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: 37
216
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeboWilliams

Originally posted by ExCloud
reply to post by Unknown Soldier
 


The videos were taken by people who were 10 feet apart with 2 different cameras talking will be the same. Please go test this and prove me wrong that the audio should not be almost the exact same if not the same. That is all I ask of this audio.

As for saying 2-4 are a hoax or if they turn out to be then 1 loses all its flavor per say? No thats why people would make these diss info video's. To kill the real one off.


Yes, talking will be the same, noone is denying that. What wouldnt be the same is the volume levels.

Let's make this as clear as possible


If you and a friend was both recording a video at the same time, being across the street from each other, and he said HEY, then you said HEY, which would be louder in the video you recorded? And which would be louder on the video he recorded?

However in both videos at the part AFTER they both say woah, actor Bs (the guy who is seen in the first video recording with his cell phone) vocal volume is IDENTICAL in both videos. This is not possible unless the audio was from 1 source, and not 2 sources. Think back to my example again, and the conclusion YOU came to for that exercise.


I dare anyone to prove me wrong with FACTS not opinions.

Go for it.


If I knew someone who would record it with me i would prove you wrong. I would have my microphone a little lower in the background and I would have the guy in video 2 turn his settings up. Again it goes back to the phone you have. You say the guy in video 1's vocals stay the same, but the guys in video 2's his are louder in his own video. Correct? Thats how it came out in my headset.




posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeboWilliams

Originally posted by ExCloud
reply to post by Unknown Soldier
 


The videos were taken by people who were 10 feet apart with 2 different cameras talking will be the same. Please go test this and prove me wrong that the audio should not be almost the exact same if not the same. That is all I ask of this audio.

As for saying 2-4 are a hoax or if they turn out to be then 1 loses all its flavor per say? No thats why people would make these diss info video's. To kill the real one off.


Yes, talking will be the same, noone is denying that. What wouldnt be the same is the volume levels.

Let's make this as clear as possible


If you and a friend was both recording a video at the same time, being across the street from each other, and he said HEY, then you said HEY, which would be louder in the video you recorded? And which would be louder on the video he recorded?

However in both videos at the part AFTER they both say woah, actor Bs (the guy who is seen in the first video recording with his cell phone) vocal volume is IDENTICAL in both videos. This is not possible unless the audio was from 1 source, and not 2 sources. Think back to my example again, and the conclusion YOU came to for that exercise.


I dare anyone to prove me wrong with FACTS not opinions.

Go for it.


OK......................Hows this

After they say whoa, they both tilt their respective recording instruments up at the sky to capture the red lights, this then changes the microphones position from being in front of the cell phone, to on top of the cell phone, where prior to saying whoa the mic is blocked by the phone, that is the phone is between the mic and the guy behind, now there is a clear line of sight from the mic to the guy behind
in this scenario it seems possible that the cell phones mic would get better pickup of the audio behind
edit on 3-2-2011 by Ashtrei because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Unknown Soldier
 


I appreciate the tone of your response and I will consider the points you made carefully before offering any response in turn.


By God though, are we quoting comic books again? Is that a secret code for 'close the thread now please'..


I jest; it just reminds me of what happened at the end of the CSIMON thread. I ended up clicking on a link that took me to a free online e-book version of 'War & Peace'... (thanks for that Mor1arty..)



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 06:56 PM
link   
what if the first video and 2nd video were real and the others were faked to make it a cover up?

also what im thinking is that the LIGHT/UFO isnt a ufo.....
maybe just maybe it is a alien entite with in a forced type field shooting down with the motherships help(the red lights blinking in the other video)

AM I THINKING TO MUCH?



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
Reply to post by Unknown Soldier
 


Link on the Moscow Pyramid being a hoax?


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 






Once again a couple of people see a pyramid over a highly populated area and upload it to youtube. But nobody else notices...but wait
www.youtube.com...




