@ashtonforbes#MH370X PRE-REGICIDEANON VERSION FOUND! DIFFERENT PORTAL EFFECT! Just a screenshot, but if real it's looking like RegicideAnon posted an altered version with identifiable VFX after the originals were scrubbed. https://t.co/GZZkJYrlAa
@adams_at@LeftwaffenWatch@ashtonforbes What I do find hard to believe is the subject matter of the videos and the teleportation. I was happy with the portal VFX debunk until that recent post sparked my interest. There is always a chance that tech could be real imo because weird shit like quantum entanglement exists.
@ashtonforbes#MH370X You might want to look into this. I was not a believer in the videos and believed they were debunked, but this post about the VFX is making me think otherwise. I would like to hear your thoughts on it, potentially on a live stream. https://t.co/m3W1M6MUAb
@adams_at@LeftwaffenWatch@ashtonforbes I'm personally not claiming you are purposely tampering evidence, that's a claim the reddit poster is making. In regard to the rabbit hole, I am fully willing to accept that a gov agency would plant false evidence to keep something a secret. That isn't hard to believe.
@adams_at@LeftwaffenWatch@ashtonforbes I'm not saying you did. Im saying perhaps your sourced was compromised and you were unknowingly propagating false evidence. I'm playing devils advocate atm, I don't know if I believe in the videos, but given their implication if real, debunkers should triple-checking everything.
@adams_at@LeftwaffenWatch@ashtonforbes Cant metadata be easily edited? If so, then it shouldn't be used as definitive proof. If powers that be are willing to write blank checks to falsify the footage, then Pong5 being compromised is not out of the question. When did you obtain the images? You could have been duped too
@adams_at@LeftwaffenWatch@ashtonforbes I'm not here to debate, I want to understand how you're so adamant on the videos being fake. I am relatively new to this discussion, I don't know what to think as of yet.
@adams_at@LeftwaffenWatch@ashtonforbes What's wrong with using this? It's an upload from 2014, and if the argument is that the effect was retroactively modified for download on Pond5 appearing as the original, wouldn't footage like this be logically used to prove they are in fact modified? Help me understand please.
@LeftwaffenWatch@markocheese@ashtonforbes Thanks for posting this. I will consider this and look into the validity of Arwen's analysis, but I'm no expert so I unfortunately have to go off the claims of others and their evidence. I'm still on the fence. I just wish the mods of both subs would stop deleting discussions.
@NatashaMosokito@arwenevenstarr_ To me it looks like top-down footage of lit alcohol or some flammable liquid on a black backdrop, later made transparent.
@LeftwaffenWatch@ashtonforbes Metadata can be manipulated. The post I'm referencing shows the Pond5 hosted versions have been retroactively changed and are slightly different from an archived version.
@LeftwaffenWatch@ashtonforbes Isn't that what that post was doing? Gathering multiple publications of the effect from different archival dates and comparing the inconsistencies? The post shows it has been changed, why ask those redundant questions rather than rebutting with evidence how the post is bull.
@LeftwaffenWatch@ashtonforbes I don't know. If the powers that be have blank checks to put behind falsifying evidence, then it's not outside the realm of possibility. I don't know if the videos are real or not, I'm on the fence. Please give me your angle on how this is preposterous. Don't be an ass about it.