Julian Dorey Podcast - 😱 [VIDEO] - MH370 "Whistleblower" EXPOSED by Julian Dorey | Ashton Forbes • 168

Episode Date: November 16, 2023

(***TIMESTAMPS in Description Below) ~ Ashton Forbes is a citizen journalist and investigator of the doomed 2014 Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 (MH370). EPISODE LINKS: - Get 15% OFF MudWTR (PROMO CODE: “JULIAN”): https://mudwtr.com/julian  - Julian Dorey PODCAST MERCH: https://legacy.23point5.com/creator/Julian-Dorey-9826?tab=Featured  - Support our Show on PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/JulianDorey  - Join our DISCORD: https://discord.gg/VRZKvXZ7  - SUBSCRIBE to Clips Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@UChs-BsSX71a_leuqUk7vtDg  ***TIMESTAMPS*** 0:00 - MH370 (Malaysia Airlines) Story; UFO footage? 9:06 - Teleportation effect; alleged MH370 Thermal Video breakdown; How Ashton got into case 15:42 - How Ashton vets sources; Footage Leaker 22:15 - MH370 Stereoscopic Satellite Breakdown 25:57 - Ashton’s first time seeing alleged MH370 footage; MH370 Flight Path 31:54 - Plane animation; Governments involved in area 37:32 - The biggest search in history; Malaysia’s sketch Defense Minister; Electrical Fire Theory 46:54 - Pilot culpability Theory debunked; Julian vs Ashton on Cockpit Door 54:17 - FBI review of Pilot’s flight simulator 58:25 - Jeff Wise MH370 Russia Theory 1:03:41 - MH370 Passengers Mysterious Cell Phone Signals; Debris Field 1:10:17 - Entire MH370 investigation turns sketchy 1:15:46 - Alleged Debris from plane found story 1:22:26 - MH370 Thermal Overlay breakdown; Timelines of flight 1:28:45 - Smoking Gun; Leaker Timeline 1:32:33 - Lithium Battery Scenario; Julian vs Ashton on Determining Source Credibility 1:39:57 - MH370 SOS & Witnesses; Julian vs Ashton on Oil Rig Witness 1:53:34 - Julian vs Ashton on Katherine Tee (Kate Tee) Witness 2:10:21 - Fake Passengers 2:16:26 - Matching alleged leaked MH370 Satellite Footage; 3 Types of Satellites 2:22:54 - Julian vs Ashton on Obama Malaysia Trip & General’s Nephew’s Friend’s DM 2:31:26 - Motive behind making fake MH370 videos 2:39:10 - “How badly do you want this to be true?” 2:47:16 - Ashton’s theory on MH370 plane crash 2:55:06 - Why is Ashton taking lead here?; Julian gives Ashton life advice CREDITS: - Hosted & Produced by Julian D. Dorey - Edited by Alessi Allaman ~ Get $150 Off The Eight Sleep Pod Pro Mattress / Mattress Cover (USING CODE: “JULIANDOREY”): https://eight-sleep.ioym.net/trendifier Julian's Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/julianddorey ~ Music via Artlist.io ~ Julian Dorey Podcast Episode 168 - Ashton Forbes Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

She actually at one point was able to look through the cockpit and see in the cockpit, which actually makes me wonder. Wait, what? Yeah, she saw. She was able to look in the cockpit of the plane. It was low enough that she could see in the cockpit of the plane. Yeah, how high is this plane allegedly at this time? Between 2,000 and 10,000 feet.

Yeah, dude. Planes fly up above here from Newark Airport all the time, which is right there. I couldn't see the cockpit if I had a telescope. I mean, yeah, that's bull. So she said she doubted her sanity due to the I doubt her sanity, too. But I've talked to her, too. And she's not the kind of person that's making up a lot of who she's very logical and rational. How many times have you talked to her? I don't know. Over the phone just a few times. But you never met her in person? Do you know anyone who knows her well? i have not yeah yeah yeah you gotta chill with that okay whether or not you saw through the cockpit i think is not something

necessarily we have to harp on because the rest of the evidence is well we're pretty conclusive well listen as you saw it hold on here here's where you gotta be careful you have to harp on these things because when a witness says a ridiculous statement you then have to question what else could be ridiculous that seemed perfectly plausible before. I'm not saying that makes everything else implausible, but when you start getting into the, I saw the cockpit from 4,000 feet away, like no. Supposedly. Yeah. Yeah. Supposedly I'm a bulls**t alert. Hey guys, I need your help with three quick things. And if you're watching me on Spotify video right now, you can see this timer to my right. It is going to be fast. Number one, if you are not already following the show, please hit that follow button on Spotify or whatever

audio platform you're on. Number two, if you're on Spotify right now on our show's homepage in the description, you will see a link to our Spotify podcast clips channel. That's right. We are posting clips from this podcast every single day on there. There is a whole library, so go over there and follow. And finally, number three, if you are on Spotify or Apple, please leave a five-star review. It is a huge, huge help to the show. Now, let's get to the episode. Ashton, welcome, man. Hey, Julian. How's it going, buddy? I'm good. I'm good. We've been talking here for a few hours since you got in, going through a lot of details here.

As people can probably see maybe at the bottom of the camera, I don't know if they can see all of it, but you have a lot of paperwork out here. And you have been the man all over Reddit and Twitter talking about the mysterious MH370 case. So before we begin, I mentioned before I just wanted to set some of the groundwork here, if you don't mind for a sec. So for people who don't remember that case, I'm sure you will when I tell you about what happened. But in 2014, March 2014, there was a Malaysian Airlines flight bound for Beijing, China, flying over the South China Sea that suddenly disappeared. And the fascinating thing is that while this is debated, it is alleged that no real debris has ever been found from the crash. There was some that a shady figure we'll talk about later did find on the shores of Mozambique and Madagascar in what has to be the luckiest human being ever to walk the face of this

earth. More on that later. But there were 239 souls on board and no one has ever heard a peep since. And you have a bunch of families who have no closure. There's no bodies there is only speculation so the possible tossed around i most tossed around ideas here are generally one of four things number one the pilot zahari flew a suicide murder flight murder suicide flight and turned this plane around and went put it off the transponders and went all

the way down into the southern parts of the indian ocean until it ran out of fuel and it crashed and we just were never able to find any debris from it number three is that there was some sort of severe weapons defense testing going on presumably from the united states that went wrong and this plane was caught in the middle of it and number four is that perhaps the same thing was going on but it was purposeful. It could have been any government and it went down. Now, I don't think it's reasonable to say like the United States would shoot down a civilian aircraft that only had three Americans on it. It had a bunch of people from China, like 100-something people from mainland China on there, that would have been an international incident. So that conspiracy kind of gets out of control. But you have the greatest airline mystery in the history of aviation, and it is something that people on the Internet at the time worked together to try to figure out.

So you're hosting the family barbecue this week, but everyone knows your brother is the grill guy, and it's highly likely he'll be backseat barbecuing all night. So be it. Impress even the toughest of critics with freshly prepared Canadian barbecue favorites from Sobeys. Between client meetings, managing your business, and everyday tasks, who has time to worry about website hosting? With Kinsta's managed WordPress hosting, you don't have to. They handle the technical stuff, delivering lightning-fast load times, enterprise-grade security, and 24-7, 365 human-only support. Simply switching to Kinsta

can make your site up to 200% faster. Kinsta's custom dashboard makes managing sites easy, with powerful features designed to save you time and effort. Plus, their free expert-led migrations ensure a smooth transition. Ready to see why Kinsta is trusted by thousands of businesses? Get your first month free at kinsta.com. That's K-I-N-S-T-A dot com. Kinsta. Simply better hosting. Out and something that is now coming back to the forefront through some of these releases that dot com. Kinsta, simply better hosting. Big core release here is that you have put forward some videos that you sourced from online that were in the archives that you're going to go through that purport to show satellite and thermal images, two different videos, of this jet being surrounded by what appear to be orbs and suddenly disappearing. Now, I'm very skeptical. I'm going to be honest. I think the video is fake.

I was on the phone with my friend James Fox this morning, who reviewed the footage, and they did give it to a bunch of other people as well. And he thought it was very fake. I also am connected to someone I spoke to this morning who has a VFX team running frame by frame, how they would have created this inside of two months, which is when the video you'll get to that, but when the video, how long it took after the crash for this video to officially go online, but they're doing a frame by frame reanalysis with 2014 equipment to be able to see if they could have done this and they're certain they can. So we'll have to see when that closes off, but let's start off with who you are

and how you got into the middle of this case, and then we'll start dissecting it. Yeah. So my name is Ashton Forbes. And like many other people, I saw these videos reemerge on the Reddit, subreddit UFOs on August 8th. And they had been posted previously. The last time they'd been posted was in January. And when they were posted in January, And they had been posted previously. The last time they'd been posted was in January. And when they were posted in January, the topic had been downvoted. I saw the old thread about it. There were a lot of comments about how it was distasteful that these videos were out there. To me, what struck out to me is that I had seen the thermal footage in 2014, when I had just been looking into this case as, you know, casual civilian, kind of investigating it.

And the thing that struck out to me is when I saw the second video, I didn't realize there was two videos at the time. And even in 2014, I don't think that we had the capability to understand these videos to be real like we do today. There was a lot of requirements. Well, I think there's five requirements that we needed to have to understand to be real the first is the 2017 dod navy video leaks that showed us what fleer forward infrared facing uh videos look like we can tell that our drone is actually that type of footage at least similar but it has a thermal layer added over the top of it and the hud data has been removed the second thing is we needed the Trump 2019 satellite picture, which we could

pull up if we want to take a look at it as well to see what that picture would look like. Now, I've gone ahead and given you guys a lot of these files here, and this particular one is called Trump Satellite Leak, which we can pull up in a second, but you'll see from that that they were able to

figure out from the trajectory that this picture was taken by USA 224. And that satellite was brought up in 2011, which is the same year that we think the satellite that took our video was brought up, USA 229. It shows very similar optical capabilities, infrared. The main difference is that in the USA 224 picture from Trump, you can see some very clear shadows, whereas in our footage, we don't see any shadows. Those are the first two requirements. In addition to that, we needed to understand advanced science. In 2014, we were on just on the beginning, essentially, of understanding quantum teleportation.

And we really had no idea that potentially even things like wormholes could be possible. I read three scientific papers that show that wormholes are possible without exotic material, that they're humanly traversable, that people can go through them and survive. And then perhaps most importantly, that you can create a double-sided, thin-layer shell to allow an object to traverse through a potential wormhole. But would a wormhole be able to exist within our atmosphere like that? Yeah. Interestingly enough, as the case has developed, my understanding of science has also improved.

At this point, I think we're ready to move away from the idea that we're looking at a wormhole. And instead, what we're really going to be looking at is a transitional phase change of the plane from potentially quantum, from macro to quantum. And what that allows is it allows for a macroscopic solid object to obtain the properties of quantum, which then essentially allow it to open up to what we consider to be essentially magic.

But the scientific definition would be that there would be inertial mass reduction happening for this plane, which allows its time to speed up, and it to essentially achieve light speeds or greater, which is what we would consider to be teleportation. Okay, before we dig into that, Alessi, I just sent you the drive link. Can you click that? It's in your text. Yeah, yeah. Go down to thermal, go down to T's, yeah go down to thermal go down to tease and go down to thermal image or whatever you say it mp4 okay click that it should be like move but no it should be like a move file it's called isn't it called

thermal yeah are we talking about the video yeah yeah so yeah the other one the dot move so you look at thermal thermal HD MP4 would be our video, if we want to pull that up and take a quick look. Let's put that on the screen. Yeah. All right, so I will put this in the corner of the screen for people to be watching on the podcast. Perfect.

All right, so it has no volume, so we can talk our way through this. What are we seeing here? So digging right into the footage here, we're seeing Malaysian Airlines, we believe, a 777-200 making a left-hand turn that's descending here. And that was smoke coming out of the back, it looks like? Yeah, we can see the smoke, and the reason is that smoke is that there's cumulus clouds, which only form at low altitudes, meaning this can't be contrails coming out of the back of the plane here. We can see these orbs come in, and they appear to be ignoring gravity. This is explained as superconductivity in action, potentially even room temperature superconductivity. We can see these lines in front of the orbs that they're

following, almost like train tracks here. As far as I know, I've never seen any video in UFOlogy or otherwise that shows anything similar to this in terms of the movement that we see of the orbs, certainly not in this high quality. We can see these heat signature yeah what's going on there so there's two yeah the heat signature we can see of the jet engine but we also see the second seat go back go back we're at 56 seconds go back to 50 yeah press pause the heat signature that you see is actually in the middle of the belly of the plane there is right where the landing gear are. And the landing gear heat signature essentially shows us that there are some AC exhaust there. And those AC exhaust ports there are actually where we believe what's happening is the smoke is going through the air conditioning system in the plane, and then is being passed out through the heat exhaust ports.

And that's why we see this oblong heat signature that we see right there, right near the landing gear. So this is potentially indicative that there might be a fire on board and that this could be the real cause of what we'll be talking about today, of what happened to the plane. How do you know about this stuff? Do you have a background in anything aerospace or planes? My background is in healthcare IT,

which I've been upfront about in general. And that's part of the reason how, you know, unrelated to this, that I have a clearance that gives me some level of credibility. It doesn't have anything to do with... What do you mean you have a clearance? A government clearance. So government clearance meaning I've gone through a background check related to my job as a contractor with the government. I don't have any background experience in unidentified phenomenon or advanced technology or anything related to my job as a contractor with the government. I don't have any background experience in unidentified phenomenon or advanced technology or anything related to that. But when I've looked and seen what other people who've tried to disclose

information that's of this level, I kind of realized that you can't just be a Joe Schmo off the street. You have to have some level of credibility to the idea that what you're presenting here is potentially authentic, that we've gone through it. And I think you can see from the research that we've done here as well, that I've approached this from a scientific standpoint. Now, I'm not writing a scientific paper. I'm an investigator. I'm looking at it like you would look a case that you're going to take to court. We're building a story that is supported by the evidence. And that story in turn has evolved, but not very much. The evidence essentially stays the same.

And as we've gotten new evidence come in, the story has potentially, the narratives, the weight of the narratives have shifted slightly to the point where we're at today, where we think we have a very clear picture of what the overall story is, but there's some details that remain a mystery. So a lot of this evidence, you know, just straightforward,

initially, especially, came from social media. This might be one of the first ever cases where it began as being a community-led investigation. And as that community-led investigation was shut down and silenced, then I sort of took the reins, began a new organization called MH370X. And the people in that investigation have been pulling up all sorts of historical videos, news articles. We've dug through and had experts reach out to me by private DM. How do you verify those people? I'm off camera for a sec because of Leslie's walk-in. Yeah.

In terms of verifying them, it really has to do with how credible I find them from an individual basis, asking them about their backgrounds. But they're just people on DMs? How can you really verify that? Well, I think that's the new paradigm that we're setting here. What do you mean? Is that normally everybody's so concerned with credentialism that we only give way to people if they have credentials next to their name. That's not what we're doing in this case. In this case, we take the evidence, we determine is it credible evidence based on does it fit the facts, does it fit the story, and is their background accurate? We can look up and we can confirm it.

What we're dealing with here is potentially the largest verifiable conspiracy of all time. Right. But I'm going to be... Listen, if people are upset about interruptions today, this is not the podcast for you. I'm going to be interrupting all day because we have... There is so much dense information here and we have to be able to verify some things i don't expect you to be right about everything i certainly expect there to be holes in the story but there's they're reading through old and you've put out a lot of like manifestos of of the evidence on reddit on twitter i've read through a bunch of them i find things

where i'm like wow that's backed other things i'm like all right that doesn't have any backing right there so going back to the post-credentialism world you're talking about yeah i don't disagree that like just because someone has some expertise mean meaning should mean that they're the only people who are allowed to talk about it i i don't agree that that should be the case yeah however if you just have some random asshole DMing you on Twitter saying, listen, you know, one time I worked on a plane and like, I know that this video is this way, and then he gives you the confirmation bias of finding what you already do want to find, do you see why that would be a problem in making this case?

Yeah, and I don't think that's what's happening here. So in general... Why don't you think that's what's happening? Because that's not how I'm looking at it. So with respect to the people who give me the information, I vet that information myself. But what's your process? You understand what I'm saying? Like, I vet information too. I'm an asshole sitting in a podcast studio. So if somebody says, okay, this is how

a fire could propagate throughout the plane, then we can check and we can verify that information. Is that accurate? Does that make sense from a logical standpoint? And is what they're saying have weight to it, as opposed to someone just saying, oh, no, that's from the AC vents. Like some people will try to argue that heat signature right there is from the AC vents. But from a common sense standpoint, I can say, well, is that what it would look like from the outside? Right? Is it really going to be as hot as the

engines are going to be? The people that I give credit to are the ones that aren't telling me exactly what to think. They're people that are just presenting evidence forward, and then we can take that evidence and we can vet it. So to me, I haven't used all the evidence that's been presented forward to me, and it's not that I'm just using the evidence that is going to support my idea. I actually don't have any preconceived notions about what this should have happened. And if you look through the history of how the case has progressed, you'll be able to see that my understanding has progressed with it. I don't have any bias in terms of this being real or not real. The reason why I'm convinced it's real is because I've actually gone through each piece of the

evidence individually, and we've used, in this case, more evidence than anybody else to date regarding MH370. Okay, let's bookmark that. Let's go back to this video because we left off talking about it. We're on second 45 right now hit that play button alessi thank you perfect all right so we are seeing the orbs is now right up tight there are orbs going around this plane and suddenly boom there it goes so it appeared and this is what you're referring to a little bit ago with the almost like wormhole-ish type phenomenon. Like it disappears. So where, in the first place, when did this video first come public and how did you first get turned on to it?

Now fast forwarding. Yeah, so we have been able to archive this footage back to an account called Regicide Anon. Sounds like a straight shooter. Yeah, and we've actually got images that show that this is not the first video this person had uploaded. They seem to be a random UFO YouTuber account. And in this video archive, it says received in the description March 12, 2014.

Now, this date is four days after the plane went missing. It was uploaded May 19, 2014, which is roughly nine weeks afterwards, which is interesting that they would sit on it that long if what they say is true about the receive date. It also says source protected on it. Now, it's interesting that it says source protected because their other videos don't say that. They say email submission, other things that are more standard of somebody just giving them a video to upload. So the story that I can glean here, if this information is true,

is that they had to be convinced that what they were looking at is real because potentially they would undergo the same thing that we would go on in 2014 and said, there's no way that this can be accurate, this can be real. What this also means, that is, if you believe these videos are fake,

you have to have a reason for why Regicide Anonymous would be lying about the receive date because that receive date is very damning. Can you explain that again, just so people didn't catch that, the difference between the receive date and the post date? Yeah, the post date is the date where this was uploaded, actually, that became available on YouTube, which is about 72 days after the event of MH370 of March 8th. And how do we, what is the receive date? How do we know that that's even true? The received date of March 12th, we can't necessarily know it's true, and that's the

point. So when we develop a timeline for the videos to be faked, we have between four and 72 days to create the satellite video according to the dates that are on here. And that's very important. Because the crash was March 8th. Exactly. So either you say, okay, you've got four days, or somehow Red Decided Not is lying about that date,

or got it incorrect, or something. But that was, was the receive date, is that something that used to be listed on YouTube? Yeah, this is actually goes all the way back to the archive. So when we point to that receive date, that wasn't added later on. That was actually from the original upload, is when they had that out there.

Are you sick of the coffee jitters from drinking it too many days in a row how about that dreaded afternoon crash well then listen up because i have an amazing on-the-go drink for you to try mud water mud water is a coffee alternative containing four adaptogenic mushrooms big words because they're really cool with only a fraction of the caffeine of a cup of coffee you're still going to get that all-day energy without the jitters or the crash and by the way each ingredient was added for a very specific purpose. You got cacao and chai for a hint of caffeine and a tasty hot chocolate like flavor, cordyceps to promote natural energy, and both chaga and reishi to support a healthy immune system. All you got to

do is take a scoop of mud water powder, drop it into hot water, stir, and get on with your day. Personally, I love how you can drink mud water straight up or mix it into your favorite smoothie. Gotta have options, baby. So what I need you to do is go down and click the mud water link in my description, and at checkout, use promo code JULIAN to get 15% off the best coffee alternative you'll ever find. Once again, that's promo code JULIAN, J-U-L-I-A-N, at checkout to get 15% off your own Mudwater today. And by the way, they're going to throw in a free frother as well. Everybody wins. Now let's get back to the show. So when we're looking at that, we can say that, okay, potentially the leaker gave this to them. And the reason why we think that there's a leaker is that

there are higher quality versions of the footage that were uploaded later on by different accounts. And in one of those, there's a description. That description says that Red Decide Anon hostily argued with other YouTubers about the authenticity of this footage. So what that tells me is that Red Decide Anon was convinced that this was real. They uploaded it later on. And then they tried to convince other people that it was real as well. And just like maybe our audience is listening here, a lot of people are going, well, that's fake. They probably went through that same argument as well. Now, because we can see that the source is protected, and from a lot of the other details from the footage, which we'll present later, that potentially the person that leaked this to them really had to convince them

and say, hey, this really is real. Now, there's a second video. The one that we're looking at right here is actually the second video. This one says received June 5th. Wait, the one that we still have on the screen right now? This one right here. The first one, though, is the stereoscopic video? The satellite video, yes, which we see is side-by-side stereoscopic.

