Réveil

Introduction

In my previous post “Was Flight MH370 Teleported?”, I broke down two viral videos that appear to show MH370 being surrounded by glowing orbs before vanishing in a flash of light. Whether you believe those videos are real or fake, one thing is clear: they sparked renewed interest in alternative theories about what happened to Flight 370.

But here’s the thing: whether those videos are real or not, there should be physical evidence. An event violent enough to make a Boeing 777 disappear or crash would almost certainly generate acoustic signatures detectable by underwater sensors.

The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO) operates a network of highly sensitive underwater hydrophones throughout the world's oceans. These hydrophones are designed to detect nuclear explosions, but they can also pick up aircraft impacts, underwater explosions, and other violent events.

So what did those hydrophones record on March 8, 2014?

The answer is complicated. They recorded something. But more importantly, they recorded nothing during a critical 25-minute window at the station closest to Diego Garcia.

The Players: CTBTO Hydrophone Stations

The CTBTO operates hydroacoustic monitoring stations throughout the Indian Ocean. Three are particularly relevant to MH370:

Station	Location	Code
HA01	Cape Leeuwin, Western Australia	H01W
HA08	Diego Garcia, British Indian Ocean Territory	H08S/H08N
HA04	Crozet Islands, France	H04S

Each station consists of three hydrophones arranged in a triangular configuration, allowing researchers to determine both the bearing and approximate distance of acoustic events.

Diego Garcia is the location of HA08. It is also a remote coral atoll hosting a major U.S. military installation, Naval Support Facility Diego Garcia, which is shrouded in secrecy. The island has a 12,000-foot runway capable of handling any aircraft in the world.

Remember from Part 1: the coordinates embedded in the “satellite” video are approximately -8.834301, 93.19492, which places the supposed event south of the Nicobar Islands. Diego Garcia sits at approximately 7.3°S, 72.4°E. The distance between these two points is roughly 2,300 km.

Anomaly #1: The 25-Minute Data Gap

What Happened

At 03:07 UTC on March 8, 2014, all three hydrophones at the Diego Garcia station (HA08s) simultaneously stopped recording. They remained offline for exactly 25 minutes.

This is documented in a peer-reviewed paper by Dr. Usama Kadri of Cardiff University, published in Scientific Reports (Nature):

“A fifth signal appears at 3:07... This signal probably indicates restarting the system after it was shutdown for 25 minutes, i.e. there is missing data in these specific CTBTO recordings.”

Kadri, U. (2019). Effect of sea-bottom elasticity on the propagation of acoustic-gravity waves from impacting objects. Scientific Reports, 9, 912.

Why This Matters

Dr. Kadri explicitly addresses the suspicious nature of this gap:

“Due to the sensitivity of the recorded data, it is unlikely that the three hydrophones on HA08s had a simultaneous technical failure and the reason behind the shut down is to-date unknown.”

He then offers a possible explanation:

“A violent nearby activity (including impact, explosion) could have resulted in a shutdown of the system.”

Let that sink in. A scientist publishing in one of the world's most prestigious journals is stating on the record that:

1. A simultaneous failure of all three hydrophones is “unlikely”
2. The shutdown remains “unexplained” by the CTBTO
3. A violent nearby event, such as an aircraft impact or explosion, could cause such a shutdown

The Timeline and the Videos

The official narrative states that MH370’s final satellite communication occurred at 00:19 UTC on March 8, 2014. According to the mainstream account, the aircraft is believed to have crashed when it ran out of fuel over the southern Indian Ocean after turning and flying south.

Here is where it gets interesting. If the mainstream narrative is wrong and, instead of turning south, MH370 continued from its final reported coordinates toward Diego Garcia, then plotting its trajectory using the coordinates from the video (-8.834301, 93.19492) places the aircraft in that area sometime between 00:30 and 01:30 UTC. At a distance of about 2,100 km, the primary acoustic signal would reach Diego Garcia after roughly 10–25 minutes, depending on the propagation path: faster along the sea floor at about 3,350 m/s and slower through the water column at about 1,500 m/s. This means any acoustic signature from the event would have been recorded by Diego Garcia’s hydrophones sometime between 01:10 and 01:55 UTC, well before the 03:07 data gap.

