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: 69
167
<< 66  67  68    70  71  72 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:17 PM
link   


I hope this helps clarify things easier
edit on 2-2-2011 by DeboWilliams because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by p4rs3C
watch the full video, the 4th video phone has zoom while recording, you can see that still inside the car.
Zoom evidence at 3:40
edit on 2-2-2011 by p4rs3C because: (no reason given)

They use it again on the UFO at 4:29, not sure if that proves anything one way or the other.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by gift0fpr0phecy
reply to post by greeneyedleo
 


No.... Just keep it in the HOAX forum where it belongs...

Then change the title to "[DESTRUCTION and analysis of multiple videos here]"...



... Digital zoom is not the same has optical lenses zoom.... digital zoom does not clarify zoomed images ...
all mobile phones with zoom is Digital zoom



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlySolo
reply to post by Mr Mask
 


Are you being disingenuous? We know and you know it has been posted. I'm more confused now more than ever on your stand point. More than the ufo sighting


I still think HOAX.

But like many, I'd like to see thread returned...not because I think it hasn't been proven a hoax...but because I want my fellow ATS-ers happy.

I think this clip was debunked over 30 pages ago without question, and that Cohen's site dosn't even need to be part of the reasoning behind putting this here.

But again...I like the crowd to be pleased...as I assume the staff will probably agree on as well for the same reasons.

But if you ask me, anyone in power around here with a decent grasp on perspective should surly place this in the hoax forum based on the broken physics of the first clip.

Add to that- the actors in clip one are standing in front of the wall that is in clip 5- and well...you have them officially attached to clip 5, and clip 5 is undoubtedly a hoax.

Do the math.

MM



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by p4rs3C
reply to post by Ashtrei
 


watch the full video, the 4th video phone has zoom while recording, you can see that still inside the car.
Zoom evidence at 3:40
edit on 2-2-2011 by p4rs3C because: (no reason given)


But i still cant see the light on the horizon that features in vid one and two, also there is a black strip in the city where there are no lights, this runs in one direction in the first 2 clips, but looks like it runs in a diffent direction in the 4th this suggests to me its filmed from a differnt angle than the first 2 (the 3rd clip is worthless, why MM posted it again is very very strange)



without running the clip above, notice how there are two lights on the horizon in vid one and two.
One is the alleged UFO, but in the 4th clip that light isnt present, this suggests its from a different angle
also notice a triangle of black running from the upper left down towards the middle of the frame with a large blueish light towards the edge, this isnt seen in the still from the 4th vid. again suggesting a different angle
edit on 2-2-2011 by Ashtrei because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Mask
Add to that- the actors in clip one are standing in front of the wall that is in clip 5- and well...you have them officially attached to clip 5, and clip 5 is undoubtedly a hoax.


There's a clip 5??!?

Where?

Cite it or be damned to Care Bear colouring books without any crayons for the rest of eternity!!

-m0r



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 


That's pretty convincing evidence, however that video left out some important aspects.

1. The video is not of a still frame, as you can clearly see traffic moving along a street just below the dome. Whether or not everything above that street is composite, I can't tell, but it certainly looks as if it is one consistent shot.

2. I'm not so sure that there isn't a change in the lights. It isn't nearly as pronounced in the video as it is in the example, and maybe I'm just imagining them, but it looks like there are slight changes.

Other than those 2 things, it is a very good example as to how this could have been produced. I think this whole thing can be properly put away by debunking that 4th video, but that video doesn't do it entirely for me.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ashtrei

Originally posted by p4rs3C
reply to post by Ashtrei
 


watch the full video, the 4th video phone has zoom while recording, you can see that still inside the car.
Zoom evidence at 3:40
edit on 2-2-2011 by p4rs3C because: (no reason given)


But i still cant see the light on the horizon that features in vid one and two, also there is a black strip in the city where there are no lights, this runs in one direction in the first 2 clips, but looks like it runs in a diffent direction in the 4th this suggests to me its filmed from a differnt angle than the first 2 (the 3rd clip is worthless, why MM posted it again is very very strange)
edit on 2-2-2011 by Ashtrei because: (no reason given)


i see what you mean, still cant be sure either way. And about MM that action of his says it all...