Can we get that, Alessi? What's that called in your draft? That one's called satellite. Satellite. Go find satellite. Find satellite stereoscopic. Can we get that, Alessi? What's that called in your draft? That one's called satellite. Satellite. Go find satellite. Find satellite stereoscopic. We can see this. So what you were saying is that these are two different satellites that are capturing the image in a close enough location that, or no, that's a stereoscopic, right?

Yeah, pull up the stereoscopic one. Yes, okay. So this is the one that Regicide Anon uploaded. And this is the only one of the uploads that seems to have this stereoscopic effect to it. So it could be that what we're seeing here is two satellites looking down that are in a close proximity in outer space that are roughly 900 to 1100 kilometers in the sky. This is important because what we're looking at here is a low Earth orbit satellite. So wait, these are two different satellites capturing this? Theoretically, yes, because we can see that there's a parallax effect that we see in this,

and we've proven that parallax effect. Can you explain that to people? Yeah, and essentially that means that you're looking at two slightly different angles. The reason why it's not very apparent is because it's so far away. And what this also means is you can overlay it and you can create a 3D video from it, which we've also been able to do, where you can actually put on blue and red glasses and watch it. So what this would mean is if somebody did this, then theoretically it's a very high quality fake, if so. Yeah, they're following it within the video itself. It's like someone's scrolling across the screen with a mouse and following it. That's not us doing that.

The satellite perspective changes eight times. And in the bottom left of it, which is kind of hard to see in this version, there's a satellite designation that indicates NRL-22. Which means? National Reconnaissance Office launch. So every satellite launch gets an NRL designation. The satellite itself for NRL-22 is called USA-184. Okay.

And so with our satellite, USA-229, which we think is taking this image, is actually NRL 34. Now, there's coordinates that go along with this as well, which are also very damning in addition to the date. The coordinates indicated in the bottom, as we can see them change, we are able to tell from this perspective changes what the actual direction of travel of this plane is. Because even if this was mirrored or inverted, the coordinates would show us the true path. And because the plane's turning left, we can actually tell that this plane is actually turning south into the east. Right. And this is some information, like, going back to the initial case,

when this all came out and, you know, the governments were giving their updates and air quotes there. Yeah. They had the, they changed it to say that the flight pattern had gone like it was going from Malaysia towards China over the South China Sea. Like, I forget what the bay there is called. Yeah, the South China Sea, though, is accurate enough, right? Yeah, where it disappears and goes dark, right? But then they then came out, I don't know if it was a few days later, a week later, back then in March 2014, where they said that it banked left back across over Malaysia mainland and into what is the Indian Ocean.

And then the connotation is that – and maybe this is what you're explaining right here, so I just want to see if it ties together. they were able to deduce that there was a possibility that it would have turned directly south and gone into the Indian Ocean based on satellite readings? Is that... They used ping data for that. So they were able to track that plane and that turn back over Malaysian Peninsula there and into the Straits of Malacca and to the Andaman Sea. And at 1840 UTC, it reaches the point where we see the coordinates in the bottom of our video right here,

which is the exact same location where they claim this plane turned into the South Indian Ocean. The counter-narrative that we will be proposing here is that what we're seeing in the videos is the true end of the flight path. The day you saw this, when it was re-released, so to speak, was back in August, right? Yeah. So that was when I had seen, I hadn't seen this particular stereoscopic when I'd seen the thermal only back in 2014. Oh, you had seen that back then? Yeah. In addition to thousands of other people. And I had ignored it. I just thought it had to be, you know, unrelated. I

didn't even know that it was related to MH370. If you look at the actual descriptions of these videos, they don't say MH370 in in either of them you didn't think that could be mh370 when it's coming out right around the time this fucking plane disappears in the middle that's the weirdest part i think about that a lot i think about like wow how did we just ignore this when this plane disappeared and all of a sudden there's this video that comes out and it shows a 777-200 and again i think it goes back to what i was mentioning is that we didn't have the basis to even understand the videos to be real. I didn't even know what FLIR footage looked like back then until 2017. I definitely didn't know what satellite footage,

I didn't even know we could do video satellite footage until this last 10 weeks ago. You know, we had never seen, I think, satellite video before. So you see this video in August where they released, basically, the satellite side of it. And it clicked. When they released it, now I'm getting mixed up because there's so much information I went through with this. When they released it, did they release it like concurrently with posts pointing to the thermal one and saying, by the way, this is the same one?

Yeah. So it was, yeah, that one came out like two, three weeks after the first video was uploaded. So that one says received June 5th and uploaded June 12th. The thermal one. The thermal, oh yeah. Which is the first one we watched. Yeah, that was the first one we watched. So you start to build a narrative here, right? Which is that, okay, this first video was released, we ignored it, nobody looked at it, right? No one took it seriously. And then the second video gets released and leaked right after. And they say, hey, this is another perspective. Now, interestingly enough, three days after they uploaded the first one regicide anon they made a Twitter

account they said first post May 22nd 2014 which is three days after and now in this you can see this is the first time that they tagged mh3 7-0 so if you pull up regicide anon tweet Twitter here you can see right here as well look at this we'll put this in the corner of the screen or you might be able to see it says please send this video before it's pulled and you can see hello twitter right there and now look at the tags mh370 the original footage just says airliner uh i believe says airliner abduction in it it doesn't say anything about mh370 but now regicide andided Not has linked it to MH370 in their Twitter. So the...

And that's very unusual. Because if you're hoaxing something, wouldn't you in the video describe it as MH370 disappearing? Instead of being vague about it? I don't know. I don't hoax things. No, I agree. I think it's odd, though, personally. Now, with respect to the flight path, I want to jump back into that. Because I think it's really important to establish the flight path. Can you Google that, Alessi? Let's get a good color visual to the flight path, I want to jump back into that because I think it's really important to establish the flight path.

Can you Google that, Alessi? Let's get a good color visual of the flight path. Go ahead and pull up the video that I have, which is called – look it up. We have a giant for people following at home. We have a giant Google Drive of a bunch of the evidence Ashton has added to this. So they're all kind of named in code. Right here. Flight path G.

So that's, yeah, we can use this one. That's good enough to start. Yeah, we can use this. If you could try to find like an ABC graphic of it or something that just looks a little better, but that's fine. We'll start with that in the corner of the screen. Yeah. And so in this flight path here, we can see that the plane is going northeast. It takes off at 1642 UTC. And for people out there, UTC translates to, because this is way in East Asia.

Universal Time Code, essentially. How far ahead is that from Eastern Time? I don't know off the top of my head. The reason why we generally use UTC is just to keep it all straight when we're talking about these times, just so that we can kind of chronologically understand it. But it's going off at night. Yeah. So it's blackout. Yeah.

1721 UTC, when this plane reaches the first turnaround that you see up there, that's 121 AM local time Malaysia. So it's dark. It's nighttime here, right? So it's dark, it's nighttime here, right? So it's flying. Between client meetings, managing your business and everyday tasks, who has time to worry about website hosting? With Kinsta's managed WordPress hosting, you don't have to. They handle the technical stuff, delivering lightning fast load times, enterprise grade security, and 24-7, 365 human only support. Simply switching to Kinsta could make your site up to 200% faster.

Kinsta's custom dashboard makes managing sites easy, with powerful features designed to save you time and effort. Plus, their free, expert-led migrations ensure a smooth transition. Ready to see why Kinsta is trusted by thousands of businesses? Get your first month free at Kinsta.com. That's K-I-N-S-T-A dot com. Kinsta. Simply better hosting. Taking off after midnight. And one of the interesting points here is that there are some satellites that are pinging this plane. And interestingly enough, the satellite to the east

does not ping this plane ever throughout its flight path. There are two satellites in range. The eastern one, POR, never pings the plane. Only IOR, which is the one over the Indian Ocean, pings the plane. Well, can I back up for a second? I want to make sure people follow. When you are flying a commercial jet or any kind of airline ballistic with commercial airline because that's what we're talking about here when you are going in between international communities right so you're going from one country to another there is a line within the sea or wherever it is on land if you're over land in this case they were ever see where it

switches from one country to the other and in in order to have this, you sign off with air traffic control in country A, and then maybe a minute or two later, there's a little dark period, and you sign in with air traffic control in country B, which is what happened here. It's one of the last times we heard from Malaysia, they signed off, or from MH370, they signed off from Malaysia, and they were supposed to then go check in with, I forget which country, Vietnam, and they never did. But in order for these types of things to happen, aren't there like things that they legally have to have turned on at all times that this plane did not? So they had everything turned on. The systems got turned off at 1721 when the plane turns around. That's when the systems start to get turned off and go dark. This is where the

initial radar stops contacting it, and only the primary radar is the only one tracking it. Secondary radar goes off. It has all the data with it. From the pings that I'm talking about, these become relevant after they get outside of radar range. Because after it gets outside of radar range, the only way we have to

track it is these pings. The problem with the pings is it only tells you how far away it is from the satellite. And there's a better animation if you want to pull up plane animation to 1822 UTC. This will actually animate the flight path for us. Now, interestingly enough, if you only have one satellite that's pinging it, you can't triangulate the location. And this became relevant because this is where they had to look upon the arc and try to figure out, did it go north or south? So interestingly enough, it was only pinging one of these satellites throughout the whole flight path, which made it very difficult

to track. So following this, if you want to pause it right there, the last communication happens at 1721 UTC. 64 seconds later, this plane goes dark at 1721 UTC. Okay, so that's up on the right side there. Exactly. And now, interestingly enough here, I've been reading through the press conferences, watching through them again, and one of the officials essentially says that the last radar contact was actually at 1730 UTC from the secondary radar. So this is actually, they were actually knew that this plane had turned back around, because that radar would

have indicated that it had already turned back around. They obfuscated this information a lot. So the radar data actually wasn't even released for weeks later, but it was given to the Americans five days after the incident, which is pretty unusual. Why was it given? Here's another question. Why were the Americans so at the middle of this investigation when we're talking about a 239-person flight where they only had three people on it and there were the majority Chinese as far as like the most well-represented on there? Great question. And I think that when we kind of dig into the videos, especially when we looked at those

two videos, both of them are American assets. That's a General Atomics MQ-1C Gray Eagle, which is the drone taking that color, using an electro IR camera, we believe was produced by Raytheon. Can you pull that up, Alessi? That's the MG-1C? MQ-1C Gray Eagle. MQ-1C Gray Eagle drone. Yep. You'll see it right away. I just want people, that's fine. Just anything close to a Gray Eagle drone. Yep. All right, pull up an image. We'll put this in the corner of the screen. So that first one's great. So you're saying one of these is what had to take that thermal image. Yeah. And there is another variance that potentially could have it, but this is a

perfect match to what we see in the video. And people have argued that we see the wing coming over the top of it, but we believe that's actually the camera housing that we see kind of at the top of the video. Okay. Why are are there here's another question with this why are there no videos you were talking about this and your data there's no videos online of planes captured not in picture in video in color thermal imaging in the sky right whereas like we were on the phone with dan i was on the phone with him right out there with Danny Jones before going on camera. Like he has a color thermal camera because he's like a documentarian and has all kinds of cool shit. He's like, fuck, I could go outside right now and catch one. So why have people never done that? And why,

why would it happen for the first time on this? Well, I guess because a drone got it, but isn't that a little odd? Well, realize that, too, what we're looking at here, even before we zoom in, you don't have a very good picture from the drone even. And this drone's relatively close to the plane. Initially, it flies right underneath the wake of the plane at the very beginning of the video. And actually, you can see that there

is some disruption in the movement of the drone because of it. Oh, the drone does? Yeah, right underneath the tail of the plane, essentially. That's why when it goes around. Got it. So people have taken thermal from the ground using commercial cameras we're looking at some of the most advanced electro ir cameras in the world here and potentially this is produced by raytheon and this mq1c has a special

loadout and what did you i think you started to say but i cut you off why was it why do we say it's from raytheon um i've had some sources reach out and show me cameras that potentially could be this camera. Now, again, we can't know for sure, but Raytheon does produce very high-quality electro-IR cameras, which seem to be consistent with what we see here in this video. It could be, yeah. And then this thermal layer would be added by the software built into the camera as well, which indicates to us that the person who potentially leaked this might be an operator, because you'd have to have some knowledge of how to do that and how to strip the HUD information. Because, you know, in those 2017

DOD releases, we can see HUD information in those UAP videos. HUD information? Yeah, the HUD information is all the data that we see across the side of the screen indicating the altitude and things like that. And in this case, we don't see any of that, which is probably part of the reason why people have a hard time believing it to be real. But in my mind, it actually helps to develop a story for the person who leaked it. Now, going back to the flight path, though, real quick, if we want to pull that back up again, which is plain animation.

So we'll come back to some stuff. I want Ashton to really get through this flight path without me having to keep going on. If there's questions you're thinking, why am I not asking that? We will come back to it, so just bear with him. Yeah. Interestingly enough, this radar data is very anomalous. When it was finally released weeks later, it had the plane going from 5,000 feet to 55,000 feet.

The plane's not even capable of making these altitude changes. So the radar data itself is very highly questionable in terms of these altitude changes the plane made. And we'll talk a little bit later that there were some witnesses that cast even more doubt onto that. data itself is very highly questionable in terms of these altitude changes the plane made. And we'll talk a little bit later that there were some witnesses that cast even more doubt onto that. Now, there was a quote here that the arms forces knew much earlier that the aircraft could have turned back. This is why the search expanded to include the Straits of Malacca within a day or two. This is supported by a lot of the press conferences. The military prime minister, I don't know his exact designation,

but generally confirmed that they had this turn back. They spent a week looking in the wrong location where they knew the radar data indicated this plane turned back over to Malaysia. Now, why this is important is that, A, it kind of put doubt on the credibility of their story that they were trying to present. Who spent a week specifically? The entire world. So interestingly enough, people I don't think really understand how extensive this search was. 42 planes and 39 boats were utilized to search for this plane in the first few weeks. They were searching in the South China Sea. They searched everywhere.

How many countries? I don't have the exact number, but it was a lot. I think between five and 13. I can exact number but it was a lot i think between five and thirteen i can't remember exactly but a lot of countries got involved yeah it wasn't we're talking a lot of planes over 80 pieces of equipment were searching for this plane right um in addition to that the military did not confirm until much later due to resistance from senior officers in terms of the radar data so they wasted a week searching the south china sea where they knew there was essentially no chance the plane could even be there because in terms of the radar data. So they wasted a week searching the South China Sea

where they knew there was essentially no chance the plane could even be there. Because as you see from this flight path here, this plane turned back over Malaysia and then went out to the Nicobar Islands over here, over to the west. And you're saying in that first week, they knew this despite the fact that all the transponders

went off and went dark at 1721 UTC at that point on the top right of that chart. Yeah, the military radar would have known exactly where this plane was going. and went dark at 1721 UTC at that point on the top right of that chart. Yeah, the military radar would have known exactly where this plane was going. Interestingly enough, we have caught the defense minister on some interviews admitting contradictory information. They say that the plane was unidentified, but somehow they knew it was a civilian airliner, and somehow they knew it was not hostile.

How can that all be the case, especially if you have this radar data? What other plane could they have imagined it to be? In fact, there was even a communication that was reported at 1730 UTC, which is just 10 minutes after this plane went dark, from another 777 pilot. And what was the extent of that communication? Apparently not much, although they claimed that they heard either the pilot or the co-pilot, in addition to some static. So this would indicate that potentially communications weren't completely out when the plane went dark. Now, if there was communications and those were classified or covered up, there's actually a report that I was just reading today that that information potentially may have been classified and been locked and sealed up so that that information would not have been classified and been locked and sealed up,

so that that information would not be available. Now, if this is a conspiracy, which I personally believe it is, then it could make sense that what we're seeing here is a completely different event than the narrative that's been put forth. We see where the plane turns back to is Penang-Lankawi International Airport. There's a Wired article that I remember reading in, I believe, 2014, early 2015, that argued that an electrical fire would make more sense for what had happened to this plane. Now, what it argued is that Penang-Longkawi would be the correct airport to fly to for landing a 777-200.

The problem is that the plane doesn't land at Penang-Longkawi International Airport. So we need an explanation for why does this plane fly right over the top of it? What if it was just completely out of control, though? If it was completely out of control, why is it flying to the closest nearest airport that a 777 can be accommodated, right? Yeah, but then it couldn't get down, you're saying, right? Yeah. So, yeah, if it couldn't get down, I think the question is why doesn't it land? And the hypothesis that we would put forth, and I think the Wired article does as well,

is that perhaps the landing gear was damaged by a fire. They argued that an electrical fire could have caused the damage to the landing gear, that it was not able to land. What do you think of that? I think that's a pretty interesting hypothesis. When I first read it, that's what resonated with me a lot in 2014, until the official narrative came out and tried to cast doubt on it and claim that it was pilot suicide and that this plane went to the South Indian Ocean. We'll come back to the pilot.

Yeah. Don't worry. So when I look at that, though, I think that that makes sense. The problem is that you can't take out all the electronics with an electrical fire. And it didn't— Why not? Because electrical fire is going to be very localized, right? Now, it's not going to necessarily explode either. If you have a fire that's starting out very small and propagating,

it doesn't explain how you can take out all of the electronics at once. Why is it going to be localized? This is a tube in the sky, I would figure. I mean, I'm not a fire expert, but shit. Yeah, and I'm not necessarily an electrical fire expert either, but it's going to take out some of the wiring, right? But not necessarily all of the wiring. Interestingly enough, some of the same sources that are claimed to be experts in engineering, pilots that have reached out to me, have claimed that, you know, if there was some type of emergency event, and I'll just go ahead and say that the event that we're speculating is similar to that electrical fire,

it's a lithium ion battery fire. And if there was an explosion for it, it would make sense for the pilot to turn off some of those systems to be able to try to figure out where the cause of the issue in the electronic circuitry is. And that actually can help explain a lot of the situations that the wired article couldn't understand. Oh, I see. So we might have been turning off even like the transponders and stuff. Okay.

To try to figure out, okay, where's the issue in our circuitry? Kind of like if we had an issue with our wiring that we have here, you've got to take one piece out at a time, right? And figure out where... You're opening up the wound right now. People didn't see the first 45 minutes before we got on camera. Holy shit. Figure out where the issue is. But it's the same kind of idea.

And then the thing about the lithium ion battery fires is that they're very energetic. They're explosive. So they theoretically can solve some of the problems that the Wired article had, which is that, okay, you can't have this thing propagating. Well, what if it's a very initially energetic event, and now you have this fire raging that you have to try to get out, right? So let's just hypothetically say that the landing gear could not be deployed for whatever

reason. The next thing that you're supposed to do there is you're supposed to try to land on the belly of the plane on land, interestingly enough. On land. On land. It doesn't fucking explode? So that's the thing. It would explode if you're supposed to try to land on the belly of the plane on land interestingly on land on land it doesn't fucking explode so that's the thing it would explode if you're filled with fuel especially this plane has another six hours of fuel in it at this point it's enough right yeah it's definitely gonna blow up so we should people have argued the pilots have argued to me well then you would try to dump the fuel but if your plane's on fire and you're trying to dump the fuel that seems like you know lighting a match when you have, you know, at a gas station. You know, you don't necessarily want to do that, right? I've seen someone try to do that before.

Didn't turn into the worst thing, but Christ. Yeah, it seems very dangerous. Interestingly enough, the next thing you're supposed to do is try to land in the ocean. And that seems to fit our flight path here, where now we're going out into the ocean to land this plane. And there's the issue with you would definitely have debris if they landed here. Yeah, so that's part of the problem. And I think we looked at a video earlier together where you can see even under a controlled descent in the ocean, this plane is going to rip apart, right? And it's not like Sully Sullenberger landing in the Hudson River. Alessi, can you pull that video up? I actually have it. Let me give it

to you. You keep talking. I'll get him the video. So what we think happened here is let's assume that for a second, hypothetically, the communication was still in play here. That this plane would have picked a rendezvous point, a waypoint, where they would be able to get support, theoretically. Say, okay, we're going to try to land in the ocean, but we have to have people nearby. This is in the middle of the night. So this plane goes over Penang, as you can see here, at 1752 UTC, which is 1.52 in the morning. The moon is set, the sun is down, it's pitch black at night. The last radar contact, according to

the military, is at 1815 or 1822 UTC. They actually changed the time several times, looking back at the original press conferences. Roughly 230 miles out into the Malacca Straits, as you can see from our waypoints up here. Now, if you look back at the initial reports of the day after, they actually claim that they lost contact at 1840 UTC, which is a completely different time, which is at the same time that this plane supposedly turned into the South Indian Ocean, and the same time that this plane supposedly turned into the South Indian Ocean and the same time that we believe we're seeing in our videos here. Now, interestingly enough... Do you want us to... Do you want to see that video, by the way, of the plane?