Time (UTC)	Event
18:22, March 7	Last radar contact with MH370
00:19, March 8	Final satellite handshake (Final satellite handshake (crash estimated shortly after))
~00:30-01:30, March 8	Estimated time at video coordinates (if direct flight from last radar)
01:58, March 8	Signal HA_32 detected at Diego Garcia (military bearing)
03:07, March 8	All three Diego Garcia hydrophones go offline
03:32, March 8	System comes back online
03:47-03:55, March 8	Three signals detected at nearly identical bearings (~170°)

So what happened at 03:07? If the acoustic signal had already arrived and been recorded around 01:30-02:00 UTC, the data gap doesn't represent missing evidence – it represents evidence that may have been deleted. You don't preemptively shut down a recording system before incriminating data arrives. You shut it down after you realize what's been captured. The 25-minute window – just enough time to review and scrub recordings – looks less like a technical failure and more like a cleanup operation.

The data gap starts at 03:07 UTC. Right in the middle of that window.

Coincidence?

In July 2023, an anonymous Reddit post quietly appeared on the /r/aliens subreddit, claiming to be a confession from a former government–adjacent molecular biologist. The author said they had spent years dissecting and characterizing the bodies of “Exo-Biospheric-Organisms” (EBOs) in a secret lab buried under Fort Detrick, Maryland.

Within hours the post was removed and the account vanished, which only made the story spread faster.

Copies of the text were archived and reposted across the web, from mirrors to UFO blogs and forums.

The result is one of the most elaborate “alien biology” narratives to hit the internet in years: part lab notebook, part theology, part science-fiction.

This article breaks down what the EBO leaker actually claimed, how it fits with real-world biology and facilities, why it grabbed so many people, and how plausible any of it really is.

Where the Story Came From

The original post appeared on /r/aliens in early July 2023 and was titled:

“From the late 2000s to the mid-2010s, I worked as a molecular biologist for a national security contractor in a program to study Exo-Biospheric-Organisms (EBO).”

The account:

• Claimed to be a PhD-level molecular biologist
• Described working for a “national security contractor”
• Said the work was done in a restricted lab space at Fort Detrick, Maryland
• Identified the operator as Battelle National Biodefense Institute (BNBI)

BNBI is a real organization. It manages the National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center (NBACC) at Fort Detrick for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. NBACC is a high-containment biodefense facility built in the mid-2000s to study biological threats and forensic analysis of biocrimes.

So at minimum, the leaker anchored their story to a real, high-security lab with a plausible mandate for weird biology.

The author framed the post as a one-way leak: they explicitly said they would not testify to the Senate or talk to AARO, and that they possessed no evidence beyond the text itself. They described this as a compromise between their moral urge to “tell humanity” and their desire not to get themselves or their family into danger.

Who the Leaker Claims to Be

The author’s self-portrait is deliberately fuzzy:

• PhD in molecular biology
• Recruited informally at a scientific conference after chatting with a senior scientist
• Put through several increasingly “suspicious” interviews where scientific expertise became less relevant
• Required to sign a very detailed NDA, explained in person by a lawyer-type

Once hired, they say their first weeks were spent in a basement archive room at Fort Detrick, reading internal reports, memos, SOPs and briefings on EBOs: their biology, diet, religion, culture, and so on.

The scientific structure they describe is familiar to anyone who’s seen a large biomedical program:

• ~20 PhD-level scientists doing hands-on lab work
• 4 senior scientists who design assays and supervise
• 1 director who sets priorities and is rarely on site
• Security guards from contractors
• No janitors or support staff; scientists do their own cleaning and maintenance

Internet access is restricted to senior staff, with an internal intranet for bioinformatics.

So far, nothing exotic: the weird part is what they say they were studying.

Inside the Alleged EBO Program

The stated goal of the program is to characterize the genome and proteome of EBOs: to decode their DNA and catalog the proteins they make.

