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 Jerusalem: CONFIRMED HOAX

page: 125
216
<< 122  123  124    126  127  128 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Paradigm2012
 


Can you also explain the mirroring n the bottom of the clip?

No...you can't.

And no...that is not the hotel you speak of. I'll prove it if you wish.

MM




posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Mr Mask
 


I already proved its the hotel and not motion tiling. Sorry bud you can't win everytime, kind of like the Steelers you can win em all kid.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paradigm2012
reply to post by Mr Mask
 


I already proved its the hotel and not motion tiling. Sorry bud you can't win everytime, kind of like the Steelers you can win em all kid.


Please tell me how you proved the hotel that is "not in that location" appears in that location?

MM



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Paradigm2012
 



Originally posted by Paradigm2012
I proved that is a building. You cannot make up your own facts.


No, all you proved is that there happens to be a symmetrical building in the area. You didn't prove it actually is the building, and you actually ignored the mirroring effect happening to it, and the mirror effect on the bottom of the video...

The only thing you proved is your lack of understanding.


Originally posted by Paradigm2012
Now that I proved its a building you need to explain how the building can move?


That is not the building. You are wrong.. It is a mirror effect of a few lights and it just happened to make a similar shape as that building.. The building is not moving... motion tiling is making the lights converge to a single point.


Originally posted by Paradigm2012
Its obviously pixelation, 4th gen data loss compression,




You just made that up! 4th generation data loss compression?


Sorry, compression does not create a mirror effect. It doesn't move lights to new positions. The video is not 4th generation, and you can see the lights in the original UFO video.....



Originally posted by Paradigm2012
your GIF is only 1/1000 of a second long.


That is because it is only 3 frames taken from different parts of the original UFO video, and it was played in a loop with 10 millisecond each frame. If you play the original UFO video frame by frame you will see the lights move the exact same way...


Originally posted by Paradigm2012
any cellphone video, youtube video will have the blurring you just posted


Blurring? No... this is a mirror effect. No amount of compression can do what we see no matter how much you lie to your self.


Originally posted by Paradigm2012
its called pixelated artifacts from 3rd generation FLV video




It's not pixelated... It's not 3rd generation when it can be seen in the original video....



Originally posted by Paradigm2012
I proved its the building

and you cannot deny that


You didn't prove anything... Yes I can deny it.


edit on 7-2-2011 by gift0fpr0phecy because: incredible amount of typos



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Mr Mask
 


The Hotel is in that exact location. Sorry dude are going to have to really be tricky and deceptive this time and come up with something even more nonsensical than you did before.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paradigm2012
reply to post by Mr Mask
 


The Hotel is in that exact location. Sorry dude are going to have to really be tricky and deceptive this time and come up with something even more nonsensical than you did before.


Please post a clear photo of the hotel, and another showing its location in relation to Temple Mount. Thank you.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 


We now know that is a building that is symetrical not a mirror.
We now know that at least the left side of the video is not mirror tiled

I will work on the botttom tommorow but I have to go to work now.

BTW your 1/1000 of a second GIF clip proves nothing because data loss, and pixelation can cause what you see in your GIF

Fact ---That is the Hotel---

now that we are past that lets move on to something else.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 


If you continue to deny facts and data your only hurting yourself and making yourself loose the debate.

You cannot deny facts

you are not entitled to your own facts



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paradigm2012
reply to post by Mr Mask
 


The Hotel is in that exact location. Sorry dude are going to have to really be tricky and deceptive this time and come up with something even more nonsensical than you did before.


It is clear to me that you are playing a game.

I refuse to play it with you. You have been defending clips proven to be a hoax.

You have also been ignoring evidence presented to you proving these clips hoaxed.

MM



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Mr Mask
 


I have been talking about the data and the facts.

Is there something about facts that you don't like?



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by pezza
in summary, if a burst of light high up in the sky, having the most direct line of site to the most amount of terrain in the image, and is also about 10x brighter then any light in the video, and that light does not reveal any new features in the underexposed regions of the image, you really need to question what the role of light is in our universe.
...
But the fact that zero new information is revealed about the terrain (and emphasis on *zero*) tells me the light is 100% synthetic. I even went to the extent of characterising/parameterising this effect on not just one feature in the image but systematically to the entire image. Thats a bit heavy and over the top for a site like ATS but i think was worthwhile for some here that may want to take their debunking skills past qualitative only based assessments and occums razors. up soon to knock it off
edit on 7-2-2011 by pezza because: add paragraph





