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: 56
167
<< 53  54  55    57  58  59 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Unknown Soldier
 


Everyone has an agenda.

Just as long as rational and critical people don't start "believing" things, we should make it through this.
Even when given supposedly unfalsifiable evidence, we should look at the evidence with disbelief; until rigorous scrutiny leaves no room for deception.

In the future, this guy or someone else may try again, and fool everyone.

I fear that this hoax will continue for several more weeks.
My problem with it, is how immature it is. Childish in its motives, construction and presentation.
I would put the perp's age in the mid to late teens.
If this estimate is false, the schmuck can take it as an insult.
I'm sure he gets kicks from watching us wriggle like worms for him, he probably even reads this forum getting tips from pros.
edit on 1-2-2011 by myster0 because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by arit_
Hello All,


Regarding the fourth video.

This one is by YDMU1 and he also has the full, almost (!) unedited video up. How they got to the filming location, etc.

www.youtube.com...

I watched the whole thing, and I also speak Hebrew and familiar with the area. The people in the video are very convincing. If this is a hoax, these are actors who fake a lenghty conversation about where to stop to pee.

This video is much better than the others. We should concentrate on this one as we have the faces of the witnesses and much clearer video.

Regards

ari


The title of the video is

UFO - JERUSALEM -Temple Mount - THE BEST SIGHTING-the FULL MOVIE


That to me imply's that it is a work of fiction. You will notice at 4:26 the video is edited where the camera guy changes from walking with camera pointed at ground. Then the next clip is directed at the object. It appears to be the same production used in video number 4, why yes it is the same channel. Teenage kids are behind this. A Blair Witch, Third Kind, Paranormal Activity "this is a true story" but it is not kind of deal?


Originally posted by WhizPhiz
reply to post by arit_
 


Cheers for sharing that, however as mentioned in the video's comments, the cut before the city view is really suspicious IMO.


That is what I noticed too

edit on 1-2-2011 by Unknown Soldier because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 09:41 PM
link   
I just had to do some analysis of this video.I got to give these guys credit this one was well done, seems they have learned from some of their mistakes. Excellent work on the dome reflections.
My first objective was to look closely at the flash and glow effect knowing from experience how difficult these are to pull off.I new somewhere along the treeline this area had to be masked off to create this effect.In 4 frames you can clearly see the masking error.
There are other problems I will post later.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by zezba9000
 


Here is a response to your video that explains why you are wrong...




posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frater210
Hello, everyone. I will admit right away that I come from the 'I want to believe' crowd. I am easily duped. If it were not for the audio visual professionals that take the time to analyze this stuff I suppose I would be helpless. Or I would have to research it all myself somehow. That being said do any of the rest of you find it significant that previous posters have embedded video showing what appears to be the same phenomenon occurring in Russia, Colombia and if you can believe it Utah. This same kind of thing happened with the October sightings in New York. I am going to include links. The same thing was seen in El Paso, and Cincinatti. So is it just me flipping out or is there a theme here?
www.dailymail.co.uk...
www.youtube.com...



Previous posters that have embedded the 'same thing' are even less convincing. Add to that the fact that alot of them have created their accounts here in the last day or so, it all feels WAY too viral.
Also it should be noted that the original video has been debunked to alot of peoples satisfaction (im a strong believer, but not stupid ^_^)...

Im pretty much calling this one closed in my book. But ill stil hang around in this thread watching the fun unfold



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 09:55 PM
link   
this is very interesting, who knows maybe they are testing us, if I was one of the pilots I would personally do something liek this to mess with everyones heads, or to examine the humans pathetic idea of a higher being and how much effort they put into this



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by TinkererJim
 


That is not correct... you are trying to claim that the parallax effect will be near zero the further the objects are... that is not true at all. No matter what, the background should move left when the camera moves left, and anything in the foreground should move right. And same for the other direction, the background should move right when the camera moves right, and anything in the foreground should move left.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 10:05 PM
link   
Again the lighting is odd. Motivated entirely off highlights. Data goes crap from the highlight hike ... typical style artifacts from over hiking where data doesn't exist. Physical light should reveal data not mess it up.

Of course I'm just a filthy debunker, and the sensor is really poop, and the compression is making it odd, and it's totally real.


(Not saying everyone talks like this, but just to save the effort of the people that will)

And still no technical details at all from these persons.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 10:28 PM
link   
Just in case you missed it this is the latest UFO - JERUSALEM -Temple Mount - THE BEST SIGHTING video.
Regardless if the light was turning on or off the glow in background would remain.Instead the area is blocked out by the masking.BUSTED



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 10:45 PM
link   
so there is now a fourth video
i wounder how many more will "surface"
xploder



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 10:50 PM
link   
Yes,I like this one the best IMO.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by flyingfish
Yes,I like this one the best IMO.


yuck. that one ooozes fakery more than the rest
The flash, and the reaction to said flash is way to quick. and the 'zooming up' just looks tacky.
Sorry chief, the more these videos pop up, the easier it is to dismiss.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:07 PM
link   
reply to post by KoraX
 


LOL I know it's fake but it's my favorite.
Chief-



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by KoraX
 


You really need to able to appreciate all the FX that are going on there to understand why I like it.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:18 PM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 


First off HOAXkiller1 blocked me from commenting on his video. I think he may be intentionality pulling ppls legs.

So I sent him this message, because he is in fact not telling you about the other variables in play here. He is only telling you about 1 (the LootAt point). There are 3. The Eye(location), LookAt(point of interest) & UpVector(rotation).

