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: 25
167
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by gift0fpr0phecy
reply to post by samureyed
 


This is a hypothetical situation that caused the issues I have been pointing out;

On day one, the wall, the tree, and the man were filmed by camera... They ACT out their "omgs and wtfs", and move their cameras like they are filming a UFO go down then up, but in reality they are filming nothingness. They are looking into an empty sky, probably nowhere near Jerusalem. They could be in Los Angeles for all we know. Call this "video A".

On day two they found a separate video of Jerusalem's city lights at night from atop a hill. They used motion tracking to add a fake UFO, and animation, and lights, to the Jerusalem video. Call this "video B".

Day four they used a mask to cut out the sky/area around the wall, tree, and man in video A. Then they composited video B into the background of video A. They had to use motion tracking so video B moved with the camera shake of video A. They must have done a bad tracking job, so video B (the city lights) moved around independently from video A (the wall, tree, and man).

I believe they bad tracking was caused by the low levels of light available in video A. There is a lack of high contrast objects to choose from which is needed to track x and y coordinates in a video with motion and shake.



I understand perfectly how they would go about making it, and don't refute that logic at all.

I maintain that the effect we have seen produced by the "stabilized" versions of the video are in fact the reason behind the anomaly produced. In other words, I believe you are seeing the lights move independently because the video has been stabilized, and not because of any previous editing (even if it was done.)

At this point, I've proved all I can prove, so all I know to do is just agree to disagree until more evidence shows up or somebody figures something else out. -shrug-

Thanks for remaining civil and polite!




posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 10:53 PM
link   
Looks like another video has emerged of this. I have know idea what to make of this.



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by AstroBuzz
 



Well that vid puts the cat amongst the pigeons huh??





posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 10:55 PM
link   
Not sure what to think now...Maybe the third video is a hoax as well.This is an ongoing problem with this subject.



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by 5thDimensionalBeing
Looks like another video has emerged of this. I have know idea what to make of this.


Well. Heh.

Ummm....

I'm at a loss. Is it just me or does the audio responses on this one sound a little too calm?

All I can say is it's either real or a viral campaign. I was NOT expecting a third video.



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 10:56 PM
link   
Perhaps it was a hexacopter with a camera or something.



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 10:57 PM
link   
If this is real these people are way to happy about seeing a UFO sighting like that.,lol seems bizarre



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 10:58 PM
link   
How come they cut the video off when it shoots away like that?



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 10:59 PM
link   
i thought the final "whoa" sounded odd and almost sarcastic.

everything else about the chatter seemed extremely authentic.



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 10:59 PM
link   
the third video at www.youtube.com...
looks totally fake to me.
it looks like a still photo with a CGI ufo on top of it...
nothing moves in the video except the white orb..



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by oleus
"you can almost hardly look at it"

(quote from third video)

Also, no flash whatsoever in this one.
edit on 30-1-2011 by oleus because: (no reason given)


Not to mention how calm they are about it. I feel like if I was watching some sort of light descend on the dome of the freaking rock I'd be a little more either concerned, or in awe. They were all talking like freaking mental patients during the movie. Oh look a UFO. Yea we gots dem dere in mississippi's, wow so bright you can't hardly look at it (with a monotone voice and clearly not the case), and the oooh's and aahh's as it darted off.

Just sounds 100% fake. Surely people can't be that stupid when it comes to something that shouldn't be happening. Happening.
edit on 30-1-2011 by enigma91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:02 PM
link   
I mean why would people be this unconerned over a object like that.Could it be these people have no discernment at all in them.Like they are not the least bit concerned over it.Like it is a fireworks display.Yeahhh!! Weeeee!!! Wooooooo!!!!



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by enigma91

Originally posted by oleus
"you can almost hardly look at it"

(quote from third video)

Also, no flash whatsoever in this one.
edit on 30-1-2011 by oleus because: (no reason given)


Not to mention how calm they are about it. I feel like if I was watching some sort of light descend on the dome of the freaking rock I'd be a little more either concerned, or in awe. They were all talking like freaking mental patients during the movie. Oh look a UFO. Yea we gots dem dere in mississippi's, wow so bright you can't hardly look at it (with a monotone voice and clearly not the case), and the oooh's and aahh's as it darted off.

Just sounds 100% fake. Surely people can't be that stupid when it comes to something that shouldn't be happening. Happening.
edit on 30-1-2011 by enigma91 because: (no reason given)


LMAO! I think that's an old lady ooohing there at the end. They might have cut off the rest of the video because they didn't like the sound of their excited voices or something.
edit on 30-1-2011 by quantum_flux because:




posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:03 PM
link   
I really want to think this is the real article, but vid 3 makes it hard. if that happened to be me during that, I'd be yelling, swearing, jumping all over the damn place. I would expect others around to do similar, and if they didn't I would be shouting at everyone at the place to look.

they were way to calm and the camera work was to calm to. plus the accension of the object is suspect to me.
edit on 30-1-2011 by wingsfan because: drunk



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:04 PM
link   
Well it appears this thing is probably gonna have a ton of hoaxers on top of what probably was a hoax to begin with.Looks to staged.



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:04 PM
link   
it does almost look like that was a still 2-d picture (maybe an HD quality still on a monitor) being shot by a camera to add the effect to. and maybe audio from another UFO video added in? who knows. the fact that it was posted as "proof the sighting is real" means it was posted to prop up the other videos and wasn't just uploaded independently.



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Dramier
 


You sir have just pointed out a sound source of the light in question (to go along with my theme for fun). I believe one has control over basic post production 101 skills to do this copy/paste thing, with a highly compressed fuzzt video upload on YouTube.

People have to understand that the compression Flash video lossy upload that YouTube forces on you cannot be any kind of documented proof of something or not, Youtube is simply a dirty lossy flash over compression process to cut down on bandwidth usage.

One can never prove or disprove anything from a Youtube upload, the camera information is simply replaced by the video provider and why do I have to point this out so often in a single thread?



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:08 PM
link   
this convinces me that if ufos were to show them selves to groups in well lit areas
that the average human (in a group) fells safe enough to witness and not panic
if the govenments are scared of a panic
look how these people reacted
they we excited and frank about their opinions
i think most were in awe of what they were "seeing"
some one posted before i wont beleive it untill "the second guys" footage was found
then it was too many people would have seen this where is the other footage?
so now we have a third angle we can calculate
distence to and size of object from the combined angles
luminosity over distence
a second set of witnesses provide scale size from the dome
xploder



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:08 PM
link   
third video is definitely a hoax. The lense flares from the lights would not have continued to ray into the image after the camera panned away from them.



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:08 PM
link   
reply to post by oleus
 


I have scoured the new video for anything moving or changing in the video outside of the "light" and can't spot anything yet.

But I agree: My first impression is it's a still picture that's been recorded to appear "live".

The audio sounds dubbed too, but I think I hear Japanese or Asian language in there... anybody else pick that up?

EDIT:

It's fake. The lights never change, nothing flickers, nothing moves. That really really looks like a still image. You can hear wind blowing across the mic, so SOMEWHERE in that video surely something would move, sway, or flicker, or a car or person or piece of paper or SOMETHING. The lights aren't changing either, and the focus on the camera never changes. It SCREAMS fake to me.
edit on 30-1-2011 by Dramier because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
167
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join