What kind of aircraft displays these kind of lights?

[Z.W. Wolf]

At around the time OP recorded the planes were transitioning from NE to E sand lightly South a min or so either side is a different between NE and E.

Well done.

Can you show us the path of the aircraft on a map, from the beginning of the video to the end?

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

@FriendsAboveUs thinks MW was placing the aircraft too far away and traveling in the wrong direction.



Source: https://twitter.com/FriendsAboveUs/status/1696896889793216943?s=20

The plane they think is responsible for my sighting at 9.23 pm according to their map. The plane was over 70 miles away, making it IMPOSSIBLE for me to see anything that far.

I can see the source of the confusion.

When I pressed record, it was flying over the top of my head over 70 miles away from where that plane is on that map.

When @FriendsAboveUs looks at this flight path diagram, he sees the airplane symbol and thinks that this marks where MW thinks that the KC-135 BOLT47 was at the exact moment he was taking the video. Thus he thinks MW, and Metbunk in general, is placing the aircraft many miles away from his camera position and traveling in the wrong direction.

He has never understood that MW was tentatively placing the aircraft path seen in the video somewhere along the flight path in the diagram, depending on what the actual camera position was.

At that time, MW was using the only known camera postion: Near Alexandria, LA. So he included the entire flight path near Alexandria.

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

Further, I think I can explain why @FriendsAboveUs (AKA eyeSpy) was suspicious that MW/Metabunk was trying to dox him.

Can you give a more precise location?

Without giving you my home address? No lol
What reason would you need to have a more precise Location?
Is that not enough for deduction here?

SuppaCoup said:

Can you give us a location within say, 200-400 feet of where you were? There's no way for us to dox you with that.
And I think the hypothesis that this may be refueling airplanes is not entirely unreasonable, what do you think of it?

Just the fact that you said "dox" puts this site at risk if anything does happen so no I will not be giving you that level of information.
Regardless of personal intent.

These people act like there's 500 planes being refueled over that dot on that map at that time.
There were 0 planes on that date at that time that could explain this.

15 hours later still scratching their heads in denial.

@FriendsAboveUs doesn't understand what MW was trying to do when he first presented that flight path diagram. MW was making an hypothesis, and he wanted to test his hypothesis. To do that he needed a better, but still approximate, camera position. MW/Metabunk wanted to use geometry to test whether the aircraft path on the video could be reasonably placed somewhere on the flight path in the diagram. That would be one bit of evidence that the null hypothesis could be rejected.

@FriendsAboveUs doesn't understand why it was important to narrow down his camera position. He doesn't understand the geometry thing. He leapt to the conclusion that this was an effort to dox him. (To search for and publish private or identifying information about a particular individual on the Internet, typically with malicious intent.)

 

[Trailspotter]

He has made a daytime video of his location showing the tree line

I looked around the deduced camera location in StreetView and found a group of similar-looking trees less than 300 m away. Unfortunately, I can see them only from the road at a very different angle and therefore can't prove these are the same trees.

 

[Creamy Pasta]

@FriendsAboveUs doesn't understand why it was important to narrow down his camera position. He doesn't understand the geometry thing. He leapt to the conclusion that this was an effort to dox him. (To search for and publish private or identifying information about a particular individual on the Internet, typically with malicious intent.)

Some months ago before this video and this thread kicked off I interacted with @FriendsAboveUs (eyeSpy) regarding other videos he has published. To me, they all appeared to be satellites and I tried to assist in IDing them. For that I needed his location which he refused to supply. Back then I had zero idea where he was located. After some back and forth I was eventually blocked and for me, that was the end of it.

Roll forward to the present and I now know he's located near Alexandria, Louisiana. With this knowledge, I went back to the 16th Aug to a video entitled "GROUND BREAKING PROOF OF MY CONTACT WITH UFO ORBS" (linked below). This video featured a slow-moving "UFO ORB" and faster-moving ones. The Twitter/X post that also publishes this video also gives the time and date, 14 Aug, 21:18 local time.

Knowing these basic facts I was able to determine that the "UFO ORB" he made contact with was in fact NAVSTAR 16 (USA47), an old retired, and tumbling GPS satellite. At 1:12 into the video, we also get another fleeting faster satellite that he zooms out to capture more of before returning to his "UFO ORB" and this is identified as COSMOS 983. I suspected at the time he didn't want to give his location because it lends itself to this analysis. But recent events (this thread) have allowed for it to now happen.

