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

reply to post by Mr Mask


I know these are fake too but c'mon.

A hill (in Jerusalem of all places) with a wall (overlooking a steep hill of all places) doesn't mean pee-pee guy who was having it off with the drivers girlfriend was in cahoots with Mister I'm on a night barge with my friend guy.

It is possible that these two vantage points weren't from the same place.

Calling it a hoax without even having the locations down of those involved (never mind all the stuff that comes afterwards) is folly. There needs to be standards to calling something a hoax (beyond post a complaint to this invisible area standards) and we must make sure future generations look back on us and say stuff like "m0r was cool wasn't he?" and "Him and Mr Mask sure did prove lots of stuff wrong beyond a doubt didn't they?" and "Why did Mr Mask's mom run off with m0r?" otherwise we're just armchair debunkers who take it up the eyes when told to do so.

-m0r

Originally posted by burntoast


^^^^^^^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

Too easy bro. Hook line and sinker...

No one has to show you a damn thing here. Maybe if you quit the name-calling you'll get a better response.

And how about you do your own research on why you think it's genuine. Why is it so easy to believe this is real when it looks totally fake?

Doesn't make you any better than us idiots

Originally posted by Mr Mask

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)

... wiki
quote from wiki:
"Some digital cameras allow cropping and enlarging of a captured image, in order to emulate the effect of a longer focal length zoom lens (narrower angle of view). This is commonly known as digital zoom and produces an image of lower optical resolution than optical zoom."

in mobile phones this isn't optional meaning all zoom is digital.

more: wiki
"Most camera phones are simpler than separate digital cameras. Their usual fixed focus lenses and smaller sensors limit their performance in poor lighting. Having no physical shutter, most have a long shutter lag. Most have no flash or optical zoom[2] or tripod screw."

Originally posted by burntoast

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

Who are you and why are you mucking up this community by calling our members idiots?

Please stop that... because each and every member here, wrong or not, is directly protected and supported by my sheer willpower and love.

Even our space-reptile worshipers, our time travelers, our OOBers, resident Paladiens, debunkers, skeptics, trolls and all of our staff.

Don't make me get out my yellow gem and wish stuff with the power of my infinity gauntlet!

Be family or be gone...even if you disagree or think someone here is an idiot.

Thank you.

MM

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

Don't you think it's odd that there's more evidence that it's fake then real? Lets look at the facts

Video 3 is clearly faked

Video 2 has obvious tampering in it, not original audio track (copied from video 1 and altered). This doesn't scream legit to me. Not only that, but just look by the blue light in video 2, the one thats towards the middle bottom, compare those lights that near that blue light (the yellow ones) with the lights from the other video in the same area, the light configuration are different. How is that possible when both are supposedly being recorded at the same time?. Anyone else notice the flash of light trajectorys are different? in video 1 the first flash seems to be coming from or towards our camera man, and the second smaller flash is towards our camera man aswell, but in video 2, theres 3 flashes, and 1 is going slightly off to the left, second is middle right ish, and third is middle left. Whats up with that? With as far away as our camera men are, theyre PoV of the flashing lights would be the same, lets not forget 1 has 2 flashes and 2 has 3 flashes.

There's also pretty much every reason to believe that the person who uploaded video 2 is either A) The guy that's seen filming in video 1, or B) The person who made video one, pretending to be the guy that's seen filming in video 1. You can gather this information by looking at their youtube profiles. Both live in isreal, first video poster is 42 second video poster is 35, videos was posted a day apart, and since video 2 is fake, how did he have enough time to make a video that looks PERFECTLY like the first one, unlike the other 2 videos which came out a few days later, and are not consistent. So if the second video is fake, and it is, then how did he have enough time to make a perfect matching CGI in not even a day?

Video 4 is fake because 1-2-3 are.

I wish these was real, or that there was nothing sketchy about 'em. But I'm not about to believe in some lies or bs, if that was the case I'd just go to church!

People come on. If you STILL believe this was a actual event, then........

I have a business proposition for you, I just need you to invest 20 grand! your guaranteed triple returned!

reply to post by nwdogg1982


The program I used in that video was After Effects... Here is how to simulate focus in after effects:



Here is an example of changing focus...

vimeo.com...

reply to post by bekod


They didn't fake that... they used a real video. However, the video was not shaking or zooming. It was perfectly still like a photograph. The only thing moving was the cars and lights, but not the buildings and everything else.

Originally posted by Mr Mask
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.

With respect mate, i dont think it could be the exact same wall, it might be built from the same materials as the wall in clip one, not unusual with public facilities (same contractor/rock quarry etc)

without runing this YT clip look at all three stills



there is an area the shape of a black triangle with a large blue light on the edge of the triangle closest to the city lights on the left of the stills from vid one and two, but in the still from the 4th vid, that black triangle is not there, and the blue light looks like its just to the left of the dome in the 4th vid still.
Ergo the angles are very different, the rock wall could not be the same as in the first vid

Hey,
I live in Jerusalem and for your information:
Videos 1 and 2 are supposedly filmed at the Armon HaNatziv promenade, which is south of the old city. Meaning looking north.
In Video 4's description it reads in Hebrew that they shot it at Mount Scopus - Har HaTzofim (The description read "Zofim muonten"]. This makes sense in terms of geography of the drive, and the angle it was shot.
Mt Scopus is north of the Old City, looking south.
So they are practically shooting each-other, but standing a few miles apart.

