Forbes publicly rebuked Dr. Farrell without even the most basic grasp, something typical of intellectual illiterates, about how ancient that interview actually was. My concern isn’t about defending JPF; it’s about the glaring absence of fundamental critical thinking skills, especially regarding physics. So for those defending Forbes’ idiocy, bad form, and frank intellectual dishonesty, you’re marks for outrageous mysticism and incapable of understanding why.
1 Like
I look at the mh370 orb theory as the other side of the coin for flat earthers.
The technology is undeniably real and in use, no doubt about it. My real issue is that it’s being wielded to prop up a physics framework that’s utterly defunct and intellectually bankrupt. And I’m not about to take that lightly. And, further still, it is being and has been used to destroy the lives of decent men and women, who sought the truth, in so far as the scientific method as access.
1 Like
The guy behind the Twitter handle https://x.com/TMBSPACESHIPS has put together a seriously solid description, sure, it’s overly complex, drowning in unnecessary vector calculus and tensors, but nonetheless, it’s an excellent resource on the topic.
1 Like
Although the fact that AI can reproduce video footage of high similarity, it is not direct evidence that Forbes et al. are malignant. It is, however, very much worth noting, and more generally the phase of AI sophistication means one may not trust any videos of anything, anywhere.
1 Like
I would generally agree with this assessment; that is, I would have trouble trusting any videos/images purporting to be, say, a UFO now in 2025. But that’s not what we’re talking about. We’re talking about videos that leaked in 2014. Maybe the government had AI that good in 2014, but no one else did, and you’re surely not suggesting that the government…like, what, wanted to fake sucking MH370 into a worm hole with AI? Why…would they do that?
But the fact of the matter is that there are a lot of details that are difficult to enumerate here, making it clear that this footage is not made by AI or hoaxers of any variety. That’s why I recommend watching Forbes’s impressive videos. Not him ranting on one of his weekly streaming videos, but watch some of his long interviews on other channels where he breaks down the overwhelming evidence.
For instance, the camera footage shot with “Gorgon Stare” technology on a military drone is 6 frames per second, yet the computer where the film was recorded by the leaker (Edward C. Linn) is at 24 frames per second, which can be seen in the mouse cursor that moves the footage around. You’re saying someone hoaxing this video was so sophisticated that they programmed it to have discrepant frame rates like that? Keep in mind, the technology that captured this footage was completely classified in 2014, making the only possible hoaxer either a) the US government or b) someone who knows about their classified technology (i.e. someone extremely sophisticated and powerful). Why would someone this powerful…put together an extremely sophisticated, complicated hoax like this? What is being gained here?
Keep in mind that there are two, independent corresponding shots of this thing, so now the hoax is getting Kubrick-level sophisticated. And we’re suggesting the US government or some breakaway civilization-level entity is spending millions of dollars to produce this extremely bizarre hoax for some purpose…that is extremely difficult to imagine.
Or, you could take the videos at face value, showing exactly what Forbes purports they show. Not only is Forbes’s case air-tight in my opinion, when taken in its totality, but it also happens to align with the facts vis-a-vis MH370. Remember that Boeing 747 that disappeared in 2014? What, in your opinion, happened to it? Where did it go? Why can’t the US government that has satellite surveillance over the entire planet locate this plane? Why has no debris ever been found?
What makes Forbes’s case so convincing is all the research and facts and data he’s put to it. But it also happens to align with the complete disappearance of Malaysian flight MH370 in 2014.
1 Like
One could make plenty of arguments of why they would fake the video
- To indirectly justify to its citizens with a brain the 21 trillion they can’t account for, by showing an investment in technology
- To scare the rest of the world in getting in line if they think the video is true
- To test real time peoples responses to the idea. With Forbes getting the push from Twitter, which is owned by military front boss elon musk (my opinion, sue me if you want) , I lean towards option 3
1 Like
The orb video could very well be a fund raising effort , akin to this time cop scene where they tell the senate time travel is real and they need a black budget to fund it
So the issue isn’t whether a plane can be “disappeared.” The issue is the insult to our intelligence that follows—the peddling of laughably incoherent theories as plausible physical explanations, usually by journalists and editorial hacks who wouldn’t recognize the difference between patent and petunia. I’m in full agreement that the technology exists.
Forbes, in his ongoing campaign to cosplay as a scientific authority, has now apparently taken to evangelizing for the very people who have done so much to destroy real physics, and drive the public down road of implausibility.
It reduces the complexities of real continuum physics and coherent energy field architecture to a buzzword salad suitable only for Twitter-fed technocrats and aerospace LARPers who do nothing buy rehash 20th century quantum mechanics, which is totally inadequate. Video fake, or not, is a question of his character and associations, which given said theoretical architecture he constantly flogs to an audience of new agers, is a ruse.
