It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"UFO Over Temple Mount in Jerusalem" [discussion and analysis of multiple videos HERE]

page: 10
167
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Whiteone
 


are you serious? read up at the explanations why they are different.

we need zorgon here he take a good look and explain




posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 10:33 AM
link   
very intressting



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 10:57 AM
link   
Sorry guys but the second video confirms the first one being genuine. Different quality, different point of view...the two flashes also appear in a slightly different way. In the second video the voice of the guy standing close to the wall is louder because of course he is very close to his mobile. In the second vid the red orbs in the sky at the end are much more clear than the first vid. Very impressive find, if I was not a believer two minutes ago now I am...
Thanks for sharing this.



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by simples
 


Yes, that second video is just a zoomed in cropped version of the first with blur effects and some kind of looking bush thing (that seems to jump around its position) as the camera moves around (exaggerated from the first stable looking video, one can do that post-production) in efforts to make sure they covered up any chance that we can see the person from the first video present to like like these two guys have cell phones on at 1 a.m. shooting a night sky for no particular reason that is able to pick up these red lights that I find hard to believe a cell phone is capable of doing.

Good enough for you?



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:10 AM
link   
So this mud slinging match is only to asertain whether it is a hoax.

Because allegedly, we have two videos of the same incendent, cohere the video's authenticity as genuine. We now have to consider the source of the UFO's.

If i may, they look like flairs.



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 

superb analysis - star for you.
case closed.



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:15 AM
link   
Why I ask is almost every UFO video just some light points in the sky? Compared to other ground sources this particular 'UFO' seems quite tiny to have traveled light years to reach earth and if it's dismissed as being just an alien probe unmanned, exactly what purposeful mission was it undertaking?



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:18 AM
link   
The second video does not seem to be the guy in front, it seems to be from a different but near location.
so we should expect to see more video of this event.

There is a difference in lighting.
The city lights if you look near the blue light are slightly different. It could be the camera sensitivity or a different night?


edit on 30-1-2011 by mysteryskeptic because: spelling



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   
This is an incredible video. I don't know a thing about editing video, so if it is edited, great job! If it is not edited then WTF is going on here? I'm going to assume that the video will go to the archives soon and disclosure may happen ...at least within a few decades.



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:29 AM
link   
My opinion is that the second video isnt the guy infront of the first video, why? Well because the guy satnding at the wall in the first video is standng right next to the rock on the right. In the second video you can clearly see the rock to the right of him...but if it is him, then why on earth is his view of the UFO so close and at a totally different angle? Some of you guys are saying that its because he;s zoomed in, but thats not possible, if it was then you wouldnt see the rock on his right if he was zoomed in.

Case still open in my opinion!



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:31 AM
link   
Come on, you have to understand how video one works to see why video two is a failure.

On video one the guy you see standing there has been added to an already faked shot, you can tell this by how he seems to be suffering from an earthquake under him and he wobbles all over the place.

Just look..

The second video looks remarkably like the guy has been removed, the soundtrack altered and it cropped, zoomed and the perspective altered.

One thing I've not seen is a comment about a second light appearing just before he focuses on the sky


Seriously tho, the guy wobbling about in the first video PROVES the video is fake..He's simply NOT THERE...
edit on 30-1-2011 by Mclaneinc because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:32 AM
link   
Still image from both videos:


Using the 2 highlighted boxes as reference, the person is not visible on the right (2nd) video. If it was the same video as the left (1st) but zoomed in you would see part of the guys head/clothes, and maybe his left arm/clothes.



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:35 AM
link   
And if my breakdown of the video's isn't enough then where's the video from the various web cams that cover that region, where's the massive news reports from Israel of some sort of biblical happening.

There's neither since the only place this happened was on someone's PC or Mac...



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 


lmao...yes u are correct when i watched titanic i actually thought it was the real titanic....firstly dont insult my intellegence secondly how is it cgi?...just because YOU THINK it is? because u say oh the light shouldnt be on this part of his tshirt etc...

the video and how it is presented is all dependant on the quality of the equipment..u can zoom in and say oh the light shouldnt be there or there, therefor i prove its cgi..no sorry u dont u just give your opinion and the conclusions u have reached...how can two men raise thier heads at the same time when one is in front? unless they were looking at the same object? and is it then just sheer utter coincedence that the same thing was seen on the other side of the world?

you can throw all u want at it and disect it ...i assume u are qualified to do so?

i on the other hand will stick to my original thoughts that it is in fact real



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:45 AM
link   
I find it very curious that when using the shadow highlight filter in Photoshop the image on the right doesn't get effected.




posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Illustronic
 


to me it looks as though they are standing high up perhaps some view area that shows the city below...why is it hard to believe that people could be videoing the scenery...whos to say they were actually using the video? they could have been looking upon the city and all its lights then noticed the light in the sky and decided to film.


really grates on my nerves when people use these excuses when viewing ufo footage...

skeptics always say oh well what was he doing at night up there with a video.
then other times when ufo footage has been caught by one person they say..oh well surely others would have taped it they have cameras they have videos on the cellphones...sorry cant have it both ways!



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:50 AM
link   
Both videos synchronized:



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by rebornofmaya
 


I agree, thanks for the side by side.... Many asked the youtube poster for the second video saying, "Untill I see the 2nd I call fake" then the 2nd video gets posted and they still say fake. Looking at the two I can tell they are from diff cams by looking at the lights, thanks again for the still shots of the exact thing I was looking at.

I am not saying it's a space ship but it was it was caught on film by at least two people.... lets hope it comes out what it really was. Someone on the ground close had to see it if it really happened



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by rebornofmaya
Still image from both videos:


Using the 2 highlighted boxes as reference, the person is not visible on the right (2nd) video. If it was the same video as the left (1st) but zoomed in you would see part of the guys head/clothes, and maybe his left arm/clothes.


When I look at both pics,
I focus down below near the blue light. follow the horizontal of the blue light near the bottom
We are missing lights from each picture?
different night? or different camera sensitivity? but why are their lights on one but not on another and vice versa.
when some lights should be on both?



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by rebornofmaya
 


There should be no doubts now.

Also, the reason why the first video had a still tripod...Because of history and myth, when a star-like object appears over The Holy Land, people freakin take notice, okay?



new topics

top topics



 
167
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join