So I did my homework, and guess what. I'm inclined to agree and say video 4 was tampered with. I compared the two frames before and during the flash, and there is no indication of previously unlightened objects. Above that, only bright pixels seems to have been lightened. It's a simple brightness increase (HSL), not even Gamma. Btw, just for a little self marketing: I used my own software located on CodedColor.com for the comparison. extra DIV



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 11:03 AM
link   
when some one finely says " the videos were up loaded on jan 28-29 from X Yand Z
Here is there yt link to the videos that run 10-20 min then i will believe they are a "F" and "H" till then i will keep my proof to my self for i do not want it taped re filtered or copied, for no one seems to know were the first videos come from, not one of you have seen the hole the video HA HA HA. lol

edit on 7-2-2011 by bekod because: word corection



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Paradigm2012
 


The only one denying facts is you. You are denying evidence straight from the video that proves what you think is a building is in fact not... The lights are converging on a single point and no amount of compression will ever create that effect.

You are also ignoring the mirror effect on the bottom of the video. And you are ignoring the fact that the mirror effect on the side and the bottom are locked together perfectly on a 90 degree angle, and move together.

It is obvious to me as well that you are either playing a game, hopelessly in denial, or maybe not of sound mind. I will not waste my time on you any longer.
edit on 7-2-2011 by gift0fpr0phecy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by kazanoom


You've made the presumption that the audio is from one device and meticulously muddied up for use with the cheaper cellphone and really you have not proved anything other than your lack of knowledge regarding psychoacoustics and audio. It is true about the audio level compression, reflections etc.. but also it's apparent by the video quality of the second that it is a cheaper phone and invariably will have lesser quality mic and A/D converters which accounts for the ambiance, more artifacts and generally murkier capture. Keep grasping at straws.


Oh yea, wheres your proof that shows this to be the case? I'll wait.

Thats the point, yall keep trying so hard to throw your bs empty statements in my directions, with nothing to back it up. Yall have yet to show me HOW this is possible, show me a example that would account completely dismiss what I've proven. Know why you won't be able? because it just not possible and you keep fishing in the dark.

But I'll tell you what you will do, you'll simply respond with another useless, baseless statement that holds nothing more then your ignorant opinion.

Please, please, please prove me wrong.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 11:21 AM
link   
People - PLEASE concentrate on video 4, if you still want to argue. Who cares about the other 3 - debunk the least controversial one, and we're done !!

I think pezza has done the best job with his scientific analysis. He caused me to analyze the flash frames of video 4, and even though the mind WANTS to believe, the evidence points to a fake. You have to do a pixel analysis, otherwise you'll always be fooled. It's a good optical illusion, but an illusion is a fake nevertheless.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by time2fly
 


I already analysed video 4.

www.youtube.com...

I found that camera shake is fake. The camera zoom matches CGI zoom. The lighting on the dome is really easy to do. Also, the flashes can pretty much be reproduced using a 3D light in After Effects.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by time2fly

* Video 1: Agreed, the (still?) image has been extended to the left and bottom in order to add pixels for a camera shake. I don't see pixels "sucked in" at the axis, like some of you demonstrated, but nevertheless - a mirror fake is a fake.
* Video 2: If video 1 is a fake, this implies video 2 is also a fake.
* Video 3: hahah… i guess I have to go to Mississippi to find out more
* Video 4: ok, this is where I disagree with many of you. Let me explain:



If video 1 and 2 are fake, then video 4 is fake just by default. Why?

1. Video 1 and 2 was uploaded 4-5 days before video 4
2. Video 1 and 2 would have to have known the exact length of time, and the exact pattern of red lights / how many times they blink
3. Video 1 and 2 creators would've have to have known the intervals of the flashings of lights

All of this before the 4th video was uploaded

This would mean either 3 things

1. Video 1 and 2 creators actually recorded the event, then decided to fake it before anyone had the chance to know about it
2. Video 1 and 2 had to have pre knowledge of the event AKA Aliens themselves
3. It never happened

Honestly...........



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by time2fly
 

you see this is the problem no one knows when the videos went to You tube for web release now if we know when that is to say what time they went up on YT, then you know what order they are in.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by time2fly
 

you see this is the problem no one knows when the videos went to You tube for web release now if we know when that is to say what time they went up on YT, then you know what order they are in.


We dont know exact times, but we know the dates

Video 1 January 29, 2011
Video 2 January 30, 2011
Video 4 February 01, 2011



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 11:50 AM
link   
I don't know if this has been posted if so I apologize, but to just add to the intrigue read this. Maybe it's baby Jesus lol.

www.haaretz.com...



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
216
<< 122  123  124    126  127  128 >>

log in

join