Yeah, we can take a look at that. Yeah, yeah. So right there, Alessi. Let's press play. We'll put this in the corner of the screen. This is what would happen. And this is by the shore. It's very calm oceans, right? This is not like the middle of the ocean where there's all kinds of waves you see the plane full-blown turns on itself and then explodes you see the orange yeah the orange ball flames right there that was i forget what plane that was but that was a real video so much it's not like the movie flight you know and that was like an upside down landing, but you get the point. Yeah. Yeah. This plane is doomed, right? So now we've established a situation where it can't land a Penang for whatever reason, presumably because the landing gear shot,

it can't land on the ground on his belly because there's too much fuel in it. It can't dump the fuel because it's on fire. And it can't land in the ocean safely, because if it does, it's going to get ripped apart. In addition to that, you know, I've lived overseas before, and a lot of mainland Chinese don't learn how to swim either. So not only is there no light, half the passengers, maybe more, potentially might not even know how to swim. And as you just saw there, it's going to be a very violent event trying to land into the ocean. Oh, yeah. So this plane's in a lot of trouble at this point. And we've already established now that the Malaysian government and their story doesn't make a lot of sense. They've claimed that they somehow know this is not a

hostile situation, and yet they also claim that they didn't have any communication and that they weren't able to identify the plane. Why would you not send up jets to go track this plane? It makes no sense, and they didn't. Unless they knew that it was an emergency situation and that another country was potentially already going to take care of it. Perhaps the United States military, for example. Is part of that, though, because it did check out from one airspace to the other, and it was technically in no man's land, so there could have been a confusion on the ground as to who has jurisdiction to do this in the moment, and now you're wasting precious minutes when that happens? So I think that that was part of the initial idea. A lot of people put forth that they was

in this weak point of the radar, right? And Vietnam was supposed to take control of the radar at that point. But the moment you see this plane turn back around, and you know, you see this plane on military radar, it should become apparent which plane that is. It's the only plane that went dark, right? So they should know, okay, this is MH370. And they seem to have known, because they somehow knew it was a civilian airliner. The defense minister actually admitted to that. So at that point, why are you not tracking? Especially if you think it's either a hijacking scenario or a suicidal pilot scenario, then you definitely need to be tracking it. In fact, if it's a suicidal pilot scenario, you probably want to think about shooting it down so they don't crash

it into anything like 9-11. Now, part of the reason why I don't think it could be a suicidal pilot scenario is that there's no indication of that in the flight path. If it's a suicidal pilot scenario, you're just going to crash the plane. You're not going to go on a six-hour joyride with it. Why not? Mostly because you have 200-some passengers on board who might be trying to knock down the door. Well, the door is not – that's not possible. The door – this is way post-9-11. No one's getting through that fucking door, especially if the pilot depressurizes the cabin which takes a good 15 minutes for the

oxygen to run out no one's getting through that pilot door so i like i don't i don't see that as feasible like there if he's in there and he gets he somehow says for example to his co-pilot because let's say the co-pilot wasn't in on it and we should take a detour and talk about this pilot real quick just to litigate this but yeah if he says to his co-pilot, because let's say the co-pilot wasn't in on it, and we should take a detour and talk about this pilot real quick just to litigate this, but if he says to his co-pilot, hey, go grab me something in the back, and then the co-pilot walks out and he locks the door, Jesus Christ himself is not getting to that fucking door. So part of the argument, though, here was that you had a lot of people right when this crash happened suddenly point to, oh my god, was the pilot suicidal, wanted to do the murder-suicide, and there was a flight simulator found in this guy's basement.

And on that flight simulator, which the FBI – I'm going to use the word from the article we were reading earlier. The FBI confiscated the hard drive of this. Is that right? Is that about right? Okay. We'll try to pull that up as well the FBI two years later ended up clarifying some of this so you can do with that what you will but the FBI said that there was one flight on there you know the guys doing all these different random flights

around the world on a computer but the FBI said there was one flight where allegedly he went over Malaysia and then south to the Indian Ocean. But what they later said is that it was to a different point south in the Indian Ocean, which to me it's like, well, it's the same fucking thing, same result. But that he had manually moved the cursor from where the plane was to where it then was in the Indian Ocean as if to like start a new simulated ride, which doesn't mean it's suicidal furthermore every person at Malaysia Airlines all the way the top who knew this guy every one of his family members his friends and eventually not that they knew him before but even the family members of the passengers who were on board are all adamant that that was not what happened here this guy did not commit suicide he was was a brilliant pilot, great guy, didn't have any sort of motive for that. And

like I said, the hard drive data revealed not exactly necessarily what people thought at first about that simulated flight. Yeah. I mean, you actually just hit a lot of my points. I'll just add some of the arguments as well against the suicide myth. 18,000 flight hours. I mean, you actually just hit a lot of my points. I'll just add some of the arguments as well against the suicide myth. 18,000 flight hours. I mean, this guy loved flying. He had a custom simulator that was built into his house because he loved flying so much. He even just would do it at home as well in practice. There's no suicidal intent anywhere in this flight path.

You go look up other suicidal pilots, and that's generally what I'm interested in when planes crash. They usually just crash. Like the Germanwings guy crashed right into a mountain. He's not taking it on a joyride. The Germanwings guy? Yeah, there was a pilot for Germanwings that famously crashed into a mountain, killed everybody on the plane. When was that?

I don't have the exact date off the top of my head. But I would argue also against that you can't get through the door. You know, sure, these doors, if you've seen those pilot doors, and I fly pretty frequently, you know, they don't look like they're going to be able to hold out people for six hours. Yeah, but it wouldn't be six. He would depressurize the cabin and they'd be out in 15 minutes. But that's going to knock him out as well.

No, it's not. He has a mask up front that is more powerful than what they have in the cabin. It's not going to knock him out. Okay, well, they have masks as well, right? But they don't have his mask. Okay. He has – pilots have a special – and I don't know the exact time frames on it right now, so I'm not going to make up a number. I can't remember that.

But pilots have a mask that can last far longer than a little bullshit that drops from your seat in the back. So I don't – that one, that's not feasible. No one's breaking through that door. If he wanted to take that plane down and depressurize the cabin, fucking no one's getting through there. There's no good argument for that. I mean, I respectfully disagree. I think that from my investigation.

Why do you disagree? From my investigation into it, they would have to get an oxygen tank from potentially underneath in the crew area. So now you've got to present an argument where, okay, we got the crew guy out of there. I was able to get an oxygen tank in there without drawing any suspicion. No, there's no oxygen. They have like a different device. Alessi, maybe you can look at this to see what it is, how a pilot survives in the cockpit

when the rest of the plane is depressurized but like he the the point is he could have very easily flown that plane with his equipment on that he has access to in his cockpit that no one else in the plane has access to back there no one i i just don't there's not even the crew no there's no co-pilot there's no good he sent in this scenario he sends the co-pilot out or he kills the co-pilot in there one or good... In this scenario, he sends the co-pilot out, or he kills the co-pilot in there, one or the other. I mean, it seems a little bit implausible to me, but sure, I'll let you go. I'll concede the point.

So, in addition to this, turning the plane dark is not as simple as flipping a switch. Captain Bellany suggested that whoever was in command would have it intentionally disconnected four electrical generators and an APU, which means that this would not be a single man job to make this plane go dark it would have to take some additional effort it's practically impossible for someone to do that within 64 seconds and again that's the time frame we have between the last communication where there's no alarms nothing going off no uh nothing in his voice that would indicate anything unusual, no increased agitation.

Wait, what happened from one to the other? Yeah, so the last communication was at 1719 UTC. With Malaysia. Yeah, where he says, good night MH370. And 64 seconds later, it's 721. Now, interestingly enough, they're not sure if it's actually the pilot or

the co-pilot's voice at that time either. So for your scenario to make sense, you've got to get the co-pilot out of the cockpit within 64 seconds when it goes dark as well. Well, no, because the co-pilot, he might have had some excuse or something. I mean, I can think of ways he could get him out of there. Okay, sure. And he could have said, signing off. And the co-pilot, we don't know if it was, let's say it was the co-pilot's voice and not his, because the co-pilot was like a rookie. So, like, he's not a suspect here. But let's say it was the co-pilot's voice and not his because the co-pilot was like a rookie. So like he's not a suspect here.

But let's say it was the co-pilot's voice and he says, all right, signing off Malaysia. Puts down – he's got earphones on like this, whatever, headphones on like this. All right, I'm going to go back and grab the thing or better yet, the guy says to him, can you go back and grab a snack back there? I'll be back to – sure, no problem, man. Ten seconds later, he's out the door. Guy locks it. 64 seconds is plenty of time to do that. Yeah, okay. I mean, I'll concede the point to you. Now, in addition to these, you pointed out

the FBI took his simulator and looked into it. Again, we're including the Americans into this, again, for some reason. The route that was actually out there that they've connected to, it doesn't actually go back over Malaysia. It's actually similar to MH150, which is a route to Jeddah that he has actually rostered to fly on February 4th. And those points are actually from February 2nd and 3rd, which is right before that. Where's Jeddah?

Jeddah's to the northwest of Kuala Lumpur. I don't know exactly the exact location of it, but essentially what we're talking about is a flightdah's to the northwest of Kuala Lumpur. I don't know exactly the exact location of it. But essentially what we're talking about is a flight that goes to the northwest, which is what they're trying to simulate. It says it's similar to the path that he took here. So it casts a lot of doubt as to whether or not he was really practicing any type of suicide route. You are correct in the diversion points that were out in the South Indian Ocean or potentially even near the South Pole,

but not necessarily at the exact same point as where this plane, they believe this plane went. But that could easily indicate that this guy liked to fly. He's in the middle of practicing his route and just says, hey, I'm going to go and take it in another direction and just enjoy my flight, right? And by the way, the pilots do have a mask with a full oxygen tank up there so they can last.

Yeah, where is the, can you get the information about the oxygen tank while I'm looking at this? Because my understanding is the oxygen tank is not up there with them, even though the mask might be. Because that might be important if you are trying to get a co-pilot out there, and all of a sudden you're pulling in an oxygen tank that's going to draw suspicion. But even thinking about that logically, why would, if you have a mask up there for the pilot, and it's only for the pilot, why would that be anywhere but the cockpit? It would make no sense to put that

anywhere. You're going to put that with the passengers who might be fighting over it? The pilot needs to be able to have access to that. I don't see why. There's only limited room, and it would only be for an emergency situation. Yeah, but the oxygen tank's yay big. I could fucking sit on it. That looks pretty big to me. That looks huge. You're going to carry that thing around and pull that in and

not draw any suspicion? No, that's not. So you can see the mast there has the tube, right? That connects to the oxygen tank. That's exactly what I'm talking about. So you think that oxygen tank's just hanging out there? Fuck yes! You ever seen a cockpit? If that's right next to you, you don't think that's going to draw any suspicion?

Save that picture, put that on the corner screen, Leslie, that first one on the left. It's not going to draw suspicion if it's a part of a safety protocol. That's what I'm saying. Like, we got to watch when there's arguments that make no sense. We got to stop those because you're going to lose credibility when you do that. Yeah, so let's figure out where that oxygen tank is being stored because I think that's a pretty important factor if that's what the kind of narrative we're going to set.

In addition to this, he flies over Penang. So they have to come up with casting doubt onto the flight path and say that, oh, he's flying over his hometown to say goodbye, which is silly because it's two in the morning. And also, if you are in a situation where these people are trying to bang down your door to try to get in, in a diversion scenario, you're not going to be spending extra time trying to say goodbye to your hometown. I find that that argument just completely silly and ludicrous, frankly. The more logical scenario is this is an emergency event, and you're going to the nearest airport where you might be able to land a 777. Now, again, I personally believe that they would be able to kick down the door or break it down. And, you know, if it's me, I'm going to say, you know, 15 minutes and that door's going down,

doesn't matter how strong it is at all. And we even have to take the hinges out, we can do that. The oxygen masks for the passengers will last between 15 and 25 minutes. So that gives them a decent amount of time. Now, we're going to cast doubt on this story in other ways here as well. But in general, the narrative that this plane running out of fuel is contrary to a suicide. Usually, again, suicide is going to be very quick. So those are the main arguments against it. Okay, what are we looking at here, Alessi? You have a video in the corner of the screen.

Yeah, so for this video, we have this pilot. And essentially, this pilot is showing that he's getting the mass from the side. And for this video we have this pilot and essentially this pilot is showing that he's getting the mass from the side and it looks like it's connected you can see right there to the side of the plane so you have a place where it just drops and you can quickly so he has oxygen yeah yeah yeah that's that that makes logical sense okay all right let's continue on okay so i think that's just the evidence that would uh cast doubt on the suicide myth but in addition i think the bigger thing is this plane just didn't crash in the south indian ocean right so the official narrative says at right when we're looking up here uh kind of where

you see this boat over here at 16 or 1840 utc that this plane takes a diversion and just begins to go down at south Indian Ocean. Real quick, to all my Discord people out there, the Julian Dory Discord is officially live. I put the link down in the description below. So go hit that, join the community, and say what's up. There's all kinds of features in there, and I look forward to hearing from you guys. Let's get it popping. Now, if you want to pull up this data, I actually looked at the Imersat ping data, because after we go past the radar point at 1822, all we have is Imrstat ping data. So if you look up, I believe it's called sketchy ping data.

Can you define Inmarsat and who they are and how they play a role in this for people? So when I was talking about those satellite pings, that's who I'm talking about. They're the ones who have access to these satellite pings. This ping data has not been corroborated by anybody. They're the only ones who put this data out. It only comes from one, the IOR satellite. The POR satellite was not pinging it, so they didn't have triangulation capabilities.

So what they had to do is they had to take an arc, right, draw an arc and say, okay, it could be anywhere along this arc because this is the distance during the ping. And this is where they tried to figure out did it go north or go south. So they didn't know. They knew that it could go. The problem with going north is that you're going to go past a lot of radars and you would have seen it, right?

And that's where Jeff Wise, I think, lost his mind a little bit, who's a longtime great aviation reporter, did a lot of amazing work on this case. thing i just couldn't get past was how he ever came up with that russia theory because essentially he was trying to say so it flew north and it landed in kazakhstan because putin wanted this plane hijacked to distract distract from the war in crimea that was breaking out in 2014 i'm just like a lot of assumptions there yeah there's a lot of better ways for putin to distract from that war that's all i'm saying and in 2014 like like all the rage was Russia was causing everything too, right? Like media was harping on it all the time. But the more logical scenario was, at least at that point, was it flew to south into the South Indian Ocean. There's not as many radars there, but as we're going to find out in a second, there were some radars and they didn't catch it. So the biggest issue with the South Indian Ocean narrative, first of all, no debris field, I think, as you mentioned before. Yes.

Right? Like, this plane crashes. We just watched a video of it. This thing's going to crash and break up into a million pieces. If we look at the ping data here as well, and this is just a video of me scrolling through the SU log tab from the Imersat ping data myself. I pulled it up from Victor's blog of Radiant Physics. First of all, you can see, look at all this complete data here. And on the left, we're going minute by minute

here through these pings. It all looks very complete. And as you'll see here, as we approach 1840 UTC, all of a sudden we're going to see a huge anomaly here. We're going to get to the end at 1840. Look at all the zeros all of a sudden on the right. All of a sudden it's just zeros going down the screen here.

Right at 1840, this is right at the point where the plane turned into the South Indian Ocean. Look at this, just zeros the whole way down. And this is from what again? This is the SU log tab of the actual Imristat ping data. If you pause it right here, you can see that what happens after 1840 is now we see this 1940, 2041, 2141. This is five hours of data in 10 total rows.

In addition to that, you can see there's a pattern in here. This channel, which is like the sixth or seventh column over, goes 10, 4, 10, 4, 10, 4, 10, 4 repeatedly after it was previously, you know. What does that mean? I don't know all the details of it. I actually challenged Victor on Twitter about this information. Victor. I'm going to butcher his last name. He's a PhD expert. He's one of the independent group main people who he got this information from one of the family members of the victims. Oh, like the independent group that was working on this back in 2014. That Jeff Wise broke away from.

Yes. Okay. So, all right. This was a very real thing. So he's one of the few people who's actually from the independent group who's gone back and forth with me. And when I presented this anomaly to him, because I'm the first person to report on this anomalous data at 1840 UTC, at the point where the plane turns south in the ocean, he just repeated to me that it was normal. He wouldn't give me an explanation to why it's normal, because looking at this, and just from my past job experience, I've got a lot of experience in Excel data.

And generally, Excel data. And generally, Excel data has got to be very clean. Otherwise, when you try to ingest it into databases, it won't take it. He's saying the zeros on there is normal? He said all of this was normal. The zeros and this all of a sudden where there's just 10 rows here. When did the zeros start and stop?

How long? They start at 1840 UTC, exactly. And then when do they- Or 1839 UTC. And then when do they stop? And then right once you get to 1941, which is the next ping an hour later, that's when we see this pattern now. And then we see just each hour has two rows. Whereas you saw previously, we were going, you know, minute by minute, and there's dozens of rows of data. So those zeros are signifying that they stopped getting data on the plane. And then somehow at, what was it, 19-something they started

again? That's what I would speculate. And of course this is speculation because I can't get a clear answer from anyone who claims to be an expert on this. So if there's anyone out there that wants to explain this, please do. I don't, I mean I'm not, I'm the farthest thing from an expert on cell phone data or anything like that. I don't know shit

about that stuff. I do know just from anecdotal personal experience when someone's phone is off or whatever it'll go right to voicemail or if it was powered down by a battery fallout it'll go right to voicemail things like that yeah what would explain the fact that there were family members of passengers calling passengers and getting a dial tone for, I think it was, Alessi, was it as far as like eight or nine days out or something like that? I think it was about four days, but still, that's a long time to be calling people. Right.

We've got the video, too, that you can pull up, right, of the— Because it only had six hours of fuel. We know that. So unless it had a phantom fuel in the sky— I think it's called MH370 calling phones. I'll pull it up here while we're going. So what would explain that? So very little.

If you believe the people on CNN, they just say, well, this can happen. Because maybe it's still connecting to the last time it talked to the cell phone tower. But that maybe explains it for the first day or so but four days later how are they still calling this is a video proving that they were able to do it on live television there was also a call that came in one of the at least one there one of when all the family members were in like I don't know like the crisis room together at headquarters of where this investigation was having all the announcements. One of the passengers was like, oh my God, my dad's calling. He was on the flight.

What do I do? What do I do? And there were all the other people were there looking at him. He was really calling. And then they answered and no one was there. Yeah, I thought that was unusual. Yeah, I didn't really dig too much into it. But that's just another plot point here for these phones potentially having been on. So we're looking at video of these phones? Okay, got it. And interestingly enough, 19 families of the victims signed a statement saying they could actually call the victim's phones for up to four days, and they wanted the government to investigate it, because theoretically, you can triangulate it, you can figure out where the phone is. As far as I know, that just never happened, which is very unusual. If a phone is underwater, even more than a foot underneath water, if it's in salt water for over 30 minutes, it's going to die. As far as I know, if we were to turn our phones off right now and

I were to call you, it's not going to ring, right? So I think that they had experts go on CNN to try to cast doubt on this, but it kind of defies common reasoning and common logic, right? Yeah, I mean, that's all I can go off is common logic, because I don't know. Me too. So, going back to the debris field doubt, this was the most expensive and extensive search in history. Didn't find one piece of the plane above or below water. And we'll talk about the pieces that they found, but none of those pieces were found by the official search. All right. That sounds right to me, but is there a way that because this would have crashed alessia i don't know if you can find the potential crash point in the south indian ocean and put that picture on the screen i'll keep talking while i do it but

we can show where they allege it would have run out of fuel and crash it's in the middle of fucking nowhere in the south indian ocean which is known as a torrentially very, very violent ocean. Not that they all aren't. But is there any way that this plane could have crashed, and due to where it crashed, you just never find debris? Not really, because this is actually an active shipping route from India to Australia here. Down here where we're looking?

Well, that was the new search. Sorry, from Africa to Australia is the shipping route here. That's not exact. We're going to put that picture in the corner screen. That's not exactly right, but that's damn near it. So this point remains like middle of nowhere. So interestingly enough, I also looked recently at the black boxes and tried to figure out where they searched for that.