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:32 PM
link   
i hate how everyone on this freaking website tries to prove that the real videos are fake!

i wonder if a fake video was uploaded would the people (FOOLS!) try and debunk it even tho it says fake all over it lol

you guys waste to much time trying to debunk stuff when clearly there real you idiots

ATS PISSES ME OFF NOW SO MUCH BS! if its real its real dont try and prove its fake when its not



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:33 PM
link   
well what gets me is that not all cameras on phones work the same nor do phones use the same lens as far as i have read on the subject now that this has gone world wide 20 plus web pages and on all news and mag blogs spots it is time to sit back and wait for the pros on UFO's and see what they have to say, just because one says hoax on you tube does not make it so, or as fact i have seen more than one say hoax on there and in fact be fact, ie carrier take offs jet crashes. oh it is fake look at this , ya well not so, it would post, but one does not need to death. look up jet crashes and see, and no not the china one. we all know what that is but what we do not know is what this is. still to soon to tell ,if Israel tv has it msnbc cnn and others show it asking you the viewer what you think it is then this too me says not hoax yet,just my view on this.
edit on 2-2-2011 by bekod because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by p4rs3C
 


The video was not from a cell phone...

There is no difference between digital zoom and fake zoom from a video editing program... so you can't prove it was pure digital camera, and not just video editing.

reply to post by nwdogg1982
 




Originally posted by nwdogg1982
That's pretty convincing evidence, however that video left out some important aspects.

1. The video is not of a still frame, as you can clearly see traffic moving along a street just below the dome. Whether or not everything above that street is composite, I can't tell, but it certainly looks as if it is one consistent shot.


All I would have to do is replace the still image with a video that is perfectly still on a tripod. That demonstration works with a still video as well. Didn't you read the part where I said "import picture or video"?


Originally posted by nwdogg1982
2. I'm not so sure that there isn't a change in the lights. It isn't nearly as pronounced in the video as it is in the example, and maybe I'm just imagining them, but it looks like there are slight changes.


There is ZERO change of lights when they zoom on the UFO... there is zero change of anything other than pixel size.

edit on 2-2-2011 by gift0fpr0phecy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by burntoast
 




you guys waste to much time trying to debunk stuff when clearly there real you idiots


Ok, would you prefer everyone just blindly believed everything they was told?

Cause, I'm guessing No, no you wouldn't....

edit on 2-2-2011 by Rising Against because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by burntoast
i hate how everyone on this freaking website tries to prove that the real videos are fake!

i wonder if a fake video was uploaded would the people (FOOLS!) try and debunk it even tho it says fake all over it lol

you guys waste to much time trying to debunk stuff when clearly there real you idiots

ATS PISSES ME OFF NOW SO MUCH BS! if its real its real dont try and prove its fake when its not


These are very strong words coming from a "noob" who just signed up 2 weeks ago...

Already hating on how things go around here.

Hey, if you don't like it no one is asking you to stay. Head on over to GLP.

Now back on topic:

The videos are fake.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 
well ok but how do you fake movement in the back ground and in a widow??? look at it aging notice the traffic and then the other one that has a front on view and see the window at the building no zoom is that not a tv that is on??? how did they fake that??? i am using video from the Israel tv the link is in here some place?? if not i will re post the link.


edit on 2-2-2011 by bekod because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by m0r1arty

There's a clip 5??!?

Where?

Cite it or be damned to Care Bear colouring books without any crayons for the rest of eternity!!

-m0r


Five...four...sixteen...WHATEVER CLIP has those dishonest goons jumping out the car to take a leak near the exact same wall in clip one.

Meaning....the people in the car....are the same people near the wall in clip one.

