MH370 Videos are 100% possible to date (but improbable)

UPDATE: The footage had been kinda debunked

https://twitter.com/JonasDeRo/status/1733120958125482140?t=sGqqtsr3f1chgsfPrlq4-A&s=19

Obviously my blog post's premise was based on this being a footage, but oh well, it was a composite image lol.

It still though interesting to me what the output would've been if the techniques were executed (maybe noise and no date?)..

Anyway, now you know

The Article comes after this line I'm writing right now

Peace out!

UPDATE 2: Someone recently made a new motion displaying technique

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSS6yAMZF78

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woj4vfMLpao

 

FOREWORD:

•Not expert, just idiot

•Hypothesis verification needs experts in sound, forensics, programming, AI, social engineering, law..

•Will avoid readers’ boredom from blog’s length via:

>> Blogpost as bullet points

>> Not displaying videos

>> Will make notes for shortcuts

 

 

 

I.                   PRELUDE

We don’t have 2 UFO videos…  we have 6:

• 2 satellite & drone composites

• 2 leaker’s screenrecordings (thermal one manually recorded?)

• 2 Youtuber’s uploads

 

 

II.                 REASONING

Dating the:

• 2 Youtuber videos: Will (dis)prove the uploader’s claim in the description.

• 2 leaker’s screen recordings: Will (dis)prove the claim embodied by the footage as a fringe incident with a plane.

•2 satellite & drone composites: Will (dis)prove the claim embodied by the footage of a fringe incident with MH370.

 

Since there is a chain of events in the claim made around the videos,

Then being able to date any video, in any of the 3 types will:

(dis)prove the rest of the story

 

Meaning that

If, and only if we have one date that has been forensically found,

Then the whole story will be validated, or invalidated

 

 

III.              PROBABILITIES

• In my opinion, dating is possible for all the video; but given the nature of the techniques that will be used, it’s:

1) Unlikely to date The Youtube video

2) Likely to date the events happening in the footage

3) Unlikely to date the videotaping of the UFO footage

 

 

IV.              DATING TECHNIQUE

 

---[[[ Mains hum ]]] ----

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0elNU0iOMY&t=82s

 

 

• It’s an audio artifact that –theoretically - exists in most modern audio recordings

• Used as a tool in crime forensics to date audio records & detect possible edits to them.

è Meaning:

Extracting audio from one of the videos increases the chances of dating

 

 

V.                 SOUND EXTRACTION METHODS

 

1)      Method 1: Metadata Extraction

 

If:

there is no sound whatsoever on that Archive.org  video[1]

Then:

We should first suspect or suppose our ignorance of how Archive platform works, then:

• Try with the other videos from Youtube[2] and Vimeo[3]:

• Check for potential audiofiles in Archive’s video metadata that’s available in the platform & through “inspect” tool.

 

Moreover:

If:

the supposition stated above is:

- Unverifiable, then there is a chance such metadata is in the servers of the Internet Archive..

In which case we should create a petition concerning the Internet Archive giving us access to the raw data in their servers[4] (like CR2 files, etc).

(same contact attempts & quasi “social engineering” could be tried with the old Ytb and Vimeo uploaders)

-  Invalid, then we move directly to the next extraction method.

 

2)      Method 2: Magnifiers

 

N.B:

1^st video for integral understanding,

4^th video for testing w/ links in the description

 

• Color Magnification technique is used to create the color microscope:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHfhorJnAEI

• That technique gave birth to video magnification technique, which allowed creating the Motion microscope

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npNYP2vzaPo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUzB0L0mSCI

• Motion microscope captures subtle movements in video

• We get a visual microphone using a special program that translates the subtle movements captured by the motion microscope into sound

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKXOucXB4a8&t=109s

 

 

P.S:

There are 2 other magnifiers:

• One open source:

(research material in the description)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFzpHiXvSeI 

• The other proprietary:

(mentioned at the beginning, 2^nd part had open sourced one w/ testing links in the description) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEoc0YoALt0

 

 

VI.              POSTLUDE

 

Don’t be surprised by all of these techniques (& how old they are), it’s even possible to get audio from light:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njzjevj9KoM&t=332s

Let alone what is hidden from us..

---

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20170606182854/https://youtube.com/watch?v=5Ok1A1fSzxY

https://web.archive.org/web/20140827060121/https://youtube.com/watch?v=ShapuD290K0

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS9uL3Omg7o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKps7bcDiI0

[3] https://vimeo.com/104295906

[4] They are a non-profit that’s functioning with public donations; I don’t think a request and a petition will be any riskier or harder than filling FOIA requests.