According to the post:

• The lab runs at BSL-3 for anything involving EBO samples or cell culture, with a connected BSL-2 area for most assays and normal cell lines.
• The BSL-3 section includes a freezer room and a dedicated EBO cell culture space.
• Four incomplete EBO bodies are stored in horizontal freezers at –80 °C, vacuum-bagged in a humidity-controlled environment. All show major traumatic injuries.

The author says they never saw live EBOs, only carcasses and derived cell lines.

One of the key tools is an EBO epithelial cell line called EPI-G11, allegedly developed by another team. This line supposedly:

• Can be transfected with EBO genes via a gene gun (other methods kill it or fail)
• Enters exponential growth in response to fetal bovine serum, like many eukaryotic cell lines
• Is used as a platform to overexpress and purify EBO proteins for analysis

So the story is framed much like a very niche, very classified biotech program: nothing magical, just everyday molecular biology applied to something extraordinary.

This is a deep dive into the anonymous claims that captivated the UFO community in 2023'

In April 2023, an anonymous poster appeared on 4chan's /x/ board with a simple opening line:

“I have intimate knowledge of what the US currently knows about UFOs minus the last two years.”

He claimed to be a former insider with access to UFO crash recoveries and classified programs, now undergoing chemotherapy for liver cancer. Facing the possibility of not having much time left, he chose the most chaotic confession booth imaginable: a 4chan thread.

Over the course of two lengthy sessions spanning nearly two weeks, this individual answered hundreds of questions with an unusual level of consistency and detail that set their posts apart from the typical “LARP” (Live Action Role Play) that plagues anonymous forums.

Whether genuine insider or elaborate fiction, these threads offer one of the most comprehensive, internally consistent accounts of alleged government UFO knowledge ever posted online. They have already become a notable node in modern UFO lore.

This is their story.

The Start

The first post arrived on April 24, 2023, with five core claims that would frame everything that followed:

1. UFOs are primarily unmanned drones

2. UFOs are built to specification each time they are deployed

3. UFOs are created by a mobile construction facility hiding in the ocean

4. This construction facility destroys anything that approaches it

5. The U.S. believes this facility has been active on Earth for at least 100 years, possibly much longer

These claims immediately distinguished the poster from typical UFO narratives. No talk of crashed saucers from Zeta Reticuli, no galactic federations, no channeled messages from Ashtar Command. Instead, the picture that emerged was almost industrial: a manufacturing operation, hidden beneath the waves, churning out specialized drones for specific missions before recycling them back into raw materials.

“Atlantis”: The Underwater UFO Factory

Perhaps the most striking element of the whistleblower's account is the construction facility itself, jokingly dubbed “Atlantis” by older team members. When asked what it looked like, the poster provided surprising detail.

Q: What does it look like?

A: Shaped like an extremely large UFO but more of a “burger” design. Almost never leaves the Atlantic Ocean, in fact it will sit through hurricanes. No visible weapons or “cockpit” from sat footage. It also does not use any lights. The main construction facility does not rust or deteriorate from what we can tell.

The method of tracking this facility raised eyebrows:

Q: How do you track it?

A: We rely mostly on detecting the gravity it produces. It normally doesn't produce heat outright. When it does we believe it's in the process of construction since a small heat buildup can be detected when a craft returns or exits.

But the most chilling detail concerned what happens when humans get too close to the underwater “UFO Factory”

Q: What happens when you approach it?

A: The last unit we saw approach the facility didn't even have time to communicate they were being attacked before it was over. At one point we deployed fighters and a sub with serious intent. Everything except the sub was lost. This weapon destroys the matter it hits entirely. It also shits on anything electronic in the vicinity.

When craft return to this facility, heat signatures suggest they're smelted back down into component parts. This recycling operation explains why so few intact craft are ever recovered:

Q: Do the UAPs return to the manufacturing unit?

A: Yes, some come in and leave the planet but very rarely. Based on heat signatures likely smelted back down into parts. It feels more like a carrier but with construction capability.

The poster also suspects this may not be the only facility. With increasing attention on polar regions, he believes other units might exist, including one in the Arctic.