This was pointed out by another poster pages back. Forgive me for losing count of the damn clips.

Anyways, another thing that should be mentioned, the peeing/car clip...when they leave the car and go to pee, the clip cuts and magically goes to the UFO part...but the screen takes on a whole other feel/color with a weird "filming a screen haze" or some sort of effected air t it (I'm no effects guy). It clearly changes from crystle clear typical digital video to looking like its filming a foggy haze-like area.

Now I admit, if the clip was real (and its not) you could argue that it was foggy or some crap...but as you can see when they exit the car it is not. Then you can argue that the fog was hanging over the city, not the pee place near the wall (same wall from clip one), but then you will be running in circles just to appease the big bad "what-if" monster...and I hate that.

Anyways...points to remember-

Blue UFO appears in dozens and dozens of pics dating back multible years over Temple Mount in same location.

Wall appears in clip one and pee-clip.

Hoaxer attaches himself to clips.

Hoaxer famous for making CGI clips of fake UFOs.

Foofies usually don't show up in Jerusalem but Infinity Guantlets do...and clip clearly dosn't show an Infinity Gauntlet.

Perspective is wrong and breaks the laws of perspective as understood since early 4th century and fully detailed by the 13th century.

All other clips are proven fake.

Nothing moves in all the backgrounds of all the clips (cept for the last one) leading one to believe they are all staged by using static still images with moving elements added.

The list goes on and on and on...yet here we are defending the right to have this HOAX placed in the no-hoax zone...and why? Because in light of all these observations...we still need more info to safely call this CRAP a hoax.

Yeah...sorry...its a shame really.

MM



edit on 2-2-2011 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-2-2011 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by burntoast
i hate how everyone on this freaking website tries to prove that the real videos are fake!

i wonder if a fake video was uploaded would the people (FOOLS!) try and debunk it even tho it says fake all over it lol

you guys waste to much time trying to debunk stuff when clearly there real you idiots

ATS PISSES ME OFF NOW SO MUCH BS! if its real its real dont try and prove its fake when its not


ouch ! to have such conviction you must have witnessed these first hand ?
that is the only way you could be 100% sure it is real don't you think ?



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 


After watching it closely again, I don't see much change in the intensity or clarity of the lights, but there is a change in the focus of the camera during the zoom, kind of a "blur", that occurs at around :09 in the short version. It lasts for about a 1/2 second before it seemingly refocuses.

Don't take me the wrong way, I'm not arguing with you here, but how easy or hard would it be to create this effect? If this zoom (with the zoom-in focus effect) wasn't done on the original video, then how was it added? I'm curious as I'm not skilled with AE but I have tinkered with it.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Now back on topic:

The videos are fake.

^^^^^^^this is what im talking about just saying its fake cause others say its fake sstop being a follower and show me some REAL GOOD PROOF THAT ITS FAKE not the FAKE ZOOM IN lol



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:47 PM
link   
This is hilarious...

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Originally posted by enigma91
You can also put in a formal complaint by selecting Tools -> Complaint in the top bar. This is per greeneyedleo's suggestion.

Since simply attempting to take credit for something is enough to make it true according to ATS's moderation. Than I officially created ATS and demand all ad revenue be delievered to my Paypal account by Friday.

And that the thread be re-instated.

And the terrible advertisement be stopped immediately.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by p4rs3C

... Digital zoom is not the same has optical lenses zoom.... digital zoom does not clarify zoomed images ...
all mobile phones with zoom is Digital zoom


Not saying I doubt you...but um...can you tell me (a guy who sold digital cameras for three years and had to attend product seminars for the entire east coast district of Radioshack, before going off to work for officemax for another 2 doing the same as head of sales for electronics) exactly what you mean here?

I'd like to know more...

More then all the training manuals and 5 hour seminars I had to sit through once every other month.

Thanks in advance sir.

MM
edit on 2-2-2011 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
167
<< 66  67  68    70  71  72 >>

log in

join