in regard to this that might have some merit is that it was an obvious fake put out to discredit the report it supposedly was in support of, but I don't really think it requires any effort like this to do that.
Click to expand...
By seems to be debunked, was agreeing it was probably fake. I wasn't claiming that google had faked pictures, I was asking whether that possibility shouldn't be considered. After all, Google Earth was a program named Keyhole until the CIA sold it to them and they are partnered with the CIA in Recorded Future.Their head agrees with the government that there should noI didn't come here to argue. privacy for anyone. I don't agree that it is improbable that we were keeping close watch on Ukraine.
 
  • Dislike
Reactions: Rob
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

NorCal Dave
New Science of UAP Paper
2
Replies
44
Views
2K
Skalman
Skalman
Mick West
  • Sticky
Escaping the Rabbit Hole - Updated Endnotes and References
Replies
9
Views
10K
Stealth777
Stealth777
M
  • Locked
Claim: MH17 was shot down by separatists using BUK stolen from Ukraine army
Replies
32
Views
18K
Mick West
Mick West
TEEJ
Bellingcat Analysis of Satellite Imagery Used In Russian Claims Against Ukraine
2 3
Replies
104
Views
50K
Mick West
Mick West
Bruce Lansberg
  • Locked
Claim: Jeroen Akkermans: Framents prove MH17 was shot down by a Russian made BUK
Replies
34
Views
23K
Mick West
Mick West

Latest posts

Trending content

Back
Top