Originally posted by paradiselost333
reply to post by Unknown Soldier
 

Man you seem hell bent on making people believe what you do
sorry pal I have my own opinion:@@
Is it me or does it seem if truth slapped us in the face we would just say it didnt happen, someone had to of faked it.


It is not my purpose to sway belief, im hell bent on being realistic that's for certain. You should not feel that way unless you are questioning your "beliefs" or belief system and im not about BELIEF. Im about logic and the facts. The facts that the perpetrators are laying low so to speak as this dog and pony show unwinds. If you feel threatened by logic and critical thinking then I apologize.




Originally posted by ExCloud
reply to post by Unknown Soldier
 


The videos were taken by people who were 10 feet apart with 2 different cameras talking will be the same. Please go test this and prove me wrong that the audio should not be almost the exact same if not the same. That is all I ask of this audio.

As for saying 2-4 are a hoax or if they turn out to be then 1 loses all its flavor per say? No thats why people would make these diss info video's. To kill the real one off.




Pay attention people....









Originally posted by Ashtrei
reply to post by Unknown Soldier
 


The audio in vids one and two will match, they are both taken at the same time from the same place, of course the dialog is identical.

listening to them both i dont see any problem, in one the voice nearer to cam one is louder, in the other the voice nearer to cam 2 is louder

Of course the dialog is identical, they were recorded at the same place and same time at a distance of about 10 feet apart



You did not watch debowilliams video? He demonstrated that it is the same audio track in both videos. I sugest you have a look at the video footage.




Originally posted by freelance_zenarchist
5th video is out, this is the final nail in the coffin people!!
Totally proves all the videos are REAL!!



Stop denying reality everyone.



It's real I take it all back, the moonites are here and they want youtube hits



You guys are going to be sorely disappointed when these Hoaxers decide to come out of the wood work






edit on 3-2-2011 by Unknown Soldier because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Ashtrei
 


I posted that video a page or so back, but I guess it got looked over with all the fighting going on haha. If you take a look at that video, nothing interesting happens, but it clearly shows how terrible the quality of his phone's videocamera is, which would basically debunk the parallax debunk of the first vid
check it out and see what I mean



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by ExCloud
 


No, in video 1, guy number 2 is at lets just say -10db, and guy number 1 is at -1db. This makes sense, he is closer to his own mic than the other guy.

In video 2, guy number 1 has been edited to -20db, but guy number 2 is still at -10db.



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Immortalgemini527
reply to post by Mr Mask
 
DISCLAIMER: Recently a very popular thread was sent to the Hoax forum, and various other threads based on the same event were deleted entirely from ATS (404ed).


This whole post reminds me of an addiction to drugs/aliens, it seems like people on here are so addicted to aliens and spaceships, that they will do almost anything to believe it, this whole video episode is so sad and pathetic, I threw up on my self.

I see why allot of people get tricked into ponze schemes and so many scams across the world, this video has really taught me that there is really not much to learn on the ats, especially if you can take trash out the trash and sell it to the nearest ‘alien head’ for a fix .Its really a sad day on the ats , really is .

I am selling hoax videos for sale to the highest 'alien head' for 10 dollars.
since the ats is a place for hoax videos and finding egnorance,why not.




Going once, going twice...SOLDDDD !








edit on 3-2-2011 by Immortalgemini527 because: (no reason given)


I just wanted to ask the mods, did one mod go over another mods head to let this trashy hokey ,hoary Hoxie thread come back ? Or was this a group effort, and decision by all mods? Or is this the new protocol for 2011 ,to accept ignorance ? Or is this a month of February amnesty NEW policy to pull a hoax thread out the garbage, and let it be redone regardless on by who or which individual has done it? Or is it about rank or who has been here the longest?

I just feel if one thread goes to the bin ,then the next duplicat one should to, regardless if its redone reedited rewritten etc etc etc .

In that case can you pull up the original.

[HOAX!]: Dedicated forum for ATS threads that have been proven to be hoaxes, frauds, or part of deceptive schemes on a variety of topics. Topics in this forum will range from those that have proven to be an actual hoax to those where a significant majority of ATS members believe the subject