They found no black boxes. And I looked at the depths there, and these things are rated between 14,000 and 20,000 feet deep. So they should have been able to find the black boxes everywhere they searched, found nothing. They found a couple of pings that they thought might be them. Wait, why should they have been able to find the black boxes? Because they weren't too deep that they wouldn't be able to find them. So they try to troll these, I don't know if that's the right word, these detectors underneath the water, right? And search. And they searched all above and below the arc here.

And they were looking, and I would imagine this happens everywhere in the world, but it was even worse here when they were looking at the, I guess, LIDAR or something with that. They could see that there's basically underwater mountains and canyons. They describe it on the Netflix documentary. You can see it where it's like you want to talk about trying to find a needle in a haystack. Yeah, maybe. But I mean,

when we're looking for pings, I tried to figure out like how far away they would have to be. Like there's some reports claiming that they would have to be a couple of kilometers above the water next to it in order to be able to catch it. But you know, these, these things are, we're going to,

I think 35 megahertz. I could be wrong on that, but I believe that's the amount, which should travel through water pretty well. So the idea that we just couldn't find them anywhere and we didn't hear any detections that were accurate seems pretty unreasonable to me. Well, how does a black box work? What's the science there?

So for up to 30 days, supposedly, it's being able to ping out every, I believe, second. And so it's sending a very specific signal that isn't replicated by nature. So you can't mishear it in any way, which is also why people have cast out on those pings that they thought they found. Supposedly, they knew right away they couldn't be from the black box because it sends a very unique signal out. And so as long as you are near this thing and you're boating over it and you've got your detector in the water, you should be able to catch it unless the plane simply didn't crash there. Now, there was also a bunch of hydrophone systems. First of all, the SOSIS system, I think, is the biggest evidence against this crashing of the water.

The SOSIS system is a declassified Navy system that actually heard the Titan sub pop, the one that was going down the Titanic pretty recently. Oh, yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. Poor guys. And interestingly enough, we had these oxygen counters on cnn and every other major channel right and then we find out five days later navy says oh yeah we heard it pop right away we just didn't say anything about it like how are you gonna not say anything about it while everybody's wondering if these people are at the bottom of the ocean running out of oxygen this system should have

easily heard this as well and as far as i, they've never admitted to any sounds or any acoustic detections related to it. What happened with... Let's go back to the front end of what this is, though, which is an investigation. And as you mentioned, a bunch of countries are involved. But the country that was facing the world and answering questions was Malaysia. Did they have control over this? They seem like they did,

but from looking at all the old press conferences with the minister, like, he is not answering questions honestly. They just keep repeating that they're being consistent, but they won't answer any questions clearly. What was this guy's name again? His name's really hard to pronounce, so I don't know if I want to butcher it right now. So I'm just going to refer to him as the minister of defense right now.

Okay, that works. But a New York Times reporter actually asked one of the other, the aviation expert, if there should have been signals coming from the plane, because that's a very basic question, right? Like this thing's actively sending signals.

And they didn't want to respond to that either. Oh, we're looking into that. We have to figure that out. Like, isn't that the first thing you ask is, hey, were the Rolls-Royce engines still sending data that we could track, right? And we actually caught the minister on a piece, on a very quick snippet, claiming that they were working with the U.S. spy satellites that theoretically were in the area, and that they had been working with Rolls-Royce, which would have been sending this data as well. As far as I know, neither of those pieces of information had been made public.

Those would either be able to confirm or rule out the narratives and the route that they've kind of proposed here for the South Indian Ocean. As we're going to see in a little bit, we believe the satellite was right in the right location to be able to stare at this plane. And yet we have this narrative of it going to the South Indian Ocean. The official search as well included at least 42 planes and 39 boats. That is a huge amount of assets searching for this plane. So not only was there no debris field found, again, this is the biggest search ever. So it's essentially impossible this plane crashed into the ocean. There's two additional hydrophone systems.

So if they claim it crashed in the south end of the ocean, why did the Western Australia hydrophones and the Diego Garcia hydrophones not pick it up? The Diego Garcia hydrophone data was made public, and there's no acoustic detections matching any type of crash in the South Indian Ocean during the time. And Diego Garcia is like a military base? Yeah, it's out there in the Indian Ocean. It's about 1,500 miles away, so it's pretty far, but it's got some pretty advanced capabilities, and these acoustic detections travel across water very well.

So these systems should have been able to hear it, and yet they did not. In addition to that, the radar systems that we were mentioning, the JORN system, which is Australia's radar system, should have been able to see the plane going out there in the South Indian Ocean.

We've looked at the radar data. It definitely can fit out, or the range can see this plane if it was out there. Indonesia also has a radar system that if it flew past it going out of the South Indian Ocean, they would have seen it. Neither of these systems heard it either. That's what they're saying. Yeah, at least what they claim. Now, I assume if they had seen it and they knew, they should have fessed up to it, right, to say, hey, yeah, we can confirm that it went there, because otherwise, all we've been going on is this satellite pings, which we just showed has some pretty weird anomalies in it.

There was also a report that some social media sites showed the missing passengers still being online, which is a little bit unusual, especially if you think those phones are dead, right? Now, there might be some explanation for why, but it's just another piece of evidence that corroborates the phone's ringing, the one that we just saw on live TV as well. Now, I already mentioned that it was an active shipping route, but also this plane supposedly crashed in the morning, 8.19 in the morning, their local time. Sun is up. There's no witnesses that saw this plane anywhere near that area. They didn't find any debris fields down there either. Someone who was on a boat would have easily seen a 777. The debris field would have spread out.

Presumably it would have been visible from space for days because you'd have bodies, you'd have luggage, pieces of the plane all over the place. This isn't like, you know what, actually, I'm going to rescind that comment because that wouldn't even work. Yeah, so basically you'd have something. It's not like there's no way that based on the buoyancy of all the different things on there that some of them aren't floating. And there's even more evidence, too.

I mean, there's just an incredible amount of evidence against this. So the official narrative initially to try to argue how there could not be a debris field claimed that this plane did some kind of 90-degree perfect swan dive, which from talking to aviation experts is not possible. And so then later on, they very... They went like this? Yeah, they tried to argue they went like this, just straight down into the water. Who the hell argued that? Yeah, it's not even possible, as far as I can tell,

from flying a plane like that. It just doesn't work like that. So later on, they very quietly changed it to a 14-degree crash, which, as we just kind of showed up there, would have had this plane tearing apart. Interestingly enough, none of the ELT beacons activated on crash. So these emergency transponders, they actually activate on impact. And we would have detected those as well. But we also did not get any detections from that. Now, if the plane had no power or whatever reason, you can maybe

argue that that might be not why they won't go on. But there's four redundant ELT systems. And the whole point of having four redundant systems is that you can't turn them all off. So again, no ELT crash either. And other people might argue, well, the ocean's really big. Well, the problem is this official flight path has it running out of gas. So where else is it supposed to go? They searched everywhere, assuming fuel exhaustion scenario. So there actually isn't anywhere else for it to go. There's nowhere else to search. They searched everywhere along the final arc. And again, because the arc, the only thing the arc you were saying couldn't determine is if it went north or south, but it can determine directionality. I mean, because we had those pins... Meaning it didn't go way over here or way over there. Yeah, and so you can kind of tell

from the arc perspective that it may go here or there, but they searched everywhere. And so anywhere along that ARC, we've already searched, which is why if you see any articles too about, oh, we've got a new location for it, I'm going to give you bad news. I don't think there's any chance that any new locations are going to help out in this particular case. Okay. So now some people may say this next follow-up is,

well, what about the debris they did find, right? I heard on the news that they found some debris that they've linked to the plane. This fucking luckiest dude on the face of planet Earth. And Blaine Gibson, honestly, like I watched the Netflix documentary, and I don't think he's a bad guy. I don't think he's a Russian agent like Jeff Wise tried to claim him to be. I mean, this doesn't strike me as the Russian agent kind of type, right? I feel like Jeff just like had a chart in his house, like, always sunny in Philadelphia, and he finally turned into Charlie by the end.

But, yeah, I don't... I mean, look, the guy does technically speak Russian. He had had some ties there, but it just... Man, if he's a Russian agent, shout out to the KGB or FSB, I should say now. Like, good job, because I just wouldn't think that, but okay. So there's some pretty interesting facts about this debris. So let's just go ahead and say, okay, this is maybe real debris from the plane. You know, does this rule out the scenario?

Well, can we say where he got it? Can you just tell that? Yeah, some of it washed up in the Union Island, and some of it washed up in South Africa, and it washed up like 18 months after this. I think it was Reunion Island, Mozambique, and Madagascar. Yeah, okay. So there was something, there was a piece of, actually Jeff Wise did a great blog post breakdown of this when it happened, but there was the first piece of, I want to say it was

a piece of the wing, we'll check that though. The flapper run, possibly. Yes. Washes up on on shore of reunion island something like a year later and when it does it has sea life on it like it has clams and urchins growing on it which would suggest it's you know been staying in the ocean there was some sort of number missing from it though some sort of identifier number missing from it and also jeff i'm not going to up the blog right now because it was very dense and whatever.

But Jeff did a breakdown of Reunion Island. It's off – it's in between basically Asia and Africa, east of Madagascar. But he's like, OK, if debris washes up there, there's debris graphs that show that it would move with the currents west. And so he apparently self-described talked to some experts and said, well, where else would it come up? They pointed him to I believe it was Mozambique in Africa. And within 20 minutes of walking on the beach there, he finds a piece. Fucking Willy Wonka and thelotte factory with the golden ticket right here and he's like oh i'll be i'll be i'll be dipped in shit that is a piece of of mh370 so

then he's like well where else would it be where else would debris be washing up and again these experts he allegedly talked to said go to madagascar he's walking on the beach in madagascar for like two hours and what what do you know? Finds like, what was it? 15, 20 pieces or something like that of the plane. And look, I mean, he's holding pieces of some sort of plane, but that's an awful, unbelievable fucking coincidence that no one could find any debris of this for like a year or whatever it was. And then one washes up and then suddenly there's one asshole's like, oh, I'll do it. I'm the great savior. I'll find it. I just – I don't – like that's where like when Jeff makes the spy argument.

It seems a little odd. Like the whole Russia angle is weird. But like is he something? Maybe. Like is he something for somebody for some diversion or is he a useful idiot who got pointed by these people online? Maybe these experts he talked to said, oh, yeah, you should check there. And the experts are the people doing it. That's probably more likely.

Yeah, I think you brought some really great points. I mean, the first one, let's talk about the Flaperon. People don't really realize this, but the Flaperon did not have its unique serial plate on it. This actually delayed identification of the Flaperon to MH370. They matched it with a non-unique serial number, which is pretty unusual that they just did that. They claimed that, okay, this is definitely a match. And then they went ahead. What does that mean, a non-unique? Yeah, there's like part numbers, right? So as opposed to it being related to MH370,

they've just shown that it's a 777-200. Now, interestingly enough, there was another 777-200, which was scrapped in 2013, which was by ga telesys in october of 2013. that's an exact model match to mh370 but aren't you legally supposed to have like that identifier on there or something somehow the plate came off even though this is the type of plate that's like bolted on there which i don't know how that falls off in the ocean but boy that is really convenient that that happened um some of the debris that was found by Blaine Gibson actually had burn marks on it. And he actually presented that potentially this might be a fire scenario. That was brushed away as being resin.

Now, that's interesting. Which doesn't make a lot of sense to me. So interestingly enough, this scenario here, and actually, like you mentioned, Jeff Wise did do a very good analysis that said that the debris is not necessarily consistent with the barnacle growth for it being in the water long enough. That this debris was planted ineptly, I think, is the exact words that he used in his blog post. That somehow maybe someone threw this debris in the water later on. My argument would be that the debris that we see is going to be consistent with the hypothesis that I put forth,

which is a lithium-ion battery fire, which explains the burn marks, explains the very little amounts of debris. And if you pull up the CNN image... I can't remember. Was that on camera when we... Were we talking about that on camera, too? Or was that something that we only discussed in the hours before we were on camera, the lithium? We've discussed it briefly, but we're going to go into a lot more depth on it here in a minute, actually. So you can look at this here, and you can realize that there's only three pieces that were confirmed connected.

And again, only the Flpperon used a serial number. That's a very tiny amount of this plane. The stuff that's not confirmed is doing a lot of heavy lifting in this image. So this is not enough debris to rule out that we found this plane or to say that we found this plane. I mean, this is a very tiny amount in general. So to me, this can all be from MH370, especially if there was a fire scenario and some of the pieces fell off. And especially if what we're going to talk about here from the scientific perspective, when we saw that zap

early on in the videos, is some form of teleportation. If that's the case, and this plane went somewhere else, and then this debris either fell off there, or this plane was disassembled, debris was thrown in the ocean, perhaps like what Jeff Wise says, debris was planted ineptly. So I don't even rule the debris out as being part of MH370. I think it very well still could be given these videos, which is interesting, which what that means is that we can actually rule this evidence in to our scenario theoretically. Now, the next thing I want to discuss real quickly as well is why is this MH370? A lot of people say, well, how do we even know that that plane that we're seeing in those videos is MH370? It's the only missing 777.

There isn't any others out there. The thermal, if you want to pull up the thermal match, which I believe is called thermal overlay. Let me look it up real quick. Yeah, so that's one of them. There's another one as well that's... Actually, yeah, that's the only one I have. So in this one, you can see... Where did you get this?

So this is actually just a picture of Malaysian Airlines. Yeah, but where did you get this image? Yeah, from some of our investigative group have kind of dug into finding the images online, and then we used the overlay from the thermal video and overlaid it directly over the top. So we're looking at a Boeing 777 right here, and they literally wrote...

I believe this one is actually literally MH370, but yes. Okay. And that does match... You can see the silhouette matches. You can actually see that that thermal, the heat signature is right there where the landing gear is exactly as well. And that's where those heat exhaust ports are as well. Now, I don't have an image of that here.

I've got it on the side. But there are two exhaust ports on either side where the heat comes off from the air conditioning. And then it sucks in cold air from the front. So, interestingly enough, this is pretty consistent with where those AC packs are for the plane. So, the thermal actually exactly matches the silhouette of a 777-200. The color tone actually matches from our satellite video. It's light on the top and slightly darker on the bottom. Malaysian Airlines is white on the top, red and white stripe, and then it has a gray bottom half as well. The satellite coordinates that we see in the satellite video put it at the known flight path of MH370 around 1840 UTC

at the Nicobar Islands. This is the exact location as we talked about, that's where this plane supposedly turned in the South Indian Ocean. This is our smoking gun. This tells us that if this video is real, the person that leaked this, especially because March 12th is when this video was allegedly received, the South Indian Ocean narrative wasn't even known until March 13th, the day after that. So theoretically, the person that leaked this, gave this to Regicide Anon, didn't even know that there was a South Indian Ocean narrative. The coordinates there indicated this is exactly what it was.

We didn't have that for five days? Yeah, that was not known for five days. And it was reported by unnamed sources as well. Can we check that and see if we can check the archives there? I didn't know that. So, Alessi see if we can check the archives there? That's, I didn't know that. So, Alessi, if you want to Google, like, March, let's do March 10th, let's give it an extra day, March 10th, 2014. Sure. South MH370, South Indian Ocean flight path, and see if you find anything date marked before March 12th.

Yeah. My research shows that it first appeared March 13th, but it'd be interesting to get corroboration on that. Interesting enough, the purpose of SIGINT... And check that.

If there are people... By the way, I should have said this earlier, but if there are people in the comments who have awareness on this case, like, we're crowdsourcing all this stuff.

That's how we got here in the first place. So crowdsource away down there. I'll check it out and see what we can find. That's a good time to point in. This is potentially the first ever crowdsourced investigation. You know, while I think that I've probably put in the most work, the community deserves a lot of credit as well.

It could not be done with all the social media community and everybody else there on the internet who's pulled up information. People have sent me stuff that I've looked into. Of course, I haven't used everything, but the stuff that I found to be credible, we have used. And the story has kind of unfolded and changed. This fire scenario is relatively new. And we'll explain why we got to the fire

scenario here in a few minutes as well. But the purpose of SIGINT, Signals Intelligence, which we believe is what's happening is connecting the drone that we see to the satellite to potentially other assets that were in the area, potentially AWACS that were there, is an interconnected network. And what they're doing is they're sharing information.

And what they may be doing is sharing information to build what we think is SIBRS systems, Space Based Infrared System. What this is, is essentially, it seems to be a Google Earth playback. And if you want to go ahead, and when you have a chance there, Alessi, is pull up the SIBRS video while on the side here.

Because I think this is pretty incredible to watch. This is the part that was a bit of a smoking gun for me when we realized how this satellite data was actually sending it to build this 3D video playback. What's it called? The one right about a Sibbers mission. That one. It's going to give sound as well. So you can see here,, we don't need the sound in this case. But you can see what's happening is these geostationary satellites that are very far

away, they are scanning the world. And these other satellites that are oblong are your millennial orbit, potentially command satellites that are relaying the data. And then there would potentially be low Earth orbit satellites like our USA 229, like the Trump picture, which was USA 224. And look at how big and wide these can scan as well. So what these are doing is they're scanning in infrared, potentially able to take picture at night as well. And then they're building a 3D video playback like Google Earth that can just be logged into anytime. Show me, you know, Nicobar Islands at 1840 UTC, and then have a video playback of that. So that's very interesting, because what that means then is we don't have to be looking at

a particular satellite that is moving very quickly. We can be looking at a kind of projected program that's essentially been created to allow for signals intelligence, allow for tracking of missiles, boats, and airplanes, which is what the purpose of these systems are as well. Now, signals intelligence is going to come into play here as well later on when we try to figure out who our leaker is. So I think that that image is really interesting, but also a little bit scary because this video was nine years ago. So if that's right there, you know, what they potentially had, and we had all these satellites all over the place, first of all, there's no way they're not going to track a plane, right? In a post 9911 world, we're definitely tracking, and the U.S.

government is tracking a rogue 777 flying, of course, especially if they think it's a suicide route. Yeah. So, and what it also means is they potentially have full playback of the entire world. Now, we've proven that the U.S. military has satellites in the area. We've proven that they have USA 229 that was directly over the flight path. That's our smoking gun. And interestingly enough, the other Sibbers picture, if you want to pull that up, had not necessarily a direct quote. Real quick, the smoking gun part. Can you say that again? I was fixing the camera.

Yeah, so the smoking gun is that we've proven, by looking at amateur directories of old satellites going back to 2014 that the satellite pair, USA 229, which is sister satellite right next to it, which is officially classified as debris, at 1840 UTC was directly over the Nicobar Islands staring right down at our coordinates. And do we have a map of the Nicobar Islands just to refresh people on that? Yeah, so what we should do for there is you can pull up the USA 229 flyover because I think that that one is very compelling to prove that there's no chance that USA was not staring at this plane.

So that one should be right at the top, USA 229 flyover. Yeah, Passover detail. So pull that one up. So this is a real actual trajectory from amateur astronomers. You can find this on the internet, this data. It this is a real actual trajectory from amateur astronomers. You can find this on the internet, this data. It's been corroborated by two different sources as well. Are we looking at Malaysia right now?

Yeah, so you're looking at Malaysia there. You can see the bubble is our coordinates. And now we think that this, we can actually see much wider than our bubble, that these can potentially, as we just saw from the Sibbers video, you can see thousands of kilometers. Yeah, and those are the Nicobar Islands. So there you go. You can see the time at the top. We've just gone past 1840. So this data would have been scanning and sending it to the Sibbers system through SIGINT, and then they would have been able to use potentially

the AWACS and watch the video in real time while they're tracking this plane. Yeah, did you just... I'm trying to keep track because I was fixing the camera. Were you... Did you define the AWACS officially, what that is? No, we haven't defined that yet. Can you do that? Because it's been mentioned a few times now. I was trying to keep track because I was fixing the camera. Were you, did you define the AWACS officially, what that is? No, we haven't defined that yet. Can you do that?

Because it's been mentioned a few times now. I was waiting to bring it up, but let's go into it. So the Netflix documentary says that the French dad was told that he lost his wife and his child. Condolences to the family. Two children. Yeah, that Americans knew what happened to this plane and that there were two AWACS in the area. These AWACS are these jets, these planes. I don't necessarily know they're jets. They can, I think, be prop planes as well that have a huge radar dish over the top of them. And this radar dish is capable of potentially jamming signals and having radar data for all

around. They look like huge circular devices on top of these planes. So theoretically, this could be a third asset in addition to our drone, in addition to our satellite that is sharing information. They usually have about 20, a complement of 20 people on board. And we have even speculated that the person who would have leaked this may have been a person who was on one of these planes who is watching this happen in real time as well. Watching it happen in real time. Yeah, and the reason why I think that is, remember, go back to the dates. If Regicide Anon is telling the truth and they received this footage March 12, 2014, then the person who leaked it had a very narrow window of time to leak it.