There are walls all around the old city, and it can be seen from the south (Armon HaNatziv/East Talpiot promenade), North (Mt. Scopus), East (Mount of Olives. No video from that angle) and from the west.

By the way, you can see a camera that captures a frame every 10 minutes at the Jerusalem Weather Station 02ws.com, for the 28th go here:
www.02ws.com...
write in the box
28-01-2011
and click "Show"
The camera is located much farther away from the old city, in Nayot neighborhood, from which you cannot actually see the old city. It's probably not of much help...

That's it. I don't know if it is real or fake, but in terms of geography it passes.

reply to post by Ashtrei
so now we have 5 videos the 3 on your post the vide from the car group that i have not seen and then the English speaking video "oh my G,is that a ufo???" then there is a hole list of you tube videos. ufo dome of the rock, temple mount, ect ect i do not now if they are from one person or if they all know each other, how does one tell???

Originally posted by m0r1arty
reply to post by Mr Mask

 

I know these are fake too but c'mon.

A hill (in Jerusalem of all places) with a wall (overlooking a steep hill of all places) doesn't mean pee-pee guy who was having it off with the drivers girlfriend was in cahoots with Mister I'm on a night barge with my friend guy.

1) You have no proof those two were dating. The guy looked gay and the girl didn't seem interested in him at all.

2) You have no proof it was a night barge. It could have been a sail boat.

It is possible that these two vantage points weren't from the same place.

Possible indeed. I know.

Hence why I didn't hang my hat on it or nail my entire case to it. I think it is much more telling that Cohen is involved, the UFO is in every pic in the same location over the temple...and I'm talking literally dozens and dozens of pics.

And of course, the one that sells me hardcore is the perspective problems.

Calling it a hoax without even having the locations down of those involved (never mind all the stuff that comes afterwards) is folly. There needs to be standards to calling something a hoax (beyond post a complaint to this invisible area standards) and we must make sure future generations look back on us and say stuff like "m0r was cool wasn't he?" and "Him and Mr Mask sure did prove lots of stuff wrong beyond a doubt didn't they?" and "Why did Mr Mask's mom run off with m0r?" otherwise we're just armchair debunkers who take it up the eyes when told to do so.

-m0r

I bet the thread gets revived and replaced...don't quote me cus I have no inside knowledge or even an understanding of how things like this work. But I see an uproar and think the staff/owners will try and make us happy.

Like I said...I agree the thing should be revived...but then instantly hoaxed again for the reasons of broken perspective.

Don't worry M0r...and don't get in trouble damnit. I need you here. Don't get all Ozzy on me, love! You know how hard it is to suffer not seeing you around here?

Anyways...I think this was proven as a hoax many many pages ago. In fact, I would bet everything on it. Even in the face of digital effects experts who are unsure or on the fence. For one reason- "perspective" is my thing.

I used to actually cry about it...real tears... because I was yelled at for not mastering it. It was banged into my head forever and a day...and seeing those laws broken really jolts my brain.

But of course, unless someone comes in here with a degree in physics or the arts- people will keep saying "bah, you lack understanding".

HELL a dude actually made a video PROVING this point and said it actually debunked it...imagine how that drives one nuts.

Its like saying "water gets your feet wet"

Then some dude makes a clip showing a kid jumping in the pool with shoes on and says-

"nuh uh, his shoes got wet!"

So yeah...in my mind, I see it proven as a hoax. But I also understand people not buying that becuase they didn't suffer under the painfully demanding tutelage of the great Richard Decarlo (RIP),the spectacular Bob Murdoc (RIP) and the brilliant Patricia Robinson.

So yeah...like I said- give this time. If anyone has a complaint, send them in. If you do that- the staff will listen and decide.

Lastly- These clips are fake.

MM

reply to post by haketem


Thanks for detailing the geography. Do you speak Hebrew? Have you by any chance tried searching the Israeli forums for any witness accounts? People are likely to tweet or post some stuff if they actually saw something.

reply to post by p4rs3C


Thank you!

Originally posted by haketem
Hey,
I live in Jerusalem and for your information:
Videos 1 and 2 are supposedly filmed at the Armon HaNatziv promenade, which is south of the old city. Meaning looking north.
In Video 4's description it reads in Hebrew that they shot it at Mount Scopus - Har HaTzofim (The description read "Zofim muonten"]. This makes sense in terms of geography of the drive, and the angle it was shot.
Mt Scopus is north of the Old City, looking south.
So they are practically shooting each-other, but standing a few miles apart.

There are walls all around the old city, and it can be seen from the south (Armon HaNatziv/East Talpiot promenade), North (Mt. Scopus), East (Mount of Olives. No video from that angle) and from the west.