The Craft Themselves

The whistleblower's description of the craft challenges some popular UFO imagery while confirming others.

On shapes:

Q: What shapes have you seen?

A: Things like triangles and hard-edged squares don't exist. Pill shapes are extremely sought after, some we think are “freighters.” Cigar shaped are very rare, we were told finding one would be career changing.

The materials presented unique challenges:

Q: What are they made of?

A: An alloy that we cannot reproduce but only repurpose. This alloy is kind of like a “film” that fits over the frame of the craft. One of the main problems when repurposing these alloys is getting them hot enough. They absorb heat very well.

On the power source, the poster confirmed a name familiar to anyone who has followed UFO lore:

Q: What powers them?

A: The power source is E115. It produces its own gravity field. Bob Lazar handled E115 which was already pulled out which is rare and weird. Protocol now is that only one person is allowed to handle E115. We still have trouble producing this shit too.

When someone pointed out that Element 115 decays in milliseconds under lab conditions, the response was blunt:

Q: Element 115 nuclei lasts for milliseconds before disintegrating under lab conditions.

A: Correct. Still a massive problem.

The interiors matched what you might expect from craft not designed for human proportions:

Q: What does the interior look like?

A: Always cramped and hard to stand fully upright in. For reference I'm 5'8. There is almost never a storage facility unless dedicated to something for the craft. Tools are not freely placed around and have dedicated placement.

On stealth capabilities:

Q: Do they have stealth capabilities?

A: Maybe 1 in 20 has stealth technology. These crafts are so rare we actually almost never see them crash because we can't track them.

Many have seen the footage. Far fewer know its tangled backstory.

Is it an early‑2000s hoax or a genuine recording of an unknown craft? The video, also referred to as the Pordenone UFO, has a surprisingly intricate timeline and a long trail of debate behind it.

The video first attracted international attention in 2005, when Italian-American researcher Paola Harris presented a fourth-generation copy at the 36th Annual MUFON International Symposium in Denver, Colorado. Harris, who was then living in Italy, stated that the footage had been supplied by an anonymous source who associated it with the Aviano area. The identity of the original cameraman has never been established, and the severe degradation caused by repeated copying has made detailed analysis difficult.

The video:

How the Aviano UFO Video Emerged

The story begins with an anonymous VHS tape.

The footage was allegedly recorded in 2003 near the NATO air base in Aviano, Italy. In 2004, a VHS copy of the video was sent anonymously to the well‑known Italian ufologist Antonio Chiumiento, accompanied by a brief but ominous message:

“Ho paura” (“I am afraid,” in Italian).

The tape was subsequently sent to other Italian ufologists in the following months.

Despite receiving the material in 2004, Chiumiento chose to keep the video confidential at first, allowing time for further analysis. The footage only became public in 2005.

That year, Italian‑American journalist and ufologist Paola Harris presented the video at two major events:

• The 36th MUFON Symposium, in July 2005, in Denver, Colorado
• The International UFO Congress, in Laughlin, Nevada

The versions that later circulated on YouTube were largely derived from a DVD of her MUFON presentation.

The first encounter was early on the morning of January 23, 1981, photographer Carlos Díaz was parked on a ridge in Ajusco, just outside Mexico City.

The air was cold and thin, and mist rolled slowly over the trees below. He was waiting to meet a journalist for a story he’d been hired to shoot, his camera gear laid out on the passenger seat.

Then suddenly, he sees a bright light spread across the valley.

At first he thought it was a fire. Then the light began to move, swelling and flickering like molten metal. That was the moment his life took a very strange turn.

Díaz quickly reached for his camera and began capturing the series of photos that would later make him famous.

The object seemed to rise out of the valley and drift closer, glowing in a deep amber color that lit up the trees around him. He said the car began to shake. When he stepped outside, the object hovered for a few seconds before shooting straight up and disappearing.

In May 2008, a short, 20 second low-resolution video surfaced on YouTube showing what appeared to be a disc-shaped object flying beside what is speculated to be a jet.

One of the earliest mentions of the “Flyby” footage seems to come from the UFO Chronicles website, where it appeared under the title “Flying Saucer UFO filmed from jet window.” The uploader, a user named Danny Lampkin, added only a short note: “not too sure about this one… you decide.”