I would imagine that they would have recorded it and sent it off to whoever to kind of disseminate it to the world very quickly. You don't want to be sitting on that kind of information where, you know, you're going to get caught and you're going to potentially go to prison over it. So to me, that indicates that the person was potentially an operator because of that information about removing the HUD data, and they might have been there in real time watching the event happen. Now, the United States military also confirmed that the Cibbers data provided to the intelligence community was used to help solve the mystery

of MH370. That's a very weird statement to make because the mystery as far as I can tell was never solved. It also corroborates that the Cibbers system was actually used in this scenario. And as I mentioned before, we had a recording from the Minister of Defense of Malaysia, so that they were in communication with the US about their spy satellites. So this scenario. And as I mentioned before, we had a recording from the Minister of Defense of Malaysia so that they were in communication with the U.S. about their spy satellites. So all this information indicates the United States had to have had some type of visuals on this plane, which again corroborates what we think we're seeing in our satellite video. Now, the next thing would be the lithium-ion battery scenario.

So why is this a fire? First of all, there was 221 kilograms of lithium-ion batteries on this plane that were put together the same day the plane took off, March 7, 2014, that skipped two security screenings. Now, in 2014, we did not know how dangerous these lithium-ion batteries were, which is potentially why it wasn't considered one of the main narratives right in the beginning. It wasn't until 2015 when the FAA changed the rules to no longer allow lithium-ion batteries in the cargo of passenger planes.

Oh, they did that in 2015? The year after. Now, even today, when I checked my bag to come and visit you here and get on this podcast, I was asked, are there any lithium-ion batteries in my bag? Because it's a very dangerous situation. Really? Yeah. I've never been asked that in my life. What the fuck are they doing in my airports? If you try to even mail a letter at the post office, even just a letter like these pieces of paper right here, they will ask you if there's any lithium-ion batteries in your letter. That's how dangerous they are. These situations happen

over once per week, even after they've changed the regulations. So what these situations are happening now are usually happening up in the passenger area. There was actually one just a few days ago where they were, it was on all over Twitter, and they were pouring water all over this fire to try to get it out. Interestingly enough, in our videos, there's that heat signature that we talked about coming from the AC. We can see the smoke trails coming from the back of the plane in both videos. That AC unit might be flushing the smoke out of the plane.

How do we know that's smoke trails as someone who's not in aviation? Yeah, because the altitude is too low. What's the altitude, 5,000 feet? Roughly. And the reason why we know that is because we can see cumulus clouds in the satellite video. These cumulus clouds only form between 1,000 and 5,000 feet. The airplane seems to be just above that level. Con trails only form roughly 30,000 feet or higher. Unless the weather is exactly perfect, they can form slightly lower than that.

So what this indicates is what we're looking at there is actually smoke. Now, we also think they may have been packaged unsafely due to the ATSB report. We looked at the official ATSB report, which is the Australian Safety Bureau's report. And in there, these devices from a picture almost look like improvised explosive devices.

They seem to have just put them into cargo, into cardboard boxes, and stacked them up on just some type of crate. Now, this is a lot of batteries to be stacked up that way. From talking to sources, the most common way that these batteries ignite is due to defects. So if they missed two security screenings, they were put together just that day. Seems like a very risky situation from my perspective. Yeah, we've speculated whether or not these might even be like military batteries. It's very unclear. The cargo information doesn't seem to really add up in a way that we can tell from like what the batteries look like in their pictures. But one way or another, there's almost 500 pounds of lithium ion batteries that

have been stacked up in this cargo bay. If you go look at videos of lithium-ion batteries, they're very explosive events initially, and then the fire rages. They can't be put out. You actually can't put these out very easily. There's a lot of videos of people putting them out, and then they light back up again. I like to give the analogy almost like the joke candles people use where you blow them out, and then they come back up again. That's almost what they look like. So there's another question. How would this thing

have been able to keep flying without that fire spreading throughout? I mean, this is a tube in the sky. How does it not spread throughout the entire plane? Well, it would have been somewhat localized to the batteries, and these cargo bays are actually built to withstand the fires as well. So presumably what would happen, you'd have all your crew

going down there and they're deploying all the manual fire suppression devices, all the fire suppression devices that go off, and they're trying to keep the fire under bay, at bay. Now at some point, presumably it would break containment, and that's where you have a really dangerous situation. From an expert who's willing to go on the record, they have told me that it would be possible for this plane to last one hour and 20 minutes, which is what we needed to do in order to go from the point it went dark at 1721 UTC. Who told you that? An expert that I have that is an expert in aviation who's gone on the record and spoken and testified before.

Do we know who he is? I have not. I'm not willing to say his name right now. But do you know? Yes, I can corroborate who he is. Yes, I have looked into who this person is, and they seem to be legitimate, and they are willing to— Why is it only they seem to be legitimate? If you can check out who they are and they have testified, shouldn't you be able to check that?

Yeah, well, I would leave that for when we get to a point where we testify and they go under oath and that type of situation. Wait, wait. You're saying they haven't before, though? They have gone under oath before, but in this situation, they haven't gone under oath, of course. Yeah, that's fine. I'm not expecting that. But they've gone under oath and you've been able to check who this person is according to their name and you could off-camera show me who that is.

Right now, I'm not willing to go into that level of depth on it. But what I would say is that I find them to be very credible. And from their information that they've passed me... Yeah, but on what basis? This is that I find them to be very credible and from their information that they pass me. Yeah, but on what basis? This is where I got to press you. On what basis are they credible? If you're telling me like I... Because what I'm... Let me repeat that in case you misunderstood.

What I'm asking is, have you seen this person's CV, their resume? Have you verified that it is in fact this person talking with you? Have you gone and checked the work they've done in the past, supposedly on the record, to make them a credible source? No, I have not gone into that level of detail, but that's what I would go into if I was going to bring this to Congress and have this person come with me, which they are willing to do so.

Right, but you've already written a letter to Congress saying that to try to request the hearing, so wouldn't it be good to know that guy's bona fides before you did that? Yeah. And if I didn't think that they were credible, I would have definitely gone into more depth on that. But because I do, I'm willing to stand by it. All right. So I'm willing to put my credibility on the line. Well, yeah, I appreciate that. And I know you are. But like, is that is that how you determine they're credible? I'm willing to say that that based on me saying they're credible, that if I'm proven wrong, then fuck me? Sure.

Okay. Yeah. All right, fair enough. That is what I'm getting at. That answers my question. Yeah. That's good. So they are willing to go on the record and state that, yes,

this plane could last that long based on the engineering capabilities of the plane and its ability to hold this fire within the cargo bay that's built to do that. In addition to that, there was a B-77 fire suppression device that washed up in the Maldives. And that fire suppression device is a very unusual-looking device. It's a circle ball, and that circle ball has some serial number on it. And that serial number could theoretically have been matched to MH370. But the Maldives was excluded from the search.

They never looked into that fire suppression device. Why were they excluded from the search? I haven't got an explanation for that. But it seems a little bit suspicious why you would have these islands that are right there in the Indian Ocean, and you've got this scenario where this plane went into the Indian Ocean, and you wouldn't include them into the search. Maybe they're just really bad at searching. Maybe they're really bad.

The defense minister... Not on campuses over there. I don't know. The defense minister said that this was ruled out as being related to MH370. Well, that guy's so not credible. There was a citing as well there that he said they couldn't have seen the plane. But I was never given any reason that I've seen in those press conferences as to why that wouldn't be possible. I know it is very far away, but if we are now about to bring in this kind of advanced technology that could allow the plane to get there, you know, to me it brings it back in as

possible credible evidence. In addition to this, there was a SOS that was only reported in the Chinese news that is claimed to be intercepted communication at 2.43 a.m., which in Malaysian time correlates to 18.43 UTC. This is very close to the time where we have our satellite potentially pinpointing this time of the plane at 1840 UTC. They reported that the plane was attempting an emergency landing and disintegrating. So interestingly enough, this again corroborates what we see in our videos, which is that the plane is potentially on fire, that the plane is attempting this emergency landing, and the videos, by the way, as well, show a plane descending. So people have looked into the turn that's being made in that video,

and it's consistent with the plane maxing out 777-200 maxing out its capabilities while in descent. Lastly, in addition to that, right now, by the FAA standards, and you can take a look and pull up the FAA image here that I've given, I believe. It's called FAA lithium ion batteries. There's over one per week right now on these situations. So you can look at how much they've escalated in the recent years. And this is even after they've gone ahead and made these batteries not allowed to be in cargo base. Well, how do we define an incident? Presumably, these are reported to the FAA. So... Including... Okay, no, look at the top.

Involving smoke, fire, or extreme heat. So this could be, you know, and extreme heat's a problem. But, you know, this could be something like that. And it says in 2022, which was the peak, it was 74 of them. Yeah, you see it says lithium ion battery incidents past 10 years. And this is reported to the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration. Yeah. So this would be U.S. flights only. This doesn't include global flights. So this would be US flights only.

This doesn't include global flights. So this is a lot. That is a lot. To me, one a week is a lot. That is a lot. To me, this is scarier than anything I see in the videos. In fact, when I flew earlier today, my biggest fear is I hope nobody put any lithium ion batteries in their checked

bags. That's interesting. Because especially the thing about it being in the luggage in the cargo bay is who's down there looking? If this thing starts smoking, no one's going to see it until it erupts. And that's part of the reason why I think it even adds more credit, more credibility to this idea that there was a lithium-ion battery fire,

is that even though 64 seconds before this plane went dark, there was no alarms going off, the pilot's voice was very normal, that all of a sudden, this thing could have been smoking already, and then all of a sudden, boom, it explodes. And now you have this incident 64 seconds later that potentially damages the plane, potentially depressurizes the plane. And therefore, it leads to a situation now where we have another plausible different scenario that could have happened. It's not that the pilot depressurized the plane to kill everybody, it's that the plane depressurized and now the pilot's trying to keep everybody alive.

Now, the last thing, too, I would say is that this fire event is corroborated by 15 witnesses. Every single witness saw something that corroborates a fire event. They've all been discredited. Okay, this is where it gets interesting. Yeah, so these are, you're saying these are people from the ground who witnessed a plane in the sky. Yep. And there's 15 of them. At least 15, maybe even more. But 15 who have gone on record. And not necessarily saw the plane, but some of them saw the plane. About 10 of them saw the plane, and then another nine heard a loud bang. So I'll do a quick rundown of those witnesses. Yeah, let's start. Can we start with Katie?

Yeah, I actually want to start with the other ones first, just because her sighting is more elaborate, and the other ones actually presented in a time frame that's consistent with what we've got. But right before I say that, I want to say that covering up this fire scenario, it's a very common scenario. Like, this is a mundane type scenario. Like, why would you cover this up and come up with this South Indian Ocean ocean narrative and what i would say to that is that one of the few reasons would be the technology that we see in the videos something that can't be disclosed to the public because otherwise you would just say oh yeah it was a fire scenario you know the plane was burning up and whatever it was doomed and it crashed or whatever which

is what we haven't talked about and we are going to get to that. You're doing a great job laying the foundation with everything. Yeah, we've got to lay out the case. Now, the witnesses, Mike McKay, he was on an oil rig, he was a Kiwi. He sees the plane on fire at roughly 1720 UTC within one minute of our plane going dark. And this is what blew my mind, though. You were telling me that on an oil rig, which is lifted up from the ocean, so how high would that be? I don't know the exact height, but if you look at those pictures, they're pretty high up. It's a pretty high elevator.

500 meters, maybe? Maybe, yeah, that sounds about right. I would think that's probably the highest then it would be up. So he's on an oil rig, and he allegedly saw this plane that's flying at around 5,000 feet in the air, which – so maybe – No, it would have been at cruising altitude. So it's going to be about 35,000 feet probably at that point, right? Yeah. When he saw it on fire?

Yeah, potentially. So it's going to be really high up there. But hold on. We were just talking – what about the cumulus clouds? You said they were in cumulus clouds, which operate between – That's an hour and 20 minutes later over the Nicobar Islands. We're now at the South China Sea when the plane goes dark, right? All right. So this guy, the thing that I could not wrap my head around was that you said he saw it

from 300 miles away? I believe that's his sighting. We can pull it up to confirm. How's that possible? Yeah. That's from here to North Carolina. That's pretty far, but... I can't see shit to South Jersey from here. Now, I'm not an expert on that, but if you are elevated pretty high, it seems like that would be possible. His sighting and the direction of his sighting is exactly where MH370 was at the same time. But it would be – so we watched the thermal video. That fire is so small and contained. It's not like you have this giant raging star, shooting star-looking motherfucking figure going through the sky. You have this – you would have a light.

It would almost look like a very distant – oh, is that a shooting star? But it's probably just a light. And that looks – if I look up at Newark Airport and stuff coming in, it looks far away just to there. That's not far at all. We're talking 300 miles to see something that thin? Is that humanly possible? Well, I think this is the part where his sighting is misinterpreted. The official reports say he saw the plane crash. But if you go look at his sighting, he says that he never saw the plane

crash. He just saw fire. And that he thought it must have crashed, because how could a plane last while it's on fire? And I think that's kind of what you asked me just earlier, is could this plane last for an hour and 20 minutes? Apparently it can. And that's the part two where then I would say that it seems like, you know, if he didn't see it, what did he see? Was he just imagining that he saw the plane on fire? You know, to me, I think, sure, we could dig into whether or not that's possible, but his sighting seems very credible in terms of the timeline of the events, unless somehow, you know, he knew about it beforehand or afterwards and made up a story about it. Okay, so, and that's the thing

you got to worry about because people then find the meaning of life in trying to be in the middle of the case themselves. I'm going to read some of this article that came out like a year later, so bear with me for a minute. Because he lost his job over this as well. Yes. An oil rig worker who was notoriously fired for saying he believed he saw MH370, quote, come down, unquote, today insisted he thinks the official search for the Malaysian jet is happening in the wrong place. This is February 2015 that this article is coming out. In his first detailed interview, since he sent out an email to officials relaying what he thought might be the Boeing 777 aircraft, Mike McKckay 57 told mail online almost a year has passed but i stand by what i saw i've thought about it i've thought about it over and over and while i

cannot say for certain that the burning object in the sky was definitely mh370 the timing fits in with when the malaysian plane lost contact i've been trying to disprove this that what i saw was that airplane ever since and so far he has failed to disprove it speaking to his at his auckland home where he now sits on his days after losing his job as a result of sending out the email on his company computer on the rig off the south of Vietnam, Mr. McKay said that everyone believed he had said with certainty that he saw MH370 crash in flames into the South China Sea. Unfortunately, my words were misinterpreted, he said. I was careful to say that I believed I saw the aircraft come down. The email was never for public consumption. And if that plane, and if it was the plane that had been missing for so long, then the search midnight Vietnam time, which is one hour ahead of Malaysian time, and I wandered around to an area at the back, as usual, for a cigarette and a coffee. At 1 a.m., he was getting a coffee.

Well, I guess he's working. Yeah, he's probably doing night shifts. All right. It was a beautiful night with good visibility, but it had been raining, which always tends to clear the air. It would have been sometime after 1 a.m. Malaysian time that I saw a sudden glow of fire above the horizon, which caught my immediate attention, although, of course, I could not have known whether it was definitely an aircraft or not he said he took no immediate action but then learned the following day the mh370 was missing when it should have flown out across vietnam towards beijing on march 12th three days after his sighting he sent out the email to vietnam

vietnamese officials and declared and he said i observed the plane burning at high altitude on a compass bearing of 265 degrees to 275 degrees from our surface location. So do we know, can they then measure like how far, I would assume, if they have that, that it was? I think that's where I had read that it was somewhere around 300 miles. I may have that mixed with kilometers. But as you can tell from his sighting, he's seen it far on the horizon, right? And he's saying that he's really, and that's why it can't be clear that he saw a crash. You know, what he really saw was just some type of illumination from the plane, which he's indicated it might be fire.

Now, keep in mind that's the middle of the night as well. So there would have been no moon or sun up either there. So if he saw some illumination, it would have stood out pretty well in the night. Now, while you're looking those up as well, was nine people along yeah it says it by the way i just pulled up the distance between agari and the then location of the sangamaker oil rig is around 580 kilometers or over 300 nautical miles let's see yeah so my reporting was accurate on that yeah yeah your reporting is accurate i just can't believe i mean i i'm not an expert in that either like how far you can see but my bullshit meter is on

a 12 if someone says i saw something from 300 miles away like that's not sure could you have even seen not the smoke but could you have seen like like the towers burning from 300 miles away and they're fucking huge that's a plane's not nearly that size like you could see the smoke they saw the smoke on the satellite up in space it covered forever but i'm saying like the literal tower could you have even seen it like could someone someone in North Carolina on an oil rig have seen? I just don't. They could have seen the smoke, I'll bet. Maybe.

Maybe not even that. That just seems, that one seems so far-fetched. And again, you're reporting it correctly, to be very clear here. This is not on you. I'm saying, I think that guy's full of shit. I think that girl saw him. Yeah, the height of these oil rigs are uh 1500 feet yes yeah that's almost exactly 500 meters there you go yeah 1500 feet roughly divided by three i mean that's pretty

high above the sea level so they're gonna be able to see pretty far actually this one yeah so how tall is freedom tower alessii? Can you Google that? Freedom Tower in New York. Freedom Tower height is 1776 feet. So that's around... How many meters is that? Is that like 500 meters? 541 meters.

I have been to the top of... Not Freedom Tower. I believe... I believe I've been to the top of not Freedom Tower. I believe I've been to the top of Empire State Building. And I can assure you I could not see. Now, again, that'd be looking on land, right? I could not see anywhere near where I'm from in South Jersey by Philly. Now, we are talking about a plane that is up in the sky, okay? So

that changes things because it's up on an angle, it's above the horizon, just like you said, above the horizon. But to be able to see something that small, a Boeing 777, how big is a Boeing 777? You said you didn't know if it was a plane though as well, right? Right, but to even see anything. I mean, in the comments, maybe there's some people who have some expertise on visuals and i'm way off base here i'm perfectly open to that that just seems so it it sounds it seems like a guy wanted to believe that this thing you saw was this thing and i i don't know that just seems really really far we're all entitled to our opinion i would disagree but you know to me it's a matter of like why is somebody risking their job to make this up?

I don't think he knew he was risking his job. He sent it out on the company email and got fired and wasn't expecting to. I don't think there was – there would have been no thought in my mind I'm risking my job for saying that. But, you know, it probably had to do with the fact that, you know, coordinates of the location and giving it up because you're putting it out on a public server, and he accidentally did that. But I don't think you'd be risking your job doing that. He just made a mistake. Yeah. So there are other witnesses that are out there. There was nine witnesses that were along the South China Sea between Thailand and Malaysia that heard loud noises at roughly 1720 UTC, nine different witnesses. So these loud noises would be consistent with the lithium ion battery fire explosion, the initial event, the one that Mike McKay potentially

saw the fire from potentially as well at the same time. And these are more realistic because that was like right there. It's also nine different people as well. So yeah. There was also some fishermen who were in the South China Sea, 10 miles off the coast. There's eight of them. Two of them are named in one of the articles about the witnesses. And they saw this plane flying unusually low at 1730 UTC, which is the same time of that communication that we were talking about earlier. Now, this would be consistent with the plane being depressurized, but not the pilot trying to asphyxiate everybody,

but we're trying to keep them alive. Because you need to stay underneath 10,000 feet, maybe even lower for people to get enough oxygen to be able to breathe. Otherwise, if you're high up, like where Mike McKay potentially saw the plane, then you're not going to be able to breathe that air anymore. And we already talked about that pilot who potentially heard the communication as well. So those are other witnesses. There may even be more. I've heard rumors from in some of the spaces that I've done on Twitter that there were actually people in the peninsula of Malaysia that saw the plane flying very low over their over their houses, because people live, you know, in a lot

of those villages and stuff there as well. I just haven't gotten to corroborate and find that evidence. It's actually a little bit difficult looking past some of these nine-year-old, you know, news articles about it. But those are the main ones that have been talked about quite consistently. To argue for this, I always kind of wondered, especially based on the alleged path, if it came back over mainland, how there weren't more witnesses. The only thing I could come up with was that it was at 1 a.m., but like, I mean, there's people up at 1 a.m. Oh, exactly. Yeah, so I think there probably are more witnesses, to be honest with you. Yeah. What was, could we get to Katie now? Is it time? It's

time. Okay, let's do it. So our main witness, though. So the way this kind of played out as well is that early on, we stuck with all the evidence. I thought that this Whisper route data, which Richard Godfrey kind of like tried to track the Imersat pings and try to figure out like, okay, what's the real exact specific route? Not just the arc, right? But like the specific route the plane took. And he used those pings and he used this like historical data that all these different sites, including airports, are able to collect. And somehow I was able to try to like build this route that goes from where the turn happens to the South Indian Ocean. Now, the problem and analogy I always give there

is it's like trying to track a person wearing a white shirt and a sea of white shirts. Like, how do you know that what you're tracking is really the plane, right? And the moment you lose track of it, now you're just, you know, making stuff up, right? Yeah. So initially on, I looked through all 300 pages of it, and I found out that if you put a minus sign in front of the coordinates, this goes directly, the plane would go directly through, or the videos would be directly through the Whisper route data in the South Indian Ocean.

