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: 139
216
<< 136  137  138    140  141  142 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 05:47 AM
link   
That's not what it does at all.




posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 05:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by mirare

Originally posted by RexTheNavigator

Originally posted by mirare
Did you read what I wrote, I said IF. I think there is more evidence to support a hoax than not. How about you provide some links to show it isn't?



and if ya granny had b@lls she would be your grandad, do i really need to provide links to vids 1,2 & 4, the weathercam & the photos taken at street level?? please link me where anyone has posted a debunk video that proves it is all a hoax, or any one of those individualy.


Cut the insults please, my gran passed away very recently.
You do know where theburden of proof lies don't you?


well dont insult my intelligence to accept something based on general opinion rather than presented facts.
is this where you tell me to go back over and read through 200 pages of inconclusive "proof"?



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 05:51 AM
link   
No, this is where I tell you that it's up to you what you believe and as I have seen things like this myself I look at things my way.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 05:53 AM
link   
reply to post by mirare
 


fair enough.
also understand i am on the fence here i am willing to accept it is fake, i just need to be convinced, so someone please convince me.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 05:56 AM
link   
RexTheNavigator, can I ask, what difference would it make if this was proven to be a fake and vice versa?
Do you believe that there are events like this that are real, putting aside these videos for a moment?



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 06:03 AM
link   
reply to post by mirare
 




No, this is where I tell you that it's up to you what you believe and as I have seen things like this myself I look at things my way.


Hah. So your reasoning is that because you've seen it before, then this must be real and not a hoax ? What if it is a hoax ? Have you cosidered the possibility that it might be one ? Seems you're not weighing up both options very well to me.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 06:03 AM
link   
blah blah blah blah, sock puppet here, sock puppet there, blah blah, and so on.

In the interest of not letting this thread rage out of control like this one;

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I am going to step up to the plate. I am going to offer those who believe this video is real an opportunity of a lifetime. I will give anyone $1000, yes *$1000* in US currency if they can;

* get three academics or experts in this field from three separate institutions to verify that the footage is more likely to be real than fake. Not 99%, not 95%, just a measly 50.1%. Those three academics or experts cannot be anonymous, they must stake their name in order to make that 50.1% confidence and reasons to support that.

* Nominate any ATS moderator to hold the cash in trust. I will start with say $200 deposit now and $800 when the generous conditions are finalised

* ATS moderators must review the panel in an unbiased manner and provide transparent reasoning behind why he selected those three. They must have expertise in relevant field and neutral. Mods will also be compensated with a few bottles of choice red wine from downunder.

What do you reckon? This will get the fire raging again no doubt. Skeptics up for wild ride?
(btw, i mean skeptics in the context of just this video)

ps: i got the feeling the mods are going to move this thread to the Barbara Streisand section LOL
edit on 8-2-2011 by pezza because: add word



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 06:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Marsoups
reply to post by mirare
 




No, this is where I tell you that it's up to you what you believe and as I have seen things like this myself I look at things my way.


Hah. So your reasoning is that because you've seen it before, then this must be real and not a hoax ? What if it is a hoax ? Have you cosidered the possibility that it might be one ? Seems you're not weighing up both options very well to me.



What are you going on about? I have said I think it's a hoax.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 06:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by mirare
RexTheNavigator, can I ask, what difference would it make if this was proven to be a fake and vice versa?
Do you believe that there are events like this that are real, putting aside these videos for a moment?


yes i believe events like this can take place orbs, light anomalies etc. i have seen orb formations in the sky with my own eyes, do you think they are all fake?



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 06:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by RexTheNavigator

Originally posted by mirare
RexTheNavigator, can I ask, what difference would it make if this was proven to be a fake and vice versa?
Do you believe that there are events like this that are real, putting aside these videos for a moment?


yes i believe events like this can take place orbs, light anomalies etc. i have seen orb formations in the sky with my own eyes, do you think they are all fake?


NO, I don't think they are all fake. I'm just not sure about this particular event for some reason.
Thanks for answering.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 06:09 AM
link   
THought I'd throw a conspiracy theory into the works..

I had a look at some of the newsweb youtube clip of the event, this one here :


They have recently put in text on one of their clips this message (I might have missed this before, perhaps it's been there a while but last time I had checked I read that they had got a hold of at least one witness) :




"On Sat 28th Jan (US Time) All New Web exclusively broke the story of a UFO sighting in Jerusalem that might be the most sginificant one ever. We have now spoken to witnesses of all three genuine videos ( the "We get 'em all the time in Mississippi" one being a fake planted by agents) and belive they are genuine. A cover-up is now being planned to debunk the entire event. Multiple Jerusalem residents are coming forward to claim they saw flashes of light at the time of this alien visitation. A weather camera captured light over the Dome of the Rock at the exact moment. We report this event honestly at great risk to ourselves however are determined to get the truth out: We are not alone in the universe, are being visited by aliens. Our leaders know it and are lying to us. Michael Cohen www.--.com"


Something about them 'being in contact with the witnesses' is ringing alarm bells for me.. Anyone else ?



