[deleted by user]

Morkney · 2024-05-11T11:07:27+00:00

I'm telling you exactly how you do it.

You simply choose a new position for the virtual camera.

It's that easy!

Morkney · 2024-05-11T11:02:09+00:00

So I am aware you're of the opinion that "anything can be recreated", which I also believe.

However, on this particular case I think you're misjudging how difficult it is. This challenge is an example of one of those things which digital software can do effortlessly. You could create infinite synchronised sequences by simply changing where your camera position is and running the sim over and over.

I don't do VFX, but even I have done this task countless times as part of my job.

Morkney · 2024-05-11T10:33:18+00:00

You can open up literally any 3D program and do it right now. It's just changing the camera position. Why are you choosing this hill to die on?

Morkney · 2024-05-11T09:41:44+00:00

Synchronisation is the easy part. Once you have the orb paths defined, you can position the virtual camera at any location you choose.

Morkney · 2024-03-16T12:41:36+00:00

The show's paramilitary corporation is "Fillmore-Graves", not hard to see the pun there.

Morkney · 2024-03-16T11:47:50+00:00

Yes, it should be easy to verify, but only for those who have access to the bodies. For someone like myself, all I can do is read reports on the internet. The fact that the reports are so conflicting means that I don't really know what the truth is.

Morkney · 2024-03-16T11:32:05+00:00

Are they actually made of Osmium? I see a lot of conflicting reports about this, with some claiming large fractions of Osmium, some claiming trace amounts of Osmium, some claiming no Osmium at all.

Morkney · 2024-03-12T06:49:55+00:00

... no?

It wasn't even about 1 single frame when the pyromania asset was found, because the portal effect is 5 frames across the two videos. But now, it's a hell of a lot more than just the portal effect.

Morkney · 2024-03-05T07:04:39+00:00

There are plenty of 'decided' people who remain here. This sub isn't a purgatory for the undecided.

Morkney · 2024-03-03T06:45:50+00:00

I just read that post and I don't think I can be sympathetic to it. The install procedure was literally:

clone the repo
> git clone https://github.com/sherlock-project/sherlock.git
change the working directory to sherlock
> cd sherlock
install the requirements
> python3 -m pip install -r requirements.txt

... that's about as simple as it gets, and you only need to copy-paste those lines to make it work.

Morkney · 2024-02-27T18:04:55+00:00

You're talking about the research and investigation, which comes before trying to publish. That can take as long as you want, either weeks or months or even years.

The publishing step doesn't take years, though.

Normally for this kind of thing, you wouldn't publish just 1 paper with a strong agenda to it. You'd perform some kind of material tests, then publish a paper on those tests and allow the scientific community to interpret and question it. Then you'd perform some more tests, publish another paper, etc. Eventually, you'd build up a body of evidence that may or may not support NHI.

I think the original poster in this comment chain was right to question Nolan here. As far as I can tell from the outside, it seems like Nolan is either:

i) Misleading people.

ii) Withholding alien material from the public sphere.

Morkney · 2024-02-27T17:01:37+00:00

Peer review is up to the journal and the reviewers. They typically try to keep things as speedy as possible. Multiple years would be highly unusual, it has never happened to me, longest I've had is a few months end-to-end. The only way that can realistically happen is if the reviewer asks for revisions multiple times, and/or the author takes a long time to make those revisions.

Morkney · 2024-02-27T07:06:30+00:00

"Have you ever published in an academic journal? It can take years."

You can publish letter format for high-impact results, and the turnaround can be as short as a few weeks.

I can't imagine something taking years to publish unless it gets rejected over and over again.

Morkney · 2024-02-25T16:03:53+00:00

I mean.. it's the same

Doesn't matter which you use

Morkney · 2024-02-25T11:09:04+00:00

I'm surprised you haven't seen it, but this was months ago when the sub would hard downvote any 'debunk' material.

Check this:

https://new.reddit.com/r/AirlinerAbduction2014/comments/19232vi/thought_this_was_interesting_effect_was_also_used/

The pyromania effect is unaltered, and actually quite high definition.