And I thought, oh, but bingo, you know, we hit it. This has got to be it. It wasn't until later when we did that coordinate shift analysis that we learned that it couldn't be in the South Indian Ocean. It actually had to be up in the Nicobar Islands based on the fact that its plane is turning left, based on the fact that we can see in the coordinates it's going south into the east. Because if it was inverted, then the plane would have been going north into the east, but that would have meant a right-hand turn, not a left-hand turn. Not a left-hand, yeah. So that meant that – what that essentially meant is we had to be looking at the Nicobar Islands location in our video. So then I started to look up witnesses.

The first one I found was Catherine T. So in her 2014 blog post, which is only archived at this point, she mentions a lot of information that helped to corroborate the events that we see in the videos. They were able to reconstruct her sighting based on automatic GPS. So, you know, her plane So her boat had GPS in it. And she ended up losing, like when she goes and watches the plane, the boat starts to steer off course. Where was she again? So she was going from India to Phuket. And she was right near, if we go back to the plane recreation, you'll see that she was actually on the agreed

upon flight path that everybody agrees. So I think it's plane... Is it called flight path? No, plane is, I believe, the name of it. Yeah, that one. So you can see here her boat's right over there. And we think the boat... That's her boat? Oh, shit. Yeah. So her sighting actually is consistent with the videos in almost every regard,

except for the fact that she didn't witness the plane disappear. She went inside to put the kettle on, potentially at the worst possible moment, never saw any orbs, never saw the plane disappear. Other than that, she sees a plane. She thought her sighting, I actually had an in-person interview with her. Excuse me.

You flew out and saw her? No, over the phone. So I went over the phone. I contacted her. She's based in the UK. So she thought her sighting was at 1840 UTC. That was the first thing that she told me, which is interesting because the other experts that I've talked to, you know, Victor of the Independent Group and other people who have done the investigation, tried to give me different times. They started to say, oh no, her sighting was at 1853 or 19 something or other, 25 UTC. She also told me she felt pressured by the experts to change the time of her sighting,

which I thought was very unusual. She saw the plane descending, beginning from around 10,000 feet, and this is an estimate, to a lower level of altitude throughout the time of her sighting. She said the plane was low. This was recreated again to be between two thousand and ten thousand feet she saw a plane glowing orange with no navigation lights she saw two other planes with navigation lights what do you mean with no navigation lights that means it would have been dark right like you know when you start a plane it's like flashing it's got the lights on it right i was picturing something else for a minute but yes she saw two other planes with navigation lights at cruising altitude as well. These could have been those AWACS that were mentioned by the French dad.

She said the sighting lasted between five and ten minutes, and there was black smoke resembling a contrail coming from the back of the plane. In one of her blog posts, and her sighting is very well recorded, and she also went on some forums as well and discussed with experts about the sighting um she even mentions that uh she couldn't see any fire or flames in there and she even thought that perhaps the smoke might have been that something was wrong with the engines because she argued or kind of give the analogy of like a car that's got something wrong with the engine you see the smoke black smoke coming out of it right yeah um she said i went and asked her about the silhouette that we were showing earlier quick question go ahead if it's in the middle of the night

again i'm trying to put myself there it's not like i'm looking up seeing the smoke coming out of them but if how are you able to see it yeah how are you able to see the smoke if the if it's presumably illumination of the plane and the glow, right, was allowing the smoke to be visible as well. And maybe moonlight? There was no moon up. The moon was not up. It won't take long to tell you Neutral's ingredients. Vodka, soda, natural flavors.

So, what should we talk about? No sugar added. Neutral. Refreshingly simple. We checked that as well. So it was pitch black out. Oh boy. And so she sees this glowing orange plane, but you can see the smoke probably, you know, you can see just like the kind of silhouette of the smoke presumably, but you can probably tell that it's dark smoke as opposed to very light smoke. Um, so I asked her to compare the silhouette that I actually have on my, um, Twitter profile. And this is how I knew she wasn't following the plane very closely or following the case very closely. But she said, well, that looks like it, but it wasn't green. And that's when I realized she didn't know that we were looking at a thermal overlay on the plane. So that told me that she is not familiar with the videos at all, because she didn't realize that the

drone footage is in a thermal color. So then I said, okay, well, yeah, that's a thermal, so don't worry about the color. It's, you know, she said, oh, mine's orange, right? I'm like, yeah, okay, don't worry about that. I said, well, what about the shape? Oh, the shape matches. So that was interesting because that corroborates the shape of our thermal overlay over the top of the MH370. All right, let me poke a little hole in that.

Sure. Now, she does, this is very credible where she was. Yeah. Oh, yeah. Like, that is, I mean, if we pull up that map, look at that thing. That is scarily online. That's the exact same location where the plane turned in the south in the ocean. I'm very inclined to believe this woman.

With eyewitness testimony, though, we all know stories change over time. So when we start talking about shape and stuff like that, I get a little more like, all right, let's keep it more high level. I don't know. You replay things in your head over and over and over again. You change it or you think you saw it right and you see it differently. So I think the higher level details are more important. But just to play a little devil's advocate, I'm not sure on that. If you can pull up KT Gl that glowing plane jpeg as well she actually has several times where they tried to

recreate the visual sighting of the plane and she the one that i've got here called kt uh glowing plane is the one where she said this is the closest anyone got to what her sighting looked like this is a historical record of it so that's what she says she thought it looked like right so that's what she's looking at in the middle of the night. So you can kind of see how you might be able to see black smoke, right? Interestingly enough, pull up as well halogen light, JPEG, next. Look how similar these are. That's a halogen light glowing. So bromine is one of the main chemicals in halon gas,

which is used in the fire extinguishing devices. So the hypothesis here is the reason why she saw this glowing orange, similar to what you see from a halogen light, is the chemical reaction of the fire extinguishing devices being used on the fire for over one hour and 20, or for about over an hour. And the chemical reaction releasing bromine gas. Go ahead and pull up the bromine is scary image as well, or video if you don't mind. And the bro mine is scary JPEG here or video here shows that this chemical releases a very interesting gas that essentially permeates very quickly. And this is what we expect is essentially happening to the plane to allow it to glow orange the way that she sees it. Look how this chemical exudes this orange gas here. And there's a bunch of videos people can

look up online as well that also look similar to this. So this was the first witness where we've actually, I was sitting there trying to figure out, how is this plane glowing orange? And then it kind of came to me. It's actually just this chemical reaction from the fire extinguishing, and that's how we found all these other witnesses that also corroborate a similar event as well. Okay, all right. We're so far above my pay grade with this one, it's laughable.

Yeah, so anyway, that was just to show a little bit of how that chemical can cause this type of orange, like, smoke and gas to permeate throughout the plane. Back up for one second, though. When we think of fire we think orange this was coming from within though so perhaps it had not worked its way the outside yet it's also going at a high rate of speed through the air i don't know how that would affect the image i'm not familiar with that would it have to be this to make that color or could it make make it... I don't think the fire could have caused that. And we thought about the orbs causing it too,

but the problem with the orbs causing it, these orbs are going so fast in our videos, there's no way the plane's outrunning them. So it makes it very unlikely that this situation where the orbs are causing it, we looked into it quite a bit. So ultimately, I think really the only logical cause is this chemical reaction. Now, in addition to this,

she said that she didn't hear any radio calls for SOS, but she also didn't have her radio on. So, interestingly enough, she didn't know what she was looking at when she was watching this plane. She did see it coming low, and she was afraid that it might land in the water, potentially, at one point. She actually, at one point, was able to look through the cockpit

and see in the cockpit, which actually makes me wonder... Wait, what? She was able to look in the cockpit of the plane. It was low enough that she could see in the cockpit of the plane. No way. Supposedly. Supposedly. Bullshit alert.

Here's the thing. If there's a fire... If there's a fire potentially in the forward cargo where half the batteries were, it makes me wonder if the fire would have been inside the plane causing enough illumination to be able to see the orange glow from the cockpit. Yeah, how high is this plane allegedly at this time? Between 2,000 and 10,000 feet. Yeah, dude.

Planes fly up above here from Newark Airport all the time, which is right fucking there. I couldn't see the cockpit if I had a goddamn telescope. I mean, yeah, that's bullshit. No problem. There's no way. There's a 0% chance she saw onto the cockpit. Yeah.

So she said she doubted her sanity due to the odd sighting. I doubt her sanity, too. And I think that's probably why a lot of people dismissed her. But no one can dismiss the fact that she was on the agreed upon flight path at the right time on the right day. That's the thing. That's what makes me inclined to say maybe she did see something. Now, when did she come out with the story? When was the first time? The moment she landed, she actually went ahead and filed an official report. And when was that? I think about two or three days later. Okay. Because she was on this boat, right, for several days. So that, yeah, and on out on a remote boat.

And initially part of the problem was that she didn't know the necessary, like you lose track of time when you're on these boats. Sure. Because it's not like you're sitting there staring at the clock, right? But she didn't come in six months later or anything. No, no, it wasn't six months later. She came in right away. Now that is all pretty credible.

But when you start getting into the, I saw the cockpit from 4,000 feet away, like no, or 4,000 meters or whatever it is no yeah there was an official recreation of her sighting that was actually deemed very credible as well out there um i didn't put it in my notes here for today just because i didn't think it was super necessary um but i've talked to her too and she's not the kind of person that's making up a lot of woo she's very logical and rational how many times have you talked to her uh i don't know over the phone just a few times but you never met her in person do you know anyone who knows her well no i have not yeah yeah yeah you gotta chill with that because that's

that's gonna be you don't know she could be crazy she might not be but like that is a like those are the kinds of things and it and it makes it tough sometimes with some people who actually are telling the truth about things where then they take it too far and no one Will take the actual truth seriously if you're telling me you saw the fucking cockpit on it I mean pull up that image of the of the plane in the black again Do you remember what one that was Alessi? That we were looking at the digital recreation that she said was realistic where you could see like the middle of the plane What was that called that file?

You had us pull up a file where the plane see like the middle of the plane. Oh, yeah. What was that called? That file? You had us pull up a file where the plane was in the middle. It was like a picture. That one's called KT plane, I believe. Yeah, pull that up. And you said that she agreed that this was it. She said this is the closest recreation. Right. So I'm putting this is coming from the side, though. So you have to realize that this plane circled around her boat.

Doesn't matter. And this is probably way closer than what it was. But way like because she was farther away from it just based on the height you told me it wouldn't be that big but i understand like the recreation of like what the actual because you want to make the outline of the plane just to see what the lighting could look like on the actual plane itself you are not see like imagine looking into a fucking window from here if i if someone holds up like if someone's in a golf cart, you know, 500 yards away on a par five on flat ground in the middle of the day, it's, you know, you can tell, it's big enough. You can tell where the window is, but you can't see through their window. So you have to realize, though, that this plane came from the east.

This is what her, would have been from her initial part of seeing it. Yeah, I don't care if it's coming dead on care if she's coming down the plane for five minutes the plane circles around the boat counterclockwise and comes from the the the stern of the body the back of the boat north to south again what was the height you said it was approximately well as low as 2 000 feet okay when and it began at the highest field so when we're seeing here this is when she initially saw it from the side. That would have been roughly 10,000 feet. This is an estimate. And she sees it descending as well at this point.

So theoretically, you know, okay, whether or not she saw through the cockpit, I think is not something necessarily we have to harp on, because the rest of the evidence is pretty conclusive that she saw it. Well, hold on. Here's where you've got to be careful. You have to harp on these things because when a witness says a ridiculous statement, you then

have to question what else could be ridiculous that seemed perfectly plausible before. I'm not saying that makes everything else implausible, but these are the types of things that can lose credibility when people go that far on stuff. And I wouldn't want to see you tie your credibility to someone you talked on the phone twice like you know what if you found

out like you know she was in a mental i'm not saying she was but what what if you found out she was in a mental asylum a year from now and then you lose credibility because of that like you got it and and i admit you have a really tough job here because you're trying to tie together an international case with all kinds of moving pieces. But you got to be careful with using words like it's all conclusive when something like that is included in it. So if the cockpit – you said it was 2,000 feet at lowest. If the cockpit were at the top of the 1,776-foot-tall Freedom Tower, I'd be looking dead on. I'd be able to see the cockpit. No way. Sorry. I've stood at the bottom of Freedom Tower. You can't even see inside fucking 10 stories up. That's crazy. Of course, everyone's entitled to their opinion. I know,

but that's a fact. Let's not call that an opinion. I could point to that. That's a fucking fact. Correct me in the comments if someone is a goddamn visual savant out there. Sure. So what do we want to talk about next? I think that the next would be some additional pertinent information that is relevant to the case that is not necessarily tied to any particular piece that we've gone over right now. And then it might be good to look at the videos

again, just in the light of the context of what we've been digging into. So, other pertinent information out there, there's two fake passengers. If you want to pull up the fake passengers picture. Oh, yeah, let's do this. So these passengers were using stolen passports that they changed their appearance to look more like the people who were on the plane. Now, keep in mind, most of the people on this plane were Asian as well.

So anybody who comes from a Western country is going to stick out on this plane like a sore thumb. And how they necessarily fit into it depends on where you go with the narrative right so we've thrown out or we've put out this uh scenario where there's a fire potentially on board but there's still mystery here like did this just happen naturally where uh our witnesses see and hear this when the plane goes dark or was there an espionage angle to this, right? If there is an espionage angle, it seems weird that these passengers would have been ruled out as not being involved within, I think it was like three days or less.

Because if you have these fake passengers in a post 9-11 world, and one of the main theories is hijacking, like how are you throwing these guys out? They were spending tens of thousands, if not tens of thousands of dollars on fake passports, on stolen passports. And they were flying to Beijing, But the story is they were refugees trying to get to Amsterdam.

To me, it doesn't make any sense that you would fly to Beijing and risk going through more countries and getting a security screen. But I'm curious to hear your thoughts. Also, if you remember, on top of that, the 9-11 hijackers had meetings in kuala lampur malaysia before all that stuff so the i would imagine and now i'm doing guesswork i don't know but i would imagine the tightness of security apparatus and communication between malaysia and the united states in the wake of something like that and again we're way past that at this point in 2014 is probably pretty strong, which makes this a little more interesting too. All right, so let's keep going with these guys. Yeah, I mean, so there's not much more to go with those guys. So it really comes down to whether do you believe this narrative that they were Iranian refugees, and that they were trying to get Amsterdam flying through Beijing,

as opposed to taking the direct route from Kuala Lumpur directly to Amsterdam? I mean, there's a direct flight. So why are you risking extra segments going through additional countries, flying the wrong direction, if that was really your intention? To me, I can't figure out how these guys play in, but if this is somehow into an espionage angle, then I would bring this evidence right back in. Maybe more guesswork here. I don't know. This is a fun one. Maybe because you said Iranian refugees.

Yeah, that's the official story. Maybe they're really IRGC, like Iranian intelligence. That's right. It's IRGC, right? You might want to check that term, unless that might be the military. I forget. But maybe they're IRGC and they're trying to make diplomatic relationships with China and do it through a crossover route in Malaysia and pose as Iranian refugees or whatever they were posing as instead. That's possible. Yeah, and interestingly enough, there is 2011. Iran actually hacked an RQ-170 spy, a very advanced spy drone, and were able to land it without it crashing.

This became a very big international incident. What is this? Yeah, take a look at that. Yeah, the RQ-17070 they actually then reverse engineered it and they were able to create their own uh autonomous drones that look just like it's a very weird looking drone it's like a little almost looks like a little batman drone um and so that's where i looked into that and i thought huh this is kind of weird even more weird that we have these guys that are on stolen passports from iran on this plane but i haven't been able to find anything that connects anything else on this

plane or the cargo or anything like that to them. Are you going to bring up the Russians too? I was not going to dig into the Russian angle because I just don't find it to be credible. I agree. Yeah. I think that if this plane went to Russia, there would have been many radars that would have seen it. I think that we would not have covered that up at all. We would have immediately been saying that Russia did this right. And that's part of the reason why I don't think the videos could be produced by the United States for a PSYOP in any way. We'll come back to that, but yeah. Because, you know, if so, if they had been, you know, I would have blamed Russia on it, right?

Not ourselves. Yeah, and I kind of laid out that scenario, I think, earlier when we were on air. It's all blending together before and after. I think it was a little bit before, but yeah. But either way, the Jeff Wise scenario where he thought if the plane went north instead of south, it was Russia. But the actual plot was so implausible because – oh, by the way, bookmark remote control operation of aircraft. I just thought of that. But his scenario was with these three passengers, one of them was located near in the back so that that guy could slip up front through first class and go into that electric hatch without anyone knowing, go down there, take control of the aircraft, depressurize the cockpit, depressurize the actual aircraft, and then take the plane to Kazakhstan, again, this whole point would be to distract from the war in Crimea,

which, you know, wouldn't have been, I can, again, I can think of a lot of better ways to do that. But other than that, the fact that there were three Russians on there sitting separately doesn't seem to strike any kind of, there's nothing there, right? Not that I can find. But yeah, again, it just, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Like that goes back to this whole narrative in 2014, where everything was about Russia, always blaming Russia, right? And so I just don't find anything credible there that links it together. What I will say is that I think that the official investigators, many of them very intelligent people, and the biggest issue they probably had, the same issue that we presented

here, is there's no debris field. They didn't find any of this plane from the official search. So that's what leads people to come up with these other speculative theories. Like, okay, if it didn't crash, where did it go? Maybe it went to Russia, right? And as we'll see going back to the videos, you know, there's other capabilities. Maybe it was just us, right?

Now, in addition to that, if we can pull up the ZAP accurately illuminates, accurate illumination here, satellites can see in the dark with false color ir and this is really important especially if you have a low earth orbit satellite because it rotates around the planet every 90 minutes so if it can't see in at night it's basically useless half the time so it was as we mentioned total darkness in our videos there's no shadows anywhere the zap that you can see here, this is from the events.

And I believe this is from the satellite video. We can see that the clouds are both illuminated correctly in the background and in the foreground. So assuming that these clouds are accurate, this essentially proves that the zap is accurate as well, because this will take a tremendous amount of work to make this perfectly accurate in the way that we see on here. Wait, back up for a second. I was pulling up a source that you were just referring to. Why is this proving that the zap we see in the video

is accurate? Because in essence here, in order to accurately illuminate this, this is very difficult to pull off. You can see here that everything is perfectly illuminated both in the background and in the foreground. What is this image?

This is the image of the zap from the satellite video yeah but where but where so who got this initially where did you get this image that was the question oh yeah so this was posted on reddit this is some of the community research that was put in this is actually done by somebody who deep who thought that the videos might be fake but even so a lot of the people that have been quote-unquote debunkers have been some of the people that have given quote-unquote debunkers have been some of the people that have given us the best evidence that the videos are authentic did they get did they provide the sourcing for this though can this go be found on yeah you can go find this guys yeah you can go find this on reddit not on reddit did they did they provide the sourcing of the satellite

where this is allegedly from because i this image right here i could make this on photoshop in two seconds and i suck yeah so i mean this is actually from our videos this image right here, I could make this on Photoshop in two seconds and I suck. Yeah, so I mean, this is actually from our videos directly. Oh, it's from within them. It's from the videos, yep. So this is from the satellite video that we were looking at earlier. And that's where this comes from directly.

So this is not something that somebody else created. This is actually from the videos. So it's just a screen grab. Yep, just a screen grab. I missed that when I was over there. No problem. Okay. So this is from there. And so, in addition, interestingly enough, we... Now, not from this particular moment, but when we watch it, we think that the fact that

we can see this illumination at all might also be an indicator that it's nighttime. Because otherwise, if it was daytime, the zap would not be as clearly prominent if there was a very, like, high illumination like we saw from the Trump picture. Now, did we actually pull up the Trump picture? I was going to say, I don't think we did. Do you have that? Yeah, pull up Trump satellite. It should be in there. And you said this, I believe, at the very beginning of the podcast.

Yeah, so look at this one. You quickly mentioned it, but what was the context here again? So the context here is that without this, we wouldn't even know about the optical capabilities of our satellites. So this was posted by Trump on social media in 2019. And, yeah, he gave away some information here, which may end up proving the case for us. You can see this very large shadow right in the middle here, right? And look how bright this is compared to our video as well, much brighter than our video.

