Jersualem UFO 2011- Second Witness Recording of Same Event - HD Side By Side Video *WOW*

Originally posted by lambros56
reply to post by discl0sur3

 

I wasn`t too sure on the first video because it looked too good and i was thinking CGI.
Now that you`ve posted this one, its pushing me toward real.
It just doesn`t look doctored.
It reminds me of the split screen ufo footage with the spheres coming out like a string of beads and that hasn`t been debunked.....as far as i know.

Like yourself, I had my doubts at first...if these are in fact CGI, someone went to an awful lot of trouble. The second video was the proverbial "nail in the coffin" in my personal opinion.

I don't understand why a second video would add credibility to this hoax.
Both videos where taken basically from the same place.
Furthermore the second video has no foreground and is of worse quality, it should be even easier to fake than the first one. And to synchronize two videos is not that hard.

A second video taken from a completely different perspective would have been a lot more credible.

Also there will be a lot of ufo / alien invasion related movies coming out this year. Beware of viral marketing.

Since the other thread seems to have dissolved into .... well, "normalcy".

I am currently heavily analyzing the videos and seeing if I can add to the credibility (or lack) for these videos.

For my first contribution, I will debunk the claim:

"The second video is clearly just a zoomed in version of the first..."

I have overlaid the second video onto the first, synced up their time so they are both on the same frame or very close, and the results I present here:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/48171be41327.jpg[/atsimg]

As you can clearly tell, there is no way the second video could be a simple crop and zoom of the first. The bottom right hand of the image, you see a vertical curtain looking ghosted image with a light slightly above it. That is the man with the cellphone from the first video. If you zoomed in and cropped the original, it would still have him prominently displayed in the image. Therefore, the second image cannot possibly be a zoomed in copy of the first.

NOTE: Some people will inevitably point out the "UFO" in the screenshot above isn't lined up. This isn't the point of the screenshot. The point to be made here is the fact that the second filmer would show up in the video even if it were zoomed and cropped.

For reference, what I have done is left the first video untouched. The second video I have overlaid, reduced opacity to 62%, and moved the video's focus and scaled it to match the first.

These are indeed two seperate videos from two seperate perspectives. When overlaid at the same frames in time, the lights of the city line up, BUT NOT PERFECTLY. Indicating that the perspective is indeed, slightly different. I am working on images in photoshop to demonstrate this and will post these next.

My objective is to take the signs that people have said point to "hoax" and test to see if they are indeed correct. This includes an analysis of the sound.

More to follow...

I dunno. It's another light in the sky. Even if you accept it as real (which is fine) you cannot leap to the conclusion that it is "not of this world." No one can tell that from a simple light in the sky.

However, I DO know where this was taken from. These guys are on the Mount of Olives just East of the Second Temple. I recognize that rock wall and the perspective. They are a couple hundred feet above the Dome of the Rock looking down onto the temple mount from I'd guess a couple of miles away.

reply to post by discl0sur3


Great post... and one that looks like it is destined for a lot of activity.

I ran the first post with the original video. ATS removed it because they didn't like the source that uploaded it to You Tube. It later reappeared in another post... same URL, and it has not only stuck, but has been hotter than hell.

Since then, I have really noted how much effort has been put forward to discredit this whole event. Not ATS mind you, but a convergence of a lot of people/members who have tried to shove this whole subject into the hoax bin.

I was nowhere near convinced by that first vid. But the combination of the second vid from that other witness and the concerted effort to bunk this story... and now I have headline alerts out from a half a dozen sites and news aggregators.

Good job... S&F... (I didn't need them anyway lol!)

sob, does this mean that there is going to be a third group fighting over this pile of dirt?

Nice video though, and great split screen.

Second debunk:

"The 'UFO' is clearly a copied light from the left of the building..."

For this claim, I took a screenshot from a frame showing the "UFO" hovering, and then brought the two lights in question close together with simple cut and paste.

As you can see, they are NOT the same brightness. However, in all due fairness, this could be edited during the chop. However, the video when magnified does not show the typical pixelation associated with copying and pasting video.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ee0ed690ab05.jpg[/atsimg]

While this debunk is not nearly as concrete, I would place the odds of the "UFO" being a copied version of the lights in the city in any position as being less than a 10% chance. In other words, if I were asked to give testimony in court, I would say that the light was not a copy of a building light.

More to follow..

OP, I don't think an S&F is enough! Thank you for bringing this up, I couldn't make up my mind regarding the first video, it looked just a bit tampered, but I wasn't sure. And now... Man, you made my day. Not that I needed proof, since six months I know for sure these things are real which turned me from a skeptic to a confused believer, however, I always wanted more people to see for themselves and finally get the proof they wanted... I think this sighting has quite a lot to offer. Thank you very much!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It IS a great day for the UFO phenomenon researchers!