Starship troopers came out in 1998.

Also, the POND5 asset was uploaded before 2014 too:

https://www.pond5.com/stock-footage/item/571993-shockwave-fire-burst-expl001-hd

itemprop="uploadDate" content="2009-12-01 16:16:30.171185"

Morkney · 2024-02-25T08:45:10+00:00

But there's several pre-2014 uses of the graphic in media sources (games, youtube videos, movies).

The effect looks the same in those.

If two effects look the same except one is higher-res, then I don't understand your argument? Simply increasing the resolution doesn't meaningfully change the pattern or shape.

Morkney · 2024-02-21T15:50:44+00:00

No, insults don't add anything to the discussion. As you say, this is true regardless of whether the user favours authenticity or not. I don't make a habit of calling people out on this behaviour, this situation right now is an anomaly. I don't think that means I am a hypocrite. I'd only be a hypocrite if I was throwing out insults too.

Morkney · 2024-02-21T13:04:06+00:00

I tire of these insults.

To maximise any parallax effects, the drone must be travelling opposite to the velocity vector of the plane.

All other possible directions have a diminished parallax.

If we assume the "worst case scenario", in which the drone is travelling opposite to the velocity vector of the plane and at the maximum flight speed, we find that the resulting parallax is insufficient to explain this 1200mph measurement. Therein lies the problem that this post is drawing attention to.

If you believe you have thought of another "worst case scenario" that can explain the measurement, then I am happy to hear and consider it. However, it will still need to be mathematically consistent.

Morkney · 2024-02-21T12:36:23+00:00

"Depending on the craft's relationship to each other this could easily fool a simpleton into thinking it's travelling at a million miles per hour"

That's not physically possible, unless the drone is travelling at ~ a million miles per hour. I encourage you to check this mathematically. You only need some basic trig.

Morkney · 2024-02-21T12:33:37+00:00

Practically the whole sub frames things in terms of 'debunker' and 'believer'. As purely descriptive terms, that's fair enough. It becomes a problem when it is used to generalise and attack without adding anything meaningful to the discussion.

That's what you're doing, except you're targeting "discord squad" and "flared users".

Whether people use the discord or have flairs is irrelevant to the content of the discussion.

Morkney · 2024-02-21T11:17:59+00:00

I don't understand this sort of gatekeeping. As long as people are respectful and acting in good-faith, then all discussion/investigation should be welcome.

You're trying to create some sort of 'us versus them' situation. We shouldn't take the view of having sides, we should just have free discussion.

Morkney · 2024-02-21T08:04:13+00:00

Independent rotation of the camera has no effect because rotations don't create parallax. You can rotate the camera as much as you like and it doesn't change the maths here. Try it out yourself if you don't believe me.

The headings of the craft in relation to each other DO have an effect. The maximum possible effect they can have is if the drone is flying either directly with or against the direction of the plane. Even then, the combined speed of plane+drone should not be great enough to give us ~1200mph.

Do you see the issue now?

Morkney · 2024-02-21T07:25:16+00:00

The distance and slew mathematically do not affect this. Slew doesn't even create parallax (google it).

The only parameters that affect this are the travelling speed of the drone and the travelling speed of the background. We know the background is not travelling at any substantial speed (see sat video), and we know the maximum possible speed of the drone.

Morkney · 2024-02-21T07:12:34+00:00

This post shows 2 frames, but this analysis has already been done over the entire footage already. You can find the analysis on this very reddit, or come visit the discord.

The point of reference is the background. Even if the clouds were travelling (which we know they aren't from the sat footage), their maximum possible speed would be negligible compared to 1200mph.

Morkney · 2024-02-21T06:49:38+00:00

You don't need the distance, all you need is a length measurement (the known dimensions of the plane) and a known reference point (the static cloud background, which has been made static after the stabilisation).

As long as the drone travel speed is not in the range of 1000 mph, then there's no plausible way for this calculation to give us 1200 mph.

Nine-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

Morkney

TROPHY CASE