What was this of again? This is USA 224. This was also people were able to look at the trajectories of satellites. They were able to figure out from the shadow the time of this. Yeah, but what is the picture? Oh, this was one of these, was it Iran or one of these countries in the Middle East?

What does it say? You can see the country in the top right there. But really, country's not really relevant to the reason why I'm bringing it up. It is Iran? Yeah. So we were attacking one of their weapons facilities or what have you here. They have a weapons facility.

Yeah, you got it. We attacked it. It's gone. Here's the image. This helps, though, to corroborate that ours has a very similar, and also look at the angle here. This is not coming from a geostationary satellite. If you guys remember from those SIBR systems, the geostationary ones are so far away,

40,000 kilometers away, that they're just looking straight down. So this is another low-Earth orbit satellite. USA 224 is a low-Earth orbit satellite, and that's why we see the angle. Low-Earth orbit satellite. LEO, yep. There's three different types of, as far as I know, only three types of trajectories and orbits. There are geostationary, GEOs. Those stay in one position, generally.

You're talking about satellites right now. Mm-hmm, satellites. Low Earth orbit ones are transiting around the Earth around every 90 minutes. And then you have millennia orbit satellites, hopefully I said that right, which are more oblong. And ours, the USA, our NRL-22, the one that we see in our designation, has a millennia orbit, which we believe is therefore a command satellite, which was sent up in 2006, which may have been when the system that we see creating the video was first turned on. At the time when our videos happened, 1840 UTC, this was at the North Pole looking down on the Earth. So theoretically, this was in a position where it could have been

communicating information from other satellites to generate the SIibber system, or Cibber's video that we see. Noted. Now, a couple other just quick facts. The White House was calling Malaysia every day after this event. Some people have argued, okay, well, there was an American passenger on board, why would they not? But if our videos are accurate, and they're both US military assets taking those videos, then this would indicate potentially you're building a cover story. Well, maybe. Yes, that's very plausible.

I won't argue that that's plausible. But also, you know, there were only three Americans on board, but there's still three Americans on board. It's still in their jurisdiction. It's an international incident. There's multiple countries involved. The United States is the leader of the free world. It makes sense.

Like, they talk with these governments, but the White House doing it directly does show obviously a strong – what's it called? A strong emphasis on that. Actually, one thing that would make your case a little bit though would actually go against that too, maybe. I don't know. Which is would something like this be an intelligence community like, oh, fuck, White House is not on a need to know? Yeah, that's a good question. Like, you know, to me, something this big would have to go to the White House just because you realize, like, you would have to cover it up with Malaysia and all these other countries, too.

This is not just going to implicate just the United States. Malaysia would have to be involved, potentially other countries as well. So therefore, you're going to have to have the diplomatic relations. You got to involve Obama, who was president at the time. You know, and I think that these kind of operations, and I don't know that much about them, but I imagine they have to go all the way to the top, something of this level of magnitude. But that's just speculative on my part for sure. Obama also visited Malaysia in April, which is quite unheard of. He spent several days there. Over this? Theoretically.

I mean, I don't know if the official reason was necessarily this, but in my opinion... Obama, April 2014, Malaysia trip purpose. Let's look that up. Because, I mean, that's right after the event, right? Yeah, it's a month after. Yeah. It certainly surges. So that's pretty interesting that he came and visited afterwards as well, right?

Almost like he wanted to make sure, hey, let's smooth over, you know, we got our story right, right? And keep in mind, it took them weeks, actually months. I don't think the Imristat data was released, the ping data, until like May. Go down. Go down. We have an article right here. Opening the first visit to Malaysia by a U.S. president in nearly half a century, Barack Obama looked ahead Saturday to economic and security talks with the prime minister najib rajak who leads the south asia southeast asian nation with

an important role to obama's efforts to forge deeper ties with the region stopping stepping on the red carpet at the royal malaysian airbase obama was whisked by a limousine to koala lampor's parliament square where a 21 gun salute rang out rang out as Malaysia's king and prime minister greeted Obama under muggy skies and a yellow awning. Military band plate. Can we go down a little bit? Obama's next stop was to the Astana Nagara, the national palace for an audience with Malaysia's royal family. This was a two-day visit which follows stops in Japan and South Korea. Can we do edit find next 370

type in type in 370 370 type in malaysia airlines last month's disappearance of a commercial airliner carrying 239 people put Malaysia in the international spotlight as Obama was preparing to head to the region. So it was already on the schedule. The U.S. is assisting in the huge search effort. Officials are widening the search area in a remote part of the ocean where the jet may have crashed. In a sign of ongoing agony, about 50 relatives of missing Chinese passengers continue a sit- protests outside the malaysian embassy in beijing demanding answers absent from obama's itinerary malaysia a meeting with the opposite okay that's separate so he had had it planned before in all fairness

it's interesting i don't know if that's conclusive from that that's a little bit of i would say into the wording a little bit too much in my opinion but i get what you're getting out there well it says hold on go back go back yeah but where was it the commercial last month's disappearance obama was preparing to head to this is a big asia trip they don't announce these things like a month ahead bro they announce these months ahead so this was not just to malaysia this was to multiple countries so the president the president's schedule is public information with – what is it, Alessi? I think there's like small – like if there's intelligence-related things, they'll cover that or something. But that's – he has the press corps with him at all times.

So when it says that, it's perfectly reasonable to absolutely assume that. Okay. I don't want to put conspiracy where there's not. It's a bit speculative, but sure. Yeah, I mean I think that that's – okay. I'm trying to find corroboration for that, which I don't want to put conspiracy where there's not. It's a bit speculative, but sure. Yeah. I mean, I think that that's, uh, okay. Um, I'm trying to find corroboration for that, which I can't at the moment, but anyway, that's a side note. So Obama did visit there in April, right? Uh, right afterwards. Um, we already talked about the Rolls-Royce engines, I think, but these Rolls-Royce engines should have been transmitting data

using the ADS-B. Um, and the ACARS data set was the only real footprints that they had after the ADS-B. And after the ATC, which is the air traffic control radar and audio were lost. So the fact that this Rolls-Royce data, I don't think has been made public is very unusual, especially because the prime minister or the defense minister said that they had been in communication with the US about the spy satellites and with Rolls-Royce about that data. Theoretically, this data would have corroborated this situation or shown that it didn't actually go into the South Indian Ocean.

Because, again, that information should be pinging all the time. Now, there's one other really big piece of information as well, which is speculative. Well, I wouldn't say not completely corroborated, let's say is the best way. It's not necessarily speculative, but a source did reach out to me early on and mentioned that they had been in touch with a nephew of a general that had shown that general the videos the nephew did, and that that general, their reaction indicated that they thought the videos might be authentic. They didn't laugh at them, for example, or potentially say how fake they were.

The nephew of a general, how did they reach out to you? They initially reached out through Reddit looking for someone to contact about some impertinent information that they had. And then someone directed them to me and they came to me on Twitter. And they told me in private DMs, their first thing that they asked was if I thought the videos were real, because that was the only thing holding them back from spreading this information, which I thought was unusual, because that meant they weren't familiar with my work at all, because I had already said that I thought that the videos were real at that point and was already making building the case for it. So this, to me, lended some credibility to their story. It wasn't like they were trying to sell me a story, you know, and they weren't

trying to convince me of it. They just came and said, okay, well, here's the information. And they told me that story. And they said, this general's name is Joseph F. Dunford, somebody that I had never heard of. You know, I wasn't super familiar with military personnel, but it wasn't one of these big generals that I'd heard of before. So I went ahead and Googled them afterwards, just thinking, okay, let's check out this general. Turns out he was, if you pull him up and pull up his bio, in 2014, he was in charge of the International Security Forces. Go to Wikipedia. Actually, that's good right there.

No, no, because Wikipedia will have actual... Yeah, so he was in charge in 2014 of the International Security Forces, meaning that he potentially would have been the guy who was in charge during this event while it was happening. And then out of this event, despite the fact that we didn't find any plane, he ended up getting promoted to the highest-ranking military officer in the United States. He was advisor to the president, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Secretary of Defense from 2015 to 2019. And after that, he retired. Is there something wrong with that? No, I just

think that that's a pretty amazing career, honestly, in terms of being promoted up to being the highest ranking military officer. I would say if there was a conspiracy involved here, that he did a very successful job of making sure that nobody looked into it for nine years. But then his nephew asked him about this video and he doesn't react and says, oh, it could be whatever, suddenly to his nephew who then runs on the Reddit. No, I don't think his nephew did. His nephew talks to somebody else. The nephew wasn't the one directly talking to me.

So, interestingly enough. So now we're, hold on though. Sure. I'm not saying it didn't happen. I know how you're going to take this business direction. I got to do this, man. Go for it. We are now friend of a DM from a Reddit message of a friend of a nephew of a general who's telling us, like, that bullshit meter's rolling again, baby. So where is he now?

He is now board of directors at Lockheed Martin. Yeah, I mean, that's par for the course. That's what all these guys do. I think it's pretty interesting because what we may be looking at here, I mean, if you look at it from a ufology perspective, a lot of people argue that the companies like Lockheed Martin would be the ones who have that type of technology. They're the ones who are reverse engineering UFO technology.

Could be, yeah. And if that's the case, then perhaps what we're seeing here, my theory is that what we see with these orbs and these videos that we were showing earlier is potentially our technology. I don't think that that is non-human intelligence, which is some points we'll go into later on. But if so, now we're putting a connection between the person who was potentially involved and the person who was in charge of the situation when it was going down, who has now moved on to the company that was potentially producing the technology at the time. But for the record, to like keep, for your good,

to keep the situation honest, that evidence there is dubious at best. You're talking to someone behind a keyboard who's twice removed allegedly and is reaching out to you on a Twitter DM and acting like kind of sketch about it. So, you know, and you've tried to- I'm not saying it's not. You've tried to throw down on a lot of the evidence

so far today. And I totally, you have your own opinions and I have nothing against those opinions. I am simply presenting the evidence as it's been brought to me, and I'm not trying to misrepresent it in any way, shape, or form. And that's really what it comes down to me. And what I'm saying is that I found this evidence to be credible. If you guys don't, your listeners don't, that's totally fine. I'm just building the case and presenting it forward. So the question then would be motive, right? Like, why are you going to do this, right? Why are we going to have this situation with the videos?

But as we've presented here and brought together here is that we have a situation where this plane was doomed, right? There was, if we just let this plane live out its life here, it's going to crash into the Nicobar Islands. It's going to potentially try to land there, and this plane is going to break apart. We've got a witness that said she saw the plane descending, potentially with smoke coming out of the back of it, glowing. We have a situation of our videos, where we see the videos where the plane is descending. We can see the smoke coming out of the back of it. We have that SOS that was only reported in Chinese news that says that this plane was disintegrating and attempting an emergency landing. So if we just let this play out, all these people would be doomed.

So in my mind, one of the scenarios for why we might deploy this technology, why these videos might be real, would be to save the plane. Potentially somehow we can put this fire out, or we can get this plane to a location where we can get the fire out really quickly, right? Potentially not where it's going to be right in the middle get the fire out really quickly right potentially not where it's going to be right in the middle of the ocean at the middle of the night etc interesting enough people then ask well who's on board this plane there was 20 free-scale semiconductor scientists engineers whatever you want to call them important people that were part of this company free-scale semiconductors now i talked to chris from the So Deep podcast. He actually worked at the company in 2014 and said that these were very prominent people. This was a big loss to

the company. There's a bunch of news reports that corroborate this as well. It was a loss because there were 20 people on there. And they were, to be clear, though, none of them were C-level and none of them were engineers. They were all, say say in the supply chain side where they were overseeing the – how they were going to run the factories in China. And none of them were American. This is an American company, you know, very international though in all fairness. Like out of Austin and they had, as I said, over 16,000 employees. So it's a loss but like, you know. So the news reports would indicate the opposite of that. I think I had my reporting indicates that they were engineers and that this was a very prominent loss for the company in general.

Now, find that because they weren't making the chips is the point. They were not engineers of the chips that that company produces. They were people who oversaw like how their facilities ran in China or something like that. Yeah, I'll have to pull that up here in a second. So I'll come back to that in just a moment. Can you pull that up a little bit? I can't find the direct link. Yeah, just look up the Freescale Semiconductors MH370, and I think you should be able to get to it right away.

Who were the employees? Yeah. Type in MH370 Freescale. Who were the employees now in addition to that there was a 2005 NSA report that we found that was on the commercial use of superconductivity

and the emergence of it and that actually mentions Freescale nine different times in it did you send that to Alessi too? the report I don't think so but there is a picture of the front of it if you look up I think Freescale we can pull up the picture just while you're sitting there can you forward that to Alessi too? The report? I don't think so, but there is a picture of the front of it. If you look up, I think, we can pull up the picture. Just while you're sitting there, can you forward that to Alessi? Yeah.

So that he has it? Because it's like a 260-page report or something, including the appendix. They were mentioned nine times. Page 60 was where they were mentioned twice, and I'll admit, if someone can read it and understand it, God bless America. Yeah, I mean, it's too technical for me to understand, but I did notice that they were mentioned understand it, God bless America. Like, you know, I have no idea what that said.

Yeah, I mean, it's too technical for me to understand, but I did notice that they're mentioned a bunch of times in it. Well, they were mentioned nine times out of 260 pages. I don't think that's a bunch of times, but maybe it is. Okay. Yeah. And in that as well, you know, when he talks about it, it says that the technology would potentially be available or complete by 2010 or 2012. And what was the technology again? Room temperature superconductivity is what we're talking about,

microchips that would be able to produce that. There was another podcast that I was on that actually shed some more light on it where they speculated that these microchips that they're developing could have been used for quantum computers using room temperature superconductivity. They might be able to enable quantum computers. Might, yeah. I mean, again, it's speculative, but i think that it's kind of an interesting angle in terms of connecting the people on the plane to what the motivation would be to save

the plane to if you're onto the espionage angle to prevent those people from going to china or making sure that those people become you know know, American supporting, essentially. So let me send that over here. All right. We have the article, by the way, on Reuters. Loss of employees on Malaysia airline flight a blow, U.S. chipmaker says. Employees of Freescale Semiconductor who were on Malaysia Airlines flight presumed to have crashed were doing sophisticated work at the U.S. chipmaker, a company spokesperson said on sunday the 20 employees among 239 on flight mh370 were mostly engineers and other experts working to make the company's chip facilities in tij and i'm gonna mess that up chanjin china and koala lampur more efficient so that's what i

that's what i was meaning and if i misspoke on that they weren't engineers i was specifically meant they weren't engineering the actual chips. They were focusing on the efficiency of their actual places they were doing this. So there were people with a lot of experience and technical background, and they were very important people. It's definitely a loss for the company. None of Austin, Texas' base Freescale's most senior executives were on board the Boeing 777 that vanished from radar screens about an hour after it took off in Kuala Lumpur. Go down, Leslie. The employees who were on board, 12 from Malaysia and 8 from China, came from a range of disciplines, and they were part of a broad push by Chief Executive Officer Greg Lowe to make Freescale more efficient and cost-effective.

Again, like on a consulting basis on how they're doing this. Top quality engineers are hard to come by for chip makers and other technology companies, and losing them can have a major impact on business regardless of their seniority, which is fair. While the employees on the flight account for less than 1% of Freescale's global workforce of 16,800 people, they were working toward the same goals, and their loss will reverberate throughout Freescale, Hollis said. I think that's enough right there. I could see information across. But yeah, I mean they were definitely doing important work, but they weren't – what I would be more – where my conspiracy brain would be tingling there is if any of these guys were personally developing and were the only talent that could developing some sort of insane chip like you point out that could like power a quantum computer or something and it was shut down which in fairness could be covered up could absolutely be covered up like i don't think they'd admit that certainly publicly yeah so i think that you know i think we can kind of show there that these people were important people you know in terms of what they were doing

sure you know not know exactly what their their total role was but yes in this what they were doing, sure, you know, not know exactly what their total role was. But yes, in this case, they were going to improve the factories over there. So then, you know, going back to the motive, then it could be to prevent the loss of intellectual property related to technology, potentially, we see deployed. It could also be theoretically, just to test the technology on a doomed plane. You know, if this plane is doomed, another podcaster argued, well, you know, what if we just have some kind of, you kind of manual or whatever you want to call it, protocol that says, okay, this plane is doomed, go ahead and do the test technology on it. The thing I have against that is, okay, if we're doing that, this is a pretty big risk to be doing that and then having to develop this whole cover story, regardless of if it goes well or not. So to me, I think the motives that I think are more applicable will be either the espionage motive,

preventing these people from bringing their intellectual property to China, or you're just doing it out of the good of mankind, saving people that are doomed. It's a situation where you have enough time to respond to it. Maybe the assets are in the area because there was training exercises that were about to happen between Thailand and the United States two days later. So potentially the assets were just in the right place at the right time. What I would say is if that is, you know, if we did do it out

of the good of our hearts, I hope that if I'm on a plane like that, that they'll do that and save me as well. So yeah, at this point, you know, I think we might go back into the videos and take a look at them again if you're up for it and kind of, you know, talk about a little bit more about the videos and the technology and stuff that we see in them, if that's what you want to do. Yeah, but before we do that, you know, because like, and by the way, like, despite me picking apart everything, which I will continue to do throughout this, the scale and scope of what you have put together here is impressive.

I mean, and people are only hearing what you're going through in your basically like overall broad view bullet points of this. And you've cited a lot of things within there. But again, if you look at all the different, I mean, you've done a lot of posts on Twitter with links, with evidence, whatever. I mean, you've put together a lot. So that definitely needs to be said. But, you know, I think we would ask this in any case that people are looking into, especially

when it's a mystery with incredible secrets and an almost disproportionate... What's the word I'm looking for? It's almost like you're kind of getting to the core of some sort of meaning in life when you're looking at something this dense that could involve countries and geopolitical espionage angles that are just beyond measure. Do you ever – like how badly do you want this to be true is the question? I mean to me it doesn't matter at all. I mean I even tell people I never wanted to be famous in any respect, and I would love to go back to being a normal person at some point after this. You know, just based on the amount of attacks that I've seen, though, I don't think that one way or another that's going to be really possible.

And for me, it's just a matter of the weight of the evidence. You know, having been the person who's investigating it firsthand, you know, I think that I try to do my best kind of collecting all this information to try to get it out there so that other people can understand my thought processes going through it. But for me, I'm 100%, 150% convinced that this is real and that the videos are real. Not because I want to be. How quickly did you get there? You know, I think that initially I had a very strong inkling that once we were able to show that what we were seeing was a Citrix session logged into the Intel SPI satellite database.

It was a what? A Citrix session logged into the SPI satellite database. How were you able to find that out? We'll talk about that here in just a second. Okay. Because that's actually on my list of video facts and speculation. Okay. We'll wait on that.

Go ahead. is that once you show that the situation where this is potentially authentic, that we're able to log into the real spy satellite database, that's where I said, okay, if this is real, then we should be able to authenticate every aspect of these videos. And from there, that's pretty much what we've done. As you see from the detail around showing that the plane didn't crash in the South Indian Ocean, presenting this fire situation that's corroborated by all these witnesses, I didn't expect any of that stuff.

As the investigation progressed, and if you go through all my tweets and posts, you can follow my thought process as we've kind of gone through it. And there's been so many, oh my God, moments where we said, wow, okay, the fire scenario is real. Now we found this witness. Oh, now there's a bunch more witnesses, right? And then you look at the lithium ion batteries, I didn't know how dangerous they were. It's like, wow, this corroborborates that as well and as we'll get into a little bit later then we found out that we might even be able to find out who the leaker was i sat there one night and i said we have this whole psychological profile who this person was they potentially are an operator they are probably u.s military they didn't really want to damage u.s military because they're like

hiding all this information they probably had an emotional reaction like anyone would do while they're looking at those videos and they're like, huh, they're never going to be able to find out the official story unless I leak these. And I thought, well, I wonder if we can find this person one night. So I started digging through all this information and I ended up finding somebody who I think, and we'll present the case here, fits the bill. So all of this stuff coming together is what really solidified that this information is real. In addition to a lot of these different sources where you may say be able to cast out on individual ones and certain stories that are there, but I'm only telling probably a fraction of the things that people have come to me. Some other stuff that I'll throw out there that's not even on here just for you guys is I've had people come to me say that they work with NASA and that they've shown their team this and that they think that's corroborated and it's's real but they're not willing to go on the record and that's part of the reason why like the stuff that i have been posting out there people that have really gone into depth with me in terms of their knowledge base of uh how aviation how

planes work their former pilots people are engineers a lot of people are afraid to go on the record with their names right they because of the significance of the case look at mike mckay he went on the record and he lost his job, right? Yeah. So part of it, of course, like I'm not, and that's part of the reason why I haven't corroborated a lot of people's real identities until I get to a point where you bring me in front of Congress. Now, you bring me in front of Congress, of course.