G
E
N
U
I
N

edit - E

reply to post by ch1n1t0


did you not like it enough to add the "e" to genuine?

I agree s+f it's fantastic but I'm not enough of a computer buff to say real or hoax.

And s for you cause I had to pick.

Originally posted by redoubt
reply to post by discl0sur3

 

Great post... and one that looks like it is destined for a lot of activity.

I ran the first post with the original video. ATS removed it because they didn't like the source that uploaded it to You Tube. It later reappeared in another post... same URL, and it has not only stuck, but has been hotter than hell.

Since then, I have really noted how much effort has been put forward to discredit this whole event. Not ATS mind you, but a convergence of a lot of people/members who have tried to shove this whole subject into the hoax bin.

I was nowhere near convinced by that first vid. But the combination of the second vid from that other witness and the concerted effort to bunk this story... and now I have headline alerts out from a half a dozen sites and news aggregators.

Good job... S&F... (I didn't need them anyway lol!)

edit on 30-1-2011 by redoubt because: I hate typos!

Thank you for the compliment! After years of research I've come to the conclusion that no matter how "amazing" the evidence, there will ALWAYS be a certain percentage of individuals that aim to debunk (perhaps for a price).

I was initially skeptical as well but when the second video surfaced it certainly helped their case. If a third video pops up it's case closed for me

Thanks for the S&F

reply to post by searching4truth


LOL, I just saw it myself and edited it! hahaha thanks for the star! I'm so excited!!!

Two different perspectives doesn't really count if they're both in the same spot and obviously together. If the first video is a hoax, the second video doesn't help its case, considering the two people are obviously friends.

The object is above a city, drops directly onto the city, then causes a very obvious flash and speeds away. Maybe we'll get some real different perspectives, but the two perspectives we have now can't really be considered "different" perspectives.

I know that sounds like someone who just doesn't want to believe it's real, but I can't just jump onto it because two people in a group were able to synchronize two different videos taken from fifteen feet apart. I'll be waiting patiently for another vantage from a different place around (or in) the city. Hundreds of people must have seen this object, here's hoping there's a mass sighting report soon.

Dramier - Good job on the analysis. Your first debunk-debunk made me reconsider my initial agreement with the zoomed-original theory. Second debunk isn't quite as hard hitting. It'd be much easier to just create a CGI light source than to copy an existing light, so the original idea that you debunked wasn't a very good explanation to begin with. Great analysis though. It's rare to see someone put forth actual effort rather than "I believe this is real!"


Now, as for the video itself: If it's genuine, and the light is a real object and not hoaxed, it still does nothing to bring us any closer to understanding what's behind it. What is it? Aliens? Secret aircraft? Strange lightning phenomenon? We can't deduce the origin of the object with what we have in this (these) videos alone, so even if it's real it will have to be shelved along with all of the other "unidentifiable" pictures and videos.

Well in the first video there is a guy in the foreground recording the event on his cell phone. Isn't the second video likely the recording from the guy in the first videos cellphone? Would also explain the quality.

i agree that even 2 videos arent enough...they can be friends, you just record a clip from different part of the cities..you dont even have to recreate the ufo animation and lightning effect..you just scale and position it accordingly on both videos..IMO this IS FAKE AS HELL..

only the following can proof this right...

a) we have more incidents like this reported and documented

b) we wake up in the morning with a hell of a giant mothership hovering every continent in the World.

Originally posted by EsSeeEye
Two different perspectives doesn't really count if they're both in the same spot and obviously together. If the first video is a hoax, the second video doesn't help its case, considering the two people are obviously friends.

The object is above a city, drops directly onto the city, then causes a very obvious flash and speeds away. Maybe we'll get some real different perspectives, but the two perspectives we have now can't really be considered "different" perspectives.

I understand what you are saying, but just because they were both standing there at the same time, and both had the idea to film it at the same time, does *not* necessarily mean they were together and/or friends.

I know, for instance, that standing and seeing a scene unfold before me, that I, and several others starting imaging the scene at about the same time. None of us knew the other, and we each went home with our videos and pics. It was at a hot air balloon lift, but the point nonetheless is, we all imaged the identical things in different ways literally feet from each other. We even laughed and spoke to each other. Never seen them again, since.

Please contribute to the existing thread HERE. Both videos are already being discussed and analyzed on the existing thread. There is no need to have two threads on the same topic: UFO Over Temple Mount in Jerusalem Additional information regarding the UFO Over Temple Mount in Jerusalem can be added to the existing thread.

Closed.