Here is the Message I sent him::
[
Sorry, but yes there is subtle movement in the vertical & or depth because the guy is holding the camera in his hand. When you hold a camera in your hand #1 the location of the camera will vary, 2nd the LookAt point will vary & 3rd the Up vector will vary.

In your video here the only thing changing is your LookAt point(aka point of interest).

Also you need to bring one side of the wall(IN DEPTH) toward the camera!
Rotate the wall on the Y axis, this will prove me right... I dare you!

Look at my video more closely, you will see the WALL is at an angle on the Y axis...
www.youtube.com...
]



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by flyingfish
 


That video has evidence of being staged, and fake.

1: At 0:25 there is a sudden increase in sound volume. This is evidence of sound editing/tampering.

2: OBVIOUSLY the camera shake is FAKE. The amount of shake is too perfect. The "shake per second" rate is constant, and so is the magnitude. It looks exactly like they used "The Wiggler" tool in After Effects, or at least the "wiggle" function.



3: The reaction time between the flashes and the people saying "wow" is way too fast.

Watch the video, but don't watch the timer... Say "wow" after you see the light flash. You will see that your reaction time is identical to the people in the video. But, you knew the light was going to flash, and you were relying on visual stimuli to tell you when to say "wow". Your reaction time is increased because you knew.

Someone who doesn't know the light is going to flash at all AND relies on visual stimuli will have a much longer reaction time. The people in the video do not have a natural surprised reaction time, their reaction time is similar to someone who wasn't surprised and knew. It's completely staged, and or the "wow" sound effects were just not right.

There are also many differences between that sighting and the rest... specifically lighting. The second video of this event isn't even close to matching the light in this video.

It's fake too....

 


I remember a member of ATS asked a question towards "skeptics" a while ago. The question was something like; "skeptics, what evidence would you need to believe a UFO sighting is real?"

The number one answer was, "multiple videos/images from multiple angles and people".

It was only a matter of time before a hoaxer figured that out.

Actually, multiple angle hoaxes have happened before. There was one at night with a UFO above a building in I think Chicago. Some person driving in a car supposedly filmed it above the building.. A UFO laps a light at the building, then zooms away. There was multiple angles of it from different people. That sighting was declared a HOAX by ATS.

A member used the building the UFO was above as a measuring device, and found that the hight of the UFO in each view was different so it was a proven hoax. I will try to find that case and post a link here.

I wonder if there is hight differences in THIS hoax.... I am willing to bet there is.

The height from the ground to the UFO may be different in each video. I'll try to measure it right now.
edit on 1-2-2011 by gift0fpr0phecy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by flyingfish
reply to post by KoraX
 


You really need to able to appreciate all the FX that are going on there to understand why I like it.


I dig sir

Its just this one gets under my skin more than normal hoaxes. Due to the religious element.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by zezba9000
 



Originally posted by zezba9000
First off HOAXkiller1 blocked me from commenting on his video. I think he may be intentionality pulling ppls legs.


First off, I am HOAXKiller1. No I am not pulling anyones legs...

Second, I block everyone from commenting on my videos so they can come here, and I can make longer replies instead of less than a paragraph in YouTube comments, and zero images or links.

Third, I didn't get this message you are talking about...




Originally posted by zezba9000
So I sent him this message, because he is in fact not telling you about the other variables in play here. He is only telling you about 1 (the LootAt point). There are 3. The Eye(location), LookAt(point of interest) & UpVector(rotation).

Here is the Message I sent him::
[
Sorry, but yes there is subtle movement in the vertical & or depth because the guy is holding the camera in his hand. When you hold a camera in your hand #1 the location of the camera will vary, 2nd the LookAt point will vary & 3rd the Up vector will vary.

In your video here the only thing changing is your LookAt point(aka point of interest).


If you study the video you will see there is ZERO change in depth. If that was true the size of the guy in the video would increase or decrease. That is not happening.

Also, there is ZERO vertical movement... If that was true, the distance between the bottom right of his jacket and the top of the wall would change, and that doesn't happen.

Fourth, there is ZERO PARALLAX!!!

You must understand the importance of the meaning of ZERO PARALLAX. This means the only thing that changes is the look-at point in the video. It also means he might not even be holding the camera in his hand at all.


Originally posted by zezba9000
Also you need to bring one side of the wall(IN DEPTH) toward the camera!
Rotate the wall on the Y axis, this will prove me right... I dare you!


That was already done in this video at 1:23.

The angles NEVER CHANGE, unless you make EXTREME camera movements. There is NO EXTREME CAMERA MOVEMENTS in the original video.
edit on 1-2-2011 by gift0fpr0phecy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:40 PM
link   
It's funny...it seems like debunkers will debunk/deny everything that comes through even when they get the different angles they ask for, then in comes the excuses...oh the hoaxers knew we'd need different angles, ect. lol

I repeat what I said in an earlier post, this thread is very educational and entertaining!

Now HAVE AT IT! Another 50+ posts to go!


Sorry, had a few beers tonight.


P.S. ...and just cause people say it was debunked on ATS doesn't mean anything. This is just another cool forum were random people gather and share their expertise...which I appreciate very much but it's not the absolute of anything.
edit on 1-2-2011 by AstroBuzz because: P.S.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 


Excellent analysis, but there are parts of it that are exceptional. like the tracking of the orbs reflection on the dome and the flash effect/glow on the area beneath the orb.
I still think it's a good idea to show video evidence that can prove these are fakes.There is already to many people that are buying into these fakes it's important to keep the eye on the hoaxers



new topics

top topics



 
167
<< 53  54  55    57  58  59 >>

log in

join