Although, the actual earliest YouTube upload I could locate (though there may be older ones) comes from a user named frossani, who captioned it: “It’s a Blue Panorama flight from Rome to Paris on April 29, 2006.”

Interestingly, the version uploaded by frossani appears to be slightly higher in quality, suggesting that it may have been the original source for Danny Lampkin’s later post about two months afterward.

Watch the video:

At first glance, it looks like something from the early YouTube hoax era. The quality is awful, the reflections are odd, and the footage feels almost too dramatic to be real. Yet the deeper people have looked into it, the harder it has been to dismiss.

Below is a breakdown of what makes this case so persistent after more than fifteen years.

Original videos:

Uploaded March 5, 2008: frossani channel Uploaded May 14, 2008: Danny Lampkin channel

What’s in the Clip

The Flyby video runs just under twenty seconds. It is extremely low resolution, typical for uploads in 2008, and filled with heavy compression artifacts. There are visible reflections across the frame, which has led many to believe this is not the original footage but a recording of a screen playing the original. That would explain the odd glare and crushed image quality, although that remains a theory rather than confirmed fact.

In December 2024, a strange post appeared on ForgottenLanguages.org titled “New Jersey kinetic strike test: Threat Analysis of sUAV-driven attacks.”

If you’ve ever visited that site, you know it’s one of the internet’s deeper mysteries. Some people think it’s an elaborate art project or coded experiment. Others believe it hides fragments of real research buried in invented languages and cryptic phrasing. The truth probably lies somewhere in between.

The post described what it said was a joint Homeland Security and U.S. Navy drill off the American coast, involving 62 drones launched from two vessels. They were said to have split into reconnaissance and strike groups, targeting water infrastructure and a naval base.

Around the same time, New Jersey saw a wave of drone reports that led to temporary FAA restrictions over 22 infrastructure sites (NBC News). Federal officials later suggested many sightings were misidentified aircraft, but the investigation stayed open. The overlap between that story and the Forgotten Languages post was hard to ignore for anyone familiar with the site.

Whether it was fiction, a leak, or something else, less than a year later similar scenes began unfolding across Denmark and Europe.

The Start of the Drone Crisis in Denmark

On September 22, 2025, Copenhagen Airport was shut for nearly four hours after air traffic controllers reported large drones over the runways (BBC). That same evening, Oslo Airport in Norway also closed due to drone activity (AP News).

In the days that followed, sightings spread to Aalborg, Esbjerg, Sønderborg, and Skrydstrup Air Base, home to Denmark’s F-16 and F-35 squadrons (Financial Times). Witnesses described coordinated formations, lights that switched off when approached, and objects that moved erratically across radar.

When people talk UFOs, it always comes back to the same lines: “Show me the evidence” or “Why are the photos always so blurry?”

Well, I’ve got news for the skeptics. There are plenty of clear-as-day UFO photos out there, and I’m dropping some of them below. But let’s be real, you’ll probably still wave them off in full Mick West mode: “clearly a seagull,” “probably a dinner plate,” “parallax of a shiny hubcap cloud during a freak weather event.” Honestly, there’s just no pleasing you lot.

What follows are some of the classics, the photos that have been passed around the longest. No blurry Starlink dots, but genuine UFO shots that still spark debate. Sure, some might be fake, but who cares? They’ve been in circulation for decades, and one of them might just be the real deal.

Each has its own backstory: who snapped it, what they claimed, and how it’s been argued over ever since. Some have solid debunks, others flimsy ones, and a few remain just as strange today as the day they were taken. The point here isn’t to settle the argument. It’s to show the images that refuse to fade, the ones people keep pointing to and can’t quite dismiss.

And remember, it only takes one of them being genuine to change everything.

National Geographic Institute of Costa Rica – 1971

In September 1971, a National Geographic Institute plane was flying survey runs over Lake Cote with a mapping camera fixed under the fuselage. The camera was set to fire automatically, frame after frame, to capture the terrain below for cartographic work. Nothing unusual was noticed at the time. But when the film was developed, one image revealed a disc hovering over the lake.