I am of the belief that this character is just noise in the UAP/UFO space and I for one won't be giving him any further attention.

[EDIT: I forgot to mention before I was blocked he was highly abusive and insulting. Some of you may have noticed this already, another reason I'm done with him].

 

[Quirky Lantern]

Sounds par for the course.




Source: https://twitter.com/FriendsAboveUs/status/1688351722643582976



The 'brilliantly bright orb' at 3m19s is the Chinese Space Station, but pointing that out gets you hidden and blocked.

I would have thought the 'team of REAL pilots' he consults before he posts his videos might have pointed this out, but for some reason they fail to identify it.

 

[jarlrmai]

Well done.

Can you show us the path of the aircraft on a map, from the beginning of the video to the end?

If you read the thread there are several screenshots showing the plane's transition around the time they recorded it.

eg

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/wh...splays-these-kind-of-lights.13141/post-300517

 

[Mendel]

The Twitter/X post that also publishes this video also gives the time and date, 14 Aug, 21:18 local time.

Knowing these basic facts I was able to determine that the "UFO ORB" he made contact with was in fact NAVSTAR 16 (USA47), an old retired, and tumbling GPS satellite. At 1:12 into the video, we also get another fleeting faster satellite that he zooms out to capture more of before returning to his "UFO ORB" and this is identified as COSMOS 983. I suspected at the time he didn't want to give his location because it lends itself to this analysis. But recent events (this thread) have allowed for it to now happen.

Are you able to check the clock on his camera via these sightings, to see whether it's slow or on time?

 

[Mendel]

The 'brilliantly bright orb' at 3m19s is the Chinese Space Station, but pointing that out gets you hidden and blocked.

Are you able to check the clock on his camera via this sighting, to see whether it's slow or on time?

I would have thought the 'team of REAL pilots' he consults before he posts his videos might have pointed this out, but for some reason they fail to identify it.

If that's a reference to Americans for Safe Aerospace, I wouldn't be surprised tbh.

 

[Creamy Pasta]

Are you able to check the clock on his camera via these sightings, to see whether it's slow or on time?

For this specific video see the attached image. Note, since the observers location is only approximate there's a time tolerance of +/- a few seconds.

 

[jarlrmai]

Are you able to check the clock on his camera via this sighting, to see whether it's slow or on time?

If that's a reference to Americans for Safe Aerospace, I wouldn't be surprised tbh.

We'd need the original file from the camera to see what date and time it recorded.

 

[Mendel]

For this specific video see the attached image. Note, since the observers location is only approximate there's a time tolerance of +/- a few seconds.

So, since he gave 21:18 as the time for the video, if that corresponds to the start of the clip, the camera clock would be more than a minute fast on August 14, since it was 21:16:49 when he started. Hmmm.

BOLT47 was generally heading NE from about 9:19 pm until 9:21 pm. In this part of the track.

The camera clock showed 9:23 at the start of this clip, on August 25, so it could've actually been 9:21 or earlier. And we're looking at the later half of that sector.

 

[jarlrmai]

"The camera clock showed 9:23 at the start of this clip"

Where is this statement supported?

 

[Mendel]

We'd need the original file from the camera to see what date and time it recorded.

That would be best, but with @Quirky Lantern 's offset, we can do it loosely without that. Trailspotter's "blue star" on the Rock Hill solution gives 02:19:50 UTC, so the clock would need to be 3 minutes fast.

"The camera clock showed 9:23 at the start of this clip"

Where is this statement supported?

You can generally only make a confident statement like this after the fact if you look at the file's time stamp.

Either way, I'm simply assuming that the clock he uses to give the time of his videos is always the same clock. And @Creamy Pasta showed it's not accurate. Which means, "the tanker was in the wrong place at 2:23" can now be true without excluding our solution.

Logic dictates to say that all we've shown is that one of the clocks he's using to date his videos has been shown to be fast one time; it's not proven that the clock he used to date this video was fast when he did; but it's a plausible possibility now that has precedent.

 

[FastIndy]

I've got my own ADS-B receiver set up with aircraft type and position alerts now, just a matter of time until I nab a KC-135R refueling from a KC-46 or 2x KC-46s with some night photos. I've got an old Nikon D5000 DSLR so the low light video is not great, but I've also been getting pretty good at manually tracking airplanes with my 8" Dobsonian that I might try to throw my phone on. Pictured is an overflight from tonight, the no call sign B762 is a KC-46.