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: 180
216
<< 177  178  179    181  182  183 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   
No, I don't mean why is the response out of control. I mean why is the hoax itself so out of control - when it would be more convincing otherwise.

And i still think it's annoying when you guys make huge assumptions about what this sighting would have been like if you were there, and how many people would have seen it and reacted at the time. Considering we haven't found one local account of someone being in area and not seeing it...meanwhile there were 2 locals who said they did see it in a forum. Could have been faking, yes, of course. But I think you'd see response either way - people wanting to believe there, just as they would want to believe here.

If there weren't so many elements of this that suggested cover up - the other UFO sightings and compelling news stories coming out right now that aren't getting any attention (maybe it is all a hoax, but to cover up real sightings), the Jerusalem live web cam videos no longer loading, this very thread going down, the blog post about the YouTube cover up going down, the media in unison about it being a hoax or marketing stunt well before verdict was out, etc etc etc

You guys love speculating about how the witnesses would behave in this situation, as if if they don't behave in the way you suspect...the event must not have happened. And yet you refuse to analyze the odd behavior of the hoaxers.
edit on 11-2-2011 by hootlj because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   
If anything, I'm trying to rule out my suspicions.

A poster here said they got the past webcams to work...but I need to see screen shots. Didn't work for coworker. Still not working for me. Used to work for me. What's going on here?



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 


Yes and they look at pixels. Who knows what happened to the vids before they uploaded them
I looked at content and analyzed the content and found anomalies that are not possible to embed in the videos so easy.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   
And I'm sorry...but two of THE best anti-hoax sites...this very thread...and the only other evidence we have to investigate, the live web cam videos going down...


Could be coincidence. But I would go so far as to say that is "evidence" of cover up, which would mean it would make sense to look at all the video analysis from that angle, too. You guys just don't seem to be doing that at all. Most sites I've been going to are pro-hoax, they're not disappearing.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by hootlj
 


Are you Linda Moulton Howe by any chance? You sure do remind me of her. You seem to tip toe around proof of it being a hoax just like she does on every other hoax. coughdronecough

This here is absolute proof that video 1 (the video that started it all and which came out first) is CGI:

www.youtube.com...

1: We can rule out lens artifact because the mirrored edges moves independently from the viewport. Any lens artifact would be locked in place with the viewport.

2: We can rule out film flaw, because there is no known film flaw that would mirror the scene in such a way as to create two perfect mirrors in a 90 degree angle, and move with the camera shake independently from the viewport.

3: We can rule out compression or data artifacts because there is no known series of events that could cause a perfect mirror of data which also moves with the camera shake independently from the viewport. Video is a series of images, which are a series of pixels, which are a series of bytes, in a specific order. There is no known artifact that could mirror bytes of data and move those bytes of data in unison with the visual movement of the image. The movement of the camera is not visible by looking at the bytes of data, as they are just random numbers. Only humans can perceive the movement, so there is no reason for the mirrored bytes of data to be able to move with the camera independently from the viewport in a 90 degree angle with straight edges.

4: There is no reason for anyone or anything to add the mirror effect to a legit video. There is no accidental way to do it either without knowing.

Video 1 without a doubt has been digitally altered. There is only one explainable function/algorithm that would mirror the data in such a way that is follows the movement of the camera and is independent form the viewport, and creates straight edges at a 90 degree angle. That is the motion tile effect set to mirror edges which is applied to the edges of a video which is being moved on the X and Y axis, and rotated on the Z axis, to create fake camera movement.

Video 1 (the video that started it all) is FAKE. This means video 2 is FAKE because the two are linked.

Both video 1 and video 2 also have many issues with lighting, and sound....

Video 3 is proven to be fake, and the picture used to fake it was found.

Video 4 has also been found to have many anomalies. Fake camera shake, fake motion blur, and fake lighting. Video 4 not only shows the same "red dots in the sky" as video 1, but also has the same advantage point (a full view of the city from a high place). Both videos have similar timing, lighting, vantage point, and effects such as fake camera shake. Video 1 and 2 and 4 are created by the same person.

ALL THE VIDEOS ARE FAKE.

All of the above can be confirmed if you study it and understand it your self. There is no way to refute it, if you think there is, go ahead and try.

edit on 11-2-2011 by gift0fpr0phecy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 01:02 PM
link   
gift0fpr0phecy

Thank you. I really do appreciate how you're able to simplify and clarify things for me. i think a lot of debunkers keep skirting our issues, as you guys think we keep skirting yours. So, it just goes in circles.