By the way, you can see a camera that captures a frame every 10 minutes at the Jerusalem Weather Station 02ws.com, for the 28th go here:
www.02ws.com...
write in the box
28-01-2011
and click "Show"
The camera is located much farther away from the old city, in Nayot neighborhood, from which you cannot actually see the old city. It's probably not of much help...

That's it. I don't know if it is real or fake, but in terms of geography it passes.

edit on 2-2-2011 by haketem because: PS

Thank you, thats excellent info. much appreciated

Originally posted by Mr Mask
...and the brilliant Patricia Robinson.

I'd keep an eye out for you if I were her. Seems those who taught you perspective end up dying.

I do agree that this is more than likely a hoax, but we cannot let it go there yet and the momentum of certain posters here shouldn't be hampered.

The perspective thing is off but I am personally certain that this can be achieved with crappy equipment (like what I own). Hoaxkiller1 is slowly but surely adding credence to the manipulation side of the balance and I think once all potential arguments against are exhausted then they should get a medal of honour of something for all the great work they've done (only to their ATS name - YouTube couldn't give a fig).

-m0r

Originally posted by Ashtrei

there is an area the shape of a black triangle with a large blue light on the edge of the triangle closest to the city lights on the left of the stills from vid one and two, but in the still from the 4th vid, that black triangle is not there, and the blue light looks like its just to the left of the dome in the 4th vid still.
Ergo the angles are very different, the rock wall could not be the same as in the first vid

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

With respect-

If you believe what I do- that is that clip one's background was digitally added to the foreground, then you have kids standing behind a brick wall that looks very much like the brick wall in clip 4 (its four right? The pee pee clip?).

Now...if that is the case, then we have all these clips not showing the location it was filmed by because the temple background was added. The only thing (if you buy the background being added) to determine the location is that wall and tree in the first clip , and the road/wall of the pee clip.

Now...if I am wrong...then we have this amazing similarity.

Young dudes...two to be exact...who sound very similar in base/tone, standing at the same minute/hour, all near stone walls that are very alike, filming the very same UFO, and all of them catching the upward motion of the UFO perfectly with their camera's.

Now that isn't impossible...but I find it odd that two guys filmed this UFO by a wall in one location.

Then two guys filmed the same UFO near a wall looking identical in another.

Add that to many other reasons I find this debunked....and well...man...did my head just explode?

No really...look at my head...is it still there?

MM

reply to post by WideOpenSpace

Hey,
Most mentions in forums and some news are about the internet buzz, no real research.
There was one forum where someone said he saw the lights and was in some park from which you cannot see the Dome.
Here:
www.tapuz.co.il...
he calls himself
רפי275

You should consider that most Jerusalemites aren't "online" as much as North Americans, and not everyone holds a camera at 01:00am looking at the Dome of the Rock in the middle of winter (It's there during the day, and in the summer too. Been there for almost 1500 years )

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by Ashtrei

 

so now we have 5 videos the 3 on your post the vide from the car group that i have not seen and then the English speaking video "oh my G,is that a ufo???" then there is a hole list of you tube videos. ufo dome of the rock, temple mount, ect ect i do not now if they are from one person or if they all know each other, how does one tell???

Its common enough for a video to be copied on YT, as far as i can tell there are four of the actual alleged UFO
vids one and two taken from Armon HaNatziv promenade, which is south of the old city.
vid 3 which looks to be a fake, for a number of reasons
And vid 4 shot from Mt Scopus which is north of the Old City, looking south

Vid 4 is supposedly an extract of the car vid

There is also a vid of a light in the sky posted by the person who shot the first vid.

At this stage there are only 3 vids of the alleged UFO over the dome on the rock, that im aware of

Originally posted by m0r1arty

Originally posted by Mr Mask
...and the brilliant Patricia Robinson.

I'd keep an eye out for you if I were her. Seems those who taught you perspective end up dying.

Yeah...she's a quick bugger.

But I'll catch her one day.




MM

Originally posted by haketem
Hey,
I live in Jerusalem and for your information:
Videos 1 and 2 are supposedly filmed at the Armon HaNatziv promenade, which is south of the old city. Meaning looking north.
In Video 4's description it reads in Hebrew that they shot it at Mount Scopus - Har HaTzofim (The description read "Zofim muonten"]. This makes sense in terms of geography of the drive, and the angle it was shot.
Mt Scopus is north of the Old City, looking south.
So they are practically shooting each-other, but standing a few miles apart.

There are walls all around the old city, and it can be seen from the south (Armon HaNatziv/East Talpiot promenade), North (Mt. Scopus), East (Mount of Olives. No video from that angle) and from the west.

By the way, you can see a camera that captures a frame every 10 minutes at the Jerusalem Weather Station 02ws.com, for the 28th go here:
www.02ws.com...〈=0
write in the box
28-01-2011
and click "Show"
The camera is located much farther away from the old city, in Nayot neighborhood, from which you cannot actually see the old city. It's probably not of much help...

That's it. I don't know if it is real or fake, but in terms of geography it passes.

edit on 2-2-2011 by haketem because: PS

Thanks for providing the info on the locations - this may open up some interesting discussion on the positioning of the light in video's 1 & 4. I've plotted the locations in google maps to get an idea on positioning of each videographer.