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 06:09 AM
link   
If it's a hoax, it's a very good one, hats off to whoever made it, you should be working Hollywood, If it's real...I hope they haven't come to drink our Brains, and I don't mean the beer :-)



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 06:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by mirare

Originally posted by RexTheNavigator

Originally posted by mirare
RexTheNavigator, can I ask, what difference would it make if this was proven to be a fake and vice versa?
Do you believe that there are events like this that are real, putting aside these videos for a moment?


yes i believe events like this can take place orbs, light anomalies etc. i have seen orb formations in the sky with my own eyes, do you think they are all fake?


NO, I don't think they are all fake. I'm just not sure about this particular event for some reason.
Thanks for answering.


well I am unsure also that is why I would like to know for certain, although many on here can tell me it is a proven hoax nobody has come forward with the proof.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 06:13 AM
link   
I think it's real because it was caught by many many many many different camera angles all over the place. If it was just ONE vid, then sure. Fake. But I saw at least 4 different views of it and it all did the same thing. shrugs.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 06:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Marsoups

Something about them 'being in contact with the witnesses' is ringing alarm bells for me.. Anyone else ?


All of the witnesses have agreed to talk to Jaime Maussan



Jaime Maussan is flying over to Jerusalem to interview all of the video takers 1, 2, 4, as well as to contact other witnesses, or to collect other film evidence (say from security cameras), so we should learn more soon.


But there is other news here: www.ufo-blogger.com...




Today we have receive another email according to which the maker of Temple Mount video has admitted that his video is a hoax to the Israeli channel 2 news. Still waiting for news link..



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 06:17 AM
link   
Has anyone conclusively identified the flash that scared off the UFO in the Palestinian version? That flash was absent in the Mississippi mama version.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 06:18 AM
link   
reply to post by sarra1833
 


The answer to that is teamwork. Here is the 3D graphic of the ship hovering, and launching off... Use your graphical experise and get them all to synch up based on the supplied graphic.

If it where the case that not one flaw was spotted in the footage, multiple witnesses came speaking about it, would it not seem a little more plausible to you ? I think there are some very good points about the clips here that so far nobody has managed to argue plausible alternatives against ( minus Masks' idea that they're all still images, which I think he took a bit too much to that idea but I don't agree with him on that, to me that was a longshot compared to the other evidence supplied.)



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 06:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by RexTheNavigator

Originally posted by Slipdig1
I read the lot and you guys haven't debunked it. You just keep going on with claims that this could happen and this should happen!

which is why i gave up around the 50 page mark, did anyone put forward even a decent case for debunk in your opinion?



why did you quote that i gave up around page 50? I didn't. Many have put forth good cases, but many others have also put good cases forth for it to be real. I'm not saying it is real or not. It just hasn't been debunked.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 06:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by RexTheNavigator
reply to post by RexTheNavigator
 


I see i was spot in my prediction that his curiosity would not be approached in the same manner ours is


this outweighs any debunk i have seen so far..


Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Okay... sorry for not being able to jump in on this until this evening. I was traveling on business last week, and as a result, my weekend belonged to Mrs. Overlord.



Of the four videos, the "fourth" is the most intriguing to me... and shows little if any evidence of tampering or fabrication (in my opinion).

For reference, I obtained a decent quality original of the video using "keepvid.com" and have made it available here:
temple-ufo-4.mov (12 mb).

I've also applied some stabilization to the important sequences of the two flashes and the ascent of the "object" here in this animated GIF to preserve clarity:

While I'd like to have a much better quality original, there does appear to be an indication that light from the object is having an effect on the surroundings, consistent with the objects motion and "flashes."

Now, it's certainly possible that someone skilled with desktop video software could produce this, but the effects are subtle -- someone creating hoaxes tends not to be so subtle.


There it is.


If there are definitive aspects debunking this video that I've missed -- I'm sorry. I haven't been able to read this entire thread in one evening.

edit on 8-2-2011 by RexTheNavigator because: (no reason given)


im sorry, "seems to"?, youre kidding me right?

Go back here and read this post, www.abovetopsecret.com...

In that analysis theres is no "seem to", there is no conservative language or hedging. I state with 100% certainty there is no additional information revealed by the burst of light. I used contrast as the quantitative parameter to objectively determine that there is no new information about the terrain revealed. By definition, contrast is information, without it you would only have a 1 colour image. All black or all white. When you take an image with your DSLR, how does your camera tell you that it is configured to take an image of the scene with the maximum about of actual information possible? It uses contrast as the defining principal to drive the ultrasonic motor to lock the plane of focus onto the subject you are taking an image off. How does that contrast exist in that camera? It is given a value. What is it doing? It is varying 1 parameter (the focus ring) to achieve the maximum contrast possible. How does it do this? It performs a measly 1 parameter optimisation (could be more but lets not complicate this).

To be honest I want to smash my camera into the ground right now. I mean seriously, if I was a DSLR camera and knew my owner thought that way I would deploy my legs and run back to the company i came from.


edit on 8-2-2011 by pezza because: add word

edit on 8-2-2011 by pezza because: add joke

edit on 8-2-2011 by pezza because: more words



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 06:26 AM
link   
I added two extra CGI flashes to the video:



Once you try to recreate the flashes your self in Adobe After Effects, you can clearly see that it indeed is a CGI hoax first hand.
edit on 8-2-2011 by gift0fpr0phecy because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
216
<< 136  137  138    140  141  142 >>

log in

join