For the record, I want to believe in alien visitation, but I'll be relieved in many ways if this is all a big hoax. The idea of media getting together and sites going down does not make me feel good.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


Because sir it is being shot through a window/glass. Most cars have rear windows that are smoked or have a layer of ND(neutral density) in them. There was likely moisture on the glass of the interior wall of the window and likely dust on the exterior. Does this not make sense to you?

I agree the video is fake, just not for that reason.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   
However, since I'm still no video expert...I will do the best investigation I can on my own. Like trying to get those web cam screen shots! Since we just don't have the power to get a professional lab to publish comprehensive hoax, I still have to take everything you guys say with skepticism. Just cuz I don't know the lingo/the technicalities. So, please forgive if I try to find explanations for these non video anomalies.

edit on 11-2-2011 by hootlj because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   
You extracted subjective and alterable data from the videos that may have been caused by 1001 wacky cameras that are around and through all 1001 lowsy video editor programs that are available.. Then you judged the videos on that.
I extracted factual data from the videos and judge from there.


Period.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 01:08 PM
link   
puntito

See, this is why I have to judge video analysis with a very large grain of very large salt, but still with skepticism. Because even the debunkers disagree about even small details, even if they agree overall about big hoax. Which just shows me there is some subjectivity here and technical limitations.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Abductee001
This could all end tonight!
Can anyone tell me or give me a link to the Full Video, the one that shows the scene in the car?
I have the one from Nuro71777 posted 3rd Feb. tks!


How so abductee?

I know you are trying to trace the faces in the video to eligael's Youtube friends, but what exactly will that prove one way or the other even if you accurately identify them?

edit on 11-2-2011 by Logical one because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 01:10 PM
link   
Well, let's say that we could prove that 4th video with teh actors in them was a fake. Like let's say we have more evidence THAT video is a fake than the original video.

If we could link the original videographer to the faces in the 4th, you could actually make a better case for hoax.

Then again, the original YouTube account and Facebook stuff could be tampered with, too, but I agree - digging into those little details...you just never know what kinds of clues or info you could find.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 01:11 PM
link   
More info, the better...no matter what direction !!!



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by hootlj
However, since I'm still no video expert...I will do the best investigation I can on my own. Like trying to get those web cam screen shots!


Which web cams do you refer to hootlj?
edit on 11-2-2011 by Logical one because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by hootlj
 


I think you are overly obsessed with the cover up thing.

1: Many websites are posting information about the Jerusalem UFO, not all of them are going down.
2: People often post things then regret them later so they delete the post or blog or specific webpage.
3: Webcam servers go down ALL THE TIME when UFO fanatics think they are on to something. Everyone flocks to the website and bombards the webcam server with so many data requests that the server locks up and or becomes unavailable. Many server operators will even stop access to said webcam just to save their bandwidth usage from skyrocketing past their limits.
4: If it was a real event it would be impossible to cover up unless they delete videos from YouTube or stop access to YouTube, or take away cellphone cameras and video cameras, etc...

I think paranoia is getting the best of you.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 01:12 PM
link   
www.02ws.com...

Search past dates, maybe it'll work for you.



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 01:13 PM
link   
gift0fpr0phecy

May be true! I appreciate your response - that does make sense.

I will say how arrogant some of the debunkers were on this board, the board that went down for several hours, is one thing that didn't help my paranoia. Just crossing all my Ts, dotting my Is...
edit on 11-2-2011 by hootlj because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by hootlj
Well, let's say that we could prove that 4th video with teh actors in them was a fake. Like let's say we have more evidence THAT video is a fake than the original video.

If we could link the original videographer to the faces in the 4th, you could actually make a better case for hoax.

Then again, the original YouTube account and Facebook stuff could be tampered with, too, but I agree - digging into those little details...you just never know what kinds of clues or info you could find.


But even If you track down the faces how does that determine whether they were actors or whether they were genuinely there?
edit on 11-2-2011 by Logical one because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 01:16 PM
link   
It doesn't... but those are the only "faces"/people we have to work with on this whole thing. So, if they're behind the whole hoax...would it not be good to see who they're connected to? I mean aren't we big on revealing hoaxes?? haha



posted on Feb, 11 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   
And if the web cam has just stopped working for those reasons, though...it's literally just not loaded, I check multiple times a day every since it stopped....are you saying it just magically was working for that one ATS member??? Maybe that one ATS member just didn't do what I asked, versus lied...
edit on 11-2-2011 by hootlj because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
216
<< 177  178  179    181  182  183 >>

log in

join