2 Likes
No, these are fair points. I can accept these as possible explanations for a government hoax. I just land on the other side, I guess. My tendency is to still believe that government hoaxes are generally…less competent than this.
Initially, I found Forbes’s explanations to be absurd, but over time, seeing them in their totality, they now seem much more plausible to me than any other explanation. Again…the fact is that these leaked videos happen to correspond very neatly with a known Boeing 747 that disappeared just beforehand. I believe the government has this technology. In my mind, all the evidence leads me to conclude, despite my initial skepticism, that the leaked footage is exactly what Forbes purports it is.
For the record, I totally agree that Musk is a military/US government front. I think I might’ve heard Catherine Austin Fitts say that he’s received 38 billion in government subsidies. I guess I’m impervious to these claims that Forbes is pushed on any platform because I’m not, personally, on any social media of any variety (besides this forum, I guess). I only discovered Forbes by way of the only way I discover any of the people I do, including JPF: he was a guest interviewee on a podcast I listen to. I guess I don’t care that much who is promoted by what algorithm or another. I just try to evaluate people on the basis of the evidence they present.
2 Likes
I think I’m realizing we maybe don’t disagree quite as much as I initially thought. The root of the problem is that you think Forbes is a grifter and fraud, and I don’t. That’s the initial reason I felt compelled to say anything in the first place.
My thing is that I’m kind of new to…figures like JPF and Fitts and Temple. I’m just saying that I’ve been in this long process of rejecting so many of the sources I used to read and listen to, and now it’s really important to me to have a solid group that I still trust. Frankly, I’m all the way down to like six or seven or at this point.
For instance, JPF is one I trust. That doesn’t mean I believe everything JPF has ever said or written. Obviously, I happen to agree with the majority of it, but the point is I trust JPF because I think he is a fair player. That is, he is trying to get at truth, and his quest is genuine. He makes mistakes and has shortcomings, but I believe in him because I believe that he is not trying to mislead or lie to me. I think he is an honest actor.
As I say, I have very few people I trust now, but Forbes, admittedly, is one of them. I said in my first response that I think he is frequently annoying, but I believe in him because I think he is an honest actor. I’ve seen him make many mistakes along the way, but I’ve been impressed at his ability to own them and to change his ideas and opinions to fit new data. This is what I care about.
I guess my original disagreement with you is that I feel like Forbes is shunned by, obviously, mainstream media, but also Forbes has never been on Weaponized or Shawn Ryan or talked to Grusch or Elizondo or any of those guys. According to Forbes, Rogan did reach out at one point but then talked to some people who persuaded Rogan to ultimately cancel. Corbell, Knapp, and Coulthardt refuse to acknowledge Forbes or his claims despite their willingness to talk about clearly debunked theories with zero evidence.
I guess we don’t need to keep rehashing this, though, because I think we’re going to fundamentally disagree on whether to trust Forbes at the end of the day. I just wanted to publicly disagree with some of your initial claims because I think he is very much worth checking out. (Obviously, that’s just me.)
For the record, I also happen to find Forbes’s science compelling and also useful as an explanation, but I already tried to point out that I don’t think Forbes’s reputation should stand on the science. I think it’s incidental to the project he is working on. Forbes is fundamentally interested in proving the leaked videos of MH370 to be real, and I find his case to be compelling. I just wanted to register that I find him credible.
Obviously, I seem to be largely alone here on that opinion. Hahaha
1 Like
I’m in the “POOF!” - “ZONE”!
Of course, it’s magic; only in the Author C Clarke sense.
uC, alien technolgy[s] - at play.
Message sent.
Message manipulated - by terrestrial wannabe Gods.
What else is new?
2 Likes
Playing poker taught me one important thing. In a situation where you have limited information, you have to keep an open mind in evaluating the odd percentages of what the potential outcomes are and continuously update your odds as yiu get new information.
The trait that makes the JPF’s of the world so rare, is their intellectual honesty. They lay out the potential scenarios, rank out what they think is likely, and admit when something is high octane speculation.
This one really hit home for me. If your not a paying member, I highly suggest getting a membership. The video chats starting in 2011 are only accessible if a member. It truly is the library of Alexandria of our times. Jpf and the fellow Gizars have done a heroic task in helping make sense of our reality. I can’t recommend it enough. I started listening last summer, and have caught up from 2011-2019, as well as keeping up with the current vid chats from 2024. It the last bastion of sanity I’ve found in these troubled times. It’s truly incredible how much they have predicted, if hope can be found its there
2 Likes
Forbes is, perhaps unknowingly, perpetuating a deeply flawed interpretation of science. I question whether he fully understands the implications of the claims he’s making. If you find the physics he promotes compelling, and I acknowledge you may be newly engaging with this material, then I would strongly encourage a more rigorous examination of the subject. Forbes is merely rehashing well-worn 20th century QED which is of little use in describing anti-gravitational, monopolar lift, or kinetoregenerative phenomena.