The object is sharply defined: oval, metallic-looking, with highlights and shadows that make it appear three-dimensional and solid. Unlike the blurred streaks or dots that make up most UFO photographs of that era, this one looks like an actual craft suspended in daylight. Because the image came from a government mapping project with no link to UFO research, it has long been considered one of the more credible anomalies on record. Skeptics point out the possibility of film blemishes, but the precision of the mapping cameras and the object’s clean outline keep it ranked as one of the most intriguing UFO photos ever taken.

Weyauwega, Wisconsin – Feb 1, 2003

On a cold February evening in 2003, a mother and her son were sledding in Weyauwega, Wisconsin when the boy pointed out unusual lights moving across the sky from the southwest. The mother, carrying her camera, managed to snap several photos in quick succession. What she captured shows a saucer-like object with bright, multi-colored lights on its underside, arranged in a loose triangular pattern. Witnesses said the lights seemed to shift or cycle as the object moved.

Unlike many UFO cases that hinge on a single blurry frame, this one provided a short sequence of images, each reinforcing the last. The location—just north of Main Street, east of Highway 110, near the train tracks—anchors the event in a recognizable place, and the timing at late dusk explains the deep sky tones in the photos. While skeptics have suggested balloons or camera reflections, the clear saucer profile combined with the colored lights has made the Weyauwega case a favorite among collectors of modern UFO photographs. The witness remained anonymous, and no other locals came forward, but the photos continue to circulate widely as one of the sharper captures of the early 2000s.

When people talk about UFOs, the conversation usually drifts toward lights in the sky, strange radar returns, or second-hand stories that collapse under scrutiny. The “Skinny Bob” footage is different. It doesn’t offer a vague speck of light in the night sky, but what appears to be a clear look at a non-human being, along with scenes of saucers, crashes, and even an autopsy.

The clips first appeared in 2011 on a YouTube channel called ivan0135, and they have lived in a strange limbo ever since: compelling enough to survive years of analysis, yet compromised enough that nobody can prove they’re genuine.

“Flying twin” UFO:

The uploader, known only as Ivan, claimed the footage was drawn from a series of tapes recorded between the 1940s and 1960s. He presented the clips as small samples of a much larger archive, complete with timestamps and case numbers. Whether Ivan is a real person, a pseudonym for a group, or a character in a hoax has never been resolved. What we know is that the first videos appeared suddenly, already edited, already dressed up with overlays and sound effects that turned what could have been pristine archival material into something both more dramatic and more suspect.

The Footage

The first sequence begins with exterior shots of a house and a saucer-shaped craft hovering in the background. There are aerial views that suggest the footage was shot from an airplane, showing a disc moving in parallel with the camera. Later, we see what looks like a crash site, with smoke rising from wreckage and a figure sprawled on the ground.

Then come the most famous clips, the alien known as “Skinny Bob,” standing calmly as the camera pans from his feet to his oversized head, blinking naturally with movements that seem hard to fake. Other fragments show an autopsy in progress, a handprint with four elongated fingers, and finally a color segment where multiple beings walk alongside humans in what looks like a controlled meeting.

Before we get started, a quick heads up: this post is about two viral, highly polarizing videos that have been linked by some to the disappearance of MH370.

I’m not here to tell you whether these videos are real or fake. My goal is to lay out how they came to light, why they got so much attention, and everything that’s unfolded around them.

The Beginning

The videos originally appeared on YouTube in May and June 2014, but they didn’t get serious attention until 2023. If you haven’t seen them yet, it’s worth watching before you read further.

Archive.org Links:

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

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

Both videos side by side insync:

While I have my own thoughts on whether they’re authentic, my aim here is to outline the timeline, point out the key details, and lay out the facts as clearly as possible so you can decide for yourself.

Are the videos real or fake? That’s up to you to decide.

One thing remains true, no matter where you stand on these videos: MH370 is still missing, and families are still searching for answers. If you or someone close to you was affected by this tragedy, you have my deepest sympathies.