I mean, they're going to be there with me. They're going to have to have their identity corroborated, right? And I've asked certain people too, and they said, you know, I'm not willing to do that, right? But with all these additional stories too, the general story as well, it's like, I find that a lot of these stories are credible. The ones that I'm bringing to you, I find personally credible. Whether or not you think they are, you know, I leave that to you guys. There's some we've definitely, I think, kiboshed today, but there's a lot that we haven't. Yeah, so that's really what leads me. Now, if you were

to show me the plane in the South Indian Ocean tomorrow and say, oh, we found it, guys, here, and give me a story for how that's possible without a debris field, et cetera, sure, I'll change my opinion. And my opinion has changed throughout this. You know, when I first saw the videos, I thought we must be looking at non-human intelligence. I first thought they had to be fake. And then after we found the Citrix session information, I thought, well, this has got to be non-human intelligence. This is like triangles, orbs, everything I've seen in UFOlogy since I got interested in 2017 from those DOD Navy videos kind of corroborates a lot of the stuff we're seeing in there. But the more I dug into the case, the more I thought, huh, this actually doesn't seem like non-human intelligence.

We're looking at a lot of human motivations involved in it, and we can dig into that in a second, but, you know. Have you looked into, I mean, obviously you've looked into this in a second, but... Have you looked into... I mean, obviously, you've looked into this one pretty heavily, and you demonstrated earlier this didn't just start in August for you. This is something you were looking at back when it happened. But have you... Are there other cases you've really sunk your teeth into before

that you didn't get anywhere with that you thought you might? No, and I've never done anything like this. Even when I looked into it from 2014, I was just looking at it because I'm actually scared of flying like i've always been scared of flying even though i did it for my job for like over seven years every week i just came to uh you know i would assume that every flight i got on might be my last that was how i would process it so every time there's been a flight accident i want to know why right and that was the same with malaysian airlines And most of them, they have very mundane answers.

I used to read a lot of Malcolm Gladwell, which was that you had to have a breakdown. It's not just one thing that caused it, usually. And actually, he did a whole thing about flight crashes. They actually changed the communication so that I think people speak in English almost always now. Because the language barrier was a big incident that caused flight crashes.

People just simply not doing due diligence to confirm information. Was that in Tipping Point? Yeah. Is that Tipping Point? I think it might be. Or Talking to Strangers. I think it's Tipping Point. It had to be Tipping Point.

Yeah. And that's where actually I got really interested in trying to figure out the cause because I realized it's not usually just one thing. Right? And so then when the Malaysian Airlines thing came up, I remember back in 2014 looking into it, and when I read that Wired article, I thought – I really resonated with that. I'm like, huh, this actually makes a lot of sense. Like, it fits with the flight path, but couldn't figure out –

like, it didn't answer all the questions. And then even looking into this, like, South Indian Ocean narrative, I followed actually Victor's blog back then. I would read a lot of his blog posts because he would go out there, cast doubt into a lot of the official information like the FBI simulator data, right, and show that, no, it was actually MH150, didn't really match the flight path at all. And so I was never really comfortable with it. And even before I saw these videos, you know, I still knew the United States had to know more about this plane. Rogue 777 in a post-911 world, there was no way we weren't tracking it or anything like that.

So I was always really skeptical. But, no, I've never had a situation where I saw any videos where I thought, oh, boy, I've got to be the guy that investigates this. I've never had a situation or inkling where I thought, okay, I'm going to go dig into this case in this really high-depth level before these videos. And to be clear, earlier you started to lay it out, but your best hypothesis right now is that there was a lithium battery-caused fire, and United States secret technology happened to be in the area, and they decided that they were going to try to save the plane, and were obviously, or we think, unsuccessful in doing that. Did I get that right?

Yeah, that's about right. Again, the mystery is I don't know if it started accidentally or if it didn't start. I'm, at this point, 99% sure that the real scenario is an emergency event related to this fire that was happening. Halfway through this case, I wasn't sure if this was like an espionage scenario or an emergency event scenario related to UFOs. I thought, okay, maybe somehow these orbs caused the initial event. Or like a lot of conspiracy theorists thought maybe this plane got jammed and hijacked and like remote controlled.

Like that was a big conspiracy theory early on. I told you to put a bookmark on that. Yeah. We'll talk about that soon. Because, you know, and I couldn't figure out what of these two scenarios was it? And the real tipping point was this glowing orange plane that the witness saw at the agreed upon flight path where everybody said she was there. I couldn't figure out why is this plane glowing orange? And

that's where I realized that, oh, this is just a fire. It had 221 kilograms of lithium ion batteries in it. To me, that was always something I thought was unusual. And other people have kind of looked at the cargo. I couldn't find anything else in the cargo that really stuck out. These batteries have stuck out from the beginning. And then when I realized how dangerous those batteries were and how often those incidents were happening, that just seemed like the obvious thing that it had to be that. And then all the additional witnesses that I had ruled all the witnesses out too, all those other ones, I just thought, I actually previously thought they were in the wrong location. And then when I went back and looked at them again, like, no, they actually are in the right location. All of them are. Why actually previously thought they were in the wrong location and then when i went back and looked at them again like no they actually are in the right location

all of them why do you think they were in the wrong location part of me i thought a lot of them were in the malacca sea for some reason or in the malacca straits sorry and not over the south china sea and that's why i thought oh the timings didn't match but then i went back and looked at it again i went oh no they were actually in south china sea like 10 minutes after like these guys actually did have to see the plane pretty much and even going back to the official narratives if you started to believe that with like the decompression situation, et cetera, it didn't make a lot of sense. But with the fire scenario, it makes tons of sense. You know, you're keeping the people alive. You're trying to stay low

to keep them breathing. So it's not a matter of what I want to be true. It's just a matter of how strong the evidence is that presents that case in my mind. What do you think it accomplishes if we, let's say, let's even start with, let's say your hypothesis there is right and you're able to prove it. What is that? What do you think that accomplishes? Redemption for a lot of people and vindication for a lot of people. For the families, honestly, going back and watching the press conferences, it got me emotional because you can tell that people brushed off the reactions of the families as grief and that they were irrational. But when you go back

and look at the defense minister's answers, like that is not how honest people answer questions, right? They are very usually upfront about what they know and what they speculate on, and they refused to speculate on anything. They just kept saying any speculation will lead to more speculation. To me, it would lead to saying any speculation will lead to more speculation. To me, it would lead to answers. It would lead to somebody solving the case. Was the defense minister – I want to make sure I have this right. There were two main guys that you'd see on the mic.

There was the guy in white hair, and there was the guy in black hair. That's simple enough. Yeah, the black hair guy was the one – the white hair guy, I think, was the military guy. Yeah. Okay. So I have that right. And both of them were very standoffish about the information. You know what, though?

That guy, though, the defense minister, I wanted to make sure I had him right in my head. I did. He's sketchy as hell. Oh, yeah. The other guy almost seemed like he was trembling every time he talked. Yeah. He seemed fucking terrified every time he was, like, they all speak perfect english gotta give him that right you know because they're i guess they're speaking to the international audience in a way

and it's the most i guess the language that they're going to do that in but like that something about that it almost felt like you know when someone has an amazing hand in poker and they don't want to tell anyone because the flop hasn't come out yet and they're fucking shaking because they're like, oh my god, I got pocket rockets. It felt like that but in a negative way. Like he had seen a ghost and he couldn't tell anyone in there. No, 100%. And that's my reaction too. And even when we watched the defense minister in his Four Points interview, which that was the one that I've never seen a sketchy interview in my whole life.

His what interview? The Four Points is this Australian documentary that was the one that I've never seen a sketchy interview in my whole life. His what interview? The Four Points is this Australian documentary that was investigating it. And right off the bat, the interviewer asks, like, what was the last time he, when he was notified the plane went missing? And he's like, does that matter? What do you mean, does that matter?

She's like, from the storytelling perspective, yes. Yes, I would say it matters. Like, yeah, it's pretty damn important in the situation. And even weirder like he asks her if she would send up the plane to or send up jets to shoot the plane down she's like that's not an appropriate question for me to ask like and then so he says we turned it around yeah he tries to turn it around on her and then so would you do it would you shoot the plane down like what he's like well if i'd sent it up there and shot the plane down you would have been on me like yeah because why are you shooting down a civilian airliner with no reason and then he goes well we knew it was you know basically says that he knew

it was civilian airliner not hostile it's like a how do you know that and b like the answer is like no we would send the jet up there to follow it to track it because it's gone off radar and like we have no other way to track it like how would you not do that well maybe if it was headed towards land and it was right it was going over the land so maybe in that case you would shoot it down because you're like well what if they're gonna go down i mean if you think it's hostile but he says straight up says they knew it wasn't hostile and they knew it was civilian airliner so like and then but then they claim to say that they don't know it's mh370 like none of any sense, right? And that's why they got so much criticism. And this is why the families were freaking out.

Because, like, none of this makes sense to anybody. And, you know, they try to brush it off as, oh, well, they're just incompetent. You know, and if you play poker, which I think you've kind of established now, is, like, you have to try to build a story for your opponent, right, with their hand and what kind of hand they have. And the story these guys are building doesn't make any sense. Never did. To me, it says, okay, they've got Deuce 7.

He's got nothing in his hand. And he's just bullshitting. He's trying to bluff at us. That's the feeling I get from them there. Because the story doesn't make sense there. But it does make sense if it's not incompetence. It's that they're covering up the real story because they don't want people to know that, yes, this was an emergency event.

Maybe they had communication with the plane right any of this stuff would have destroyed the official narrative right it would have torn it apart even like that change in the time of the plane disappearing from 1840 to 1822 even that right is important because if they admit that the plane disappeared at 1840 utc now those immerse app pings are looking even sketchier right now it's like, okay, right there is where something significant happens. And now you can start to build what really occurred as opposed to this narrative of going to the South Indian Ocean. And there, but over the years though, I mean, right when this happened, there were multiple,

you laid out the one earlier, what was it called? The investigation team or? The independent group. Independent group, that's it. And then there was another one that started with a t yeah i'm not familiar with the other what the fuck was that called again can you look that up it was the one you know it had like a weird name it sounded like a like a kid's toy almost but there were there were the point being there were there were international teams of like just citizen kind of like you like oh yeah trying to put it together when this all happened different expertise is coming apart and they did get somewhere by the way in this should be noted in some of their discoveries and putting together information so much so that

some of these real journalists were working with them like jeff wise but you know those people a lot of people are still working on this case today. And these videos come out. They come out publicly on Reddit. You go review the sourcing, and then you kind of take it and run with it. Why do you think, why are you the guy that's been running with this one particular thing within the case? And why did you get at the center of this, you think, versus some of the people who have been working on this and continue to work on it for the last almost decade? Yeah, that's a great question. You know, first of all, I would say I tried to get other people to look at it. Like my early posts,

I thought the media would run with it. I trusted the media to take, hey, there's this huge story here. There's a ton of evidence that can be corroborated from this. And so I have even tweets out there that date back I think around August 14th so that's how like five days six days after these videos reemerged so you did try to are you talking mainstream media? mainstream media but you've also said that like you only want to go to independent media

on this too so which one is it? and so that was afterwards that's when I realized that the mainstream media was not going to touch this right and I started to wonder why not because I'd already had it posted over a million views at that point and I'm wondering where are the people who want to bring me on? We've got some kid in Vegas who sees aliens in his backyards and they're tearing him down on every major news station. But I'm sitting here going, hey, guys, I think we have the most evidence ever for Malaysian Airlines.

And this is well before I knew all the details, right? Nobody would touch it. Still to this day, no major like even UFO people where you can see there's some relationship that will touch it. They won't even make comments. How did you, how did you introduce yourself in doing this? Like I'm the guy with this post? No, not even just like, Hey, here's this information. Like, please, you know, take it and run with it. I thought there would be journalists who would pick it up and take the story away from me and then I would be done with it. And that's when I promised my audience, my followers, I guess, the people that were following me up to that point that, okay,

if they're not going to do it, then we'll do it. And that's literally what we've done. And that's when I promised my audience, my followers, I guess, the people that were following me up to that point that, okay, if they're not going to do it, then we'll do it. And that's literally what we've done. And what I've said is that we will get to the truth. We won't let anybody else set the timeline for getting the truth. And that we will make sure that nobody sets any false narratives. Because we already had people saying false narratives on this, right? South Indian Ocean, suicide pilot stuff. And that's what I've promised people, is that we're not going to let these people set any false narratives around it. And that's why we built the case so high, the evidence so high, that there's so little wiggle room for what other excuse you can give for what's going on here, right? Even if you believe these debunks that

are out there, which we'll get to, that even in that scenario, we're still looking at MH370 on two videos, right? So you've got to have an excuse now for why you were looking at it, why you didn't say anything about why you're looking at it. And there's not going to be a lot of wiggle room for it, right? Especially with all these witnesses in this fire scenario that comes into play. It really rules out a lot of other narratives. You might say, okay, we were trying to save it. We were, you know, to me, the most logical thing would be to save it. That makes them look good. But with the technology that we'll see and we'll go into, which is, you know,

potentially could change the whole world, like that leaves them very little wiggle room for it. And I think we'll save that for the end. But those are really good questions. Do you have other ones before we dig into the videos? Yeah, yeah. Because it's fascinating that you're driving the ship here, and there's no disputing it. I mean, you go online.

It's you doing it. But do you worry about the – do you think you could be looking to discover some things here that maybe go outside of your hypothesis or even within it that make it dangerous for you? Initially, I was scared. of your hypothesis or even within it that make it dangerous for you? Initially, I was scared. You know, I thought that, and that's why the very first podcast I did with Investigate Earth, who Chad and Sherry, I think, for having me on there, you can listen, I was legitimately afraid. Like, this was the first week. I wanted to get information out there.

Mainstream media wasn't touching it. I didn't know what people would do to cover up something like this, right? But I very quickly just became comfortable with it and realized that, you know, first of all, now that I've got the information out there, it kind of protects me, you know, and if something were to happen to me, it would be very obvious. And then I also just came to terms with it, like there couldn't be a more noble cause for trying to, you know, get this truth and vindication to the families, the witnesses, the pilot who was vilified, potentially the leaker who went to prison, and just the world that has been lied to in general about technology that might be out there, et cetera.

So for me, I've already become very comfortable with anything that might happen, and I'm not afraid anymore for that. But I have always been open about anybody else who wants to take the evidence and come up with their own story, please do. Please look at that. I've always been open about that because it shouldn't just be one person necessarily who's driving the wheel here. It should be the media running with this, trying to get answers. Hey, look, I think the media should be – I agree with you.

I think the media should be trying to get answers. And, like, to your credit, you're sitting here facing the music with this thing. You're taking a lot of hard questions from me. I mean, this is – I'm from New Jersey. Don't take it personally. It's how we do things here but you know i i one of the things i've been trying to do the last couple days is put myself in your shoes too because i you know it's not like i know you that well we're meeting in person for the first time today so i gotta feel somebody out but you know i i don't get to really ever prepare for podcasts this one one I built in – we're talking on a Wednesday.

I built in the Tuesday before to actually really dig through this because I understand that this is dense stuff and I don't want to look like an idiot with this. And to your credit, you're looking at a very complicated case here. But as I was doing that, I was going through all the things you've written, not just all the other research on the actual case and stuff that was outside of your purview. And the reason I say I was trying to put myself in your shoes is because when you come up with extraordinary claims in anything, even with evidence, as you've laid out a lot of evidence, the guns come on you. And people are constantly trying to wreck you. We've seen it online. There's some of it that I think was over the top or dismissive without looking at things, for sure. And I saw some of it in the comment sections too. And I know, look, I've been dealing with comment sections for a long time at this point. I'm a bit of a veteran. You're probably

a little less for them coming at you dealing with it. So I tried to think about what that would be like and whatever. But the one thing I would say to you that I think will help you moving forward, and this is unsolicited advice, which I don't like giving, but I'm going to give it. I'm going to be a hypocrite and give it, is don't are so many pieces of evidence, and it's already – you've had such difficulty getting the right people to look at it that naturally you are scared about – or not scared. You're defensive of, oh my god, if I let one person prove one thing wrong, they'll assume the whole case is wrong. wrong when in reality if you're at least willing to show wiggle room on certain things and there were a couple things today that probably like i definitively proved that you should that you were still like oh well that's your opinion when it's like pretty clear that i'm right like give that wiggle room because people aren't gonna and and i saw it with some perfectly reasonable comments that people were putting on posts and you were getting very defensive about it if you're gonna go down this road and you're gonna go to congress or something like that you gotta be willing to deal with the fucking bullets

and you gotta be willing to be like okay just like you said like if someone came to you tomorrow and said oh here's a debris field we found it in the south indian ocean and it goes against everything you're like i'd be willing to change my opinion yeah that's great i believe you on that and i don't think we're gonna get that either i don't think that's what happened here but either way like if you can if you can just be a little more open on that front, I think this will go easier for you because it also stress you out less and you'll feel you will feel less pressure to have to be perfect. Yeah, I mean, my response to that would be that I don't feel any pressure on that front at all. I mean, I've been pretty open that the goal here for me is to build a better community.

And the people that get blocked, there's nobody out there who's been blocked who doesn't know why. Every single person knows why. I don't know anything about the blocked people. That's not what I was talking about. Well, that's what most people complain about in general. With respect to people casting doubt on the evidence, I have never been against that to begin with. The problem I have is that when people come and they're condescending and they're rude, right, is that I'm not going to reciprocate and that I'm going to just, you know, show them the door. Sometimes you got to be a little magnanimous, though, if they come condescending with some heat, though.

You know what I mean? Like if they, not if they're just like, yo, fuck you. Okay, you don't have to answer that. But I'm saying like if they say it in an aggressive way, but they bring something reasonable to the table. And I did read some that probably you're reading other comments where they're doing that, and that's frustrating. But I read some where someone brought like, I don't know about this. This has the thing. I don't have them in front of me, so I'm not reading anything right now.

But I could show you later. And it's like if you start shut – like I saw you lose some people, some people that you weren't – that you still had on the hook or that were still willing to look at this. And I can see it today where some of the things you get defensive about and maybe you dig in a little too far. And by the way, this is the same thing I have said privately and probably publicly a couple times

to anyone who has investigated very difficult, even more conspiratorial level things. And by the way, not to sit here and throw stones from glass houses when i've looked at shit you can you can ask this guy right here he's got to check me on stuff now usually that's not on air but you know when i'm working on arguments behind the scenes there's stuff i get massively defensive about that then i'm like later i'm like oh wait a second no i was that was a straw man yeah figure and he keeps me honest so

like let's not act like i'm not susceptible to it too. I just think it'll make your journey a little easier because people won't just see you as the guy who's like, no, no, no, I got everything, whatever I say goes. Yeah, I mean, I appreciate that advice. Again, you're right. I'm not the kind of person who's been privy to a lot of that. I knew that I would get attacked from the moment I brought my name out there, which is absolutely what happened. I mean, our subreddit got banned the same day that

I put my full name out there. You know, there's people literally saying they're trying to disconnect me from the case. Yeah, so was that UAP Mike or something? I'm not going to say anybody's names, but there's people out there who are trying to disconnect me from the case. Nobody to date has tried to solve the case other than me. No one. There's not a single person out there who's tried to connect the case and actually present any type of comprehensive argument. The new evidence you're saying. Any of it ever.

No, no, that's not true. So early on. Wait, what do you mean? No one's ever tried to solve this case? No. Yes. I mean, with respect to the videos. With the new one.

Yes. Okay. All right. Cool. Of course people will try to connect. Yes. And I've talked to some of those people firsthand. You were scaring me for a minute. Yeah. Yeah. So with respect to this case, I mean, with the videos. With the new way, yes. mentioning, which is I was answering questions that people were... their basis was wrong. It was based on the narrative that's out there. And I simply presented some of the same evidence that

I was presenting right here. In some cases, all I do is copy and paste it. Right. Right. So those types of things, I'm not against at all. All right. But that's... go ahead. Well, let's stop to go to the bathroom real quick, because I'm about to pee myself. And we still haven't gone all the way to the orbs. Yeah, let's get into that. Hard stop right there. This is probably going to be a new episode now.

So if that's the case, hit the subscribe button. Hit the like button on the video. Put on your notifications. We will be putting out a part two to this. But we got to start breaking down the orbs and everything that you have hinted at for probably like most of this podcast but especially the last hour so we're going to get into the good stuff now but great so far all right guys that is what we ended up doing we recorded another full episode so that's going to be out in the next couple of days so just like i said there please

hit that subscribe button hit that notification bell as well so they get notified when the episode comes out and i'll see you when that's there also please hit that like button. Hit that notification bell as well so they get notified when the episode comes out, and I'll see you when that's there. Also, please hit that like button. Other than that, you know what it is. Give it a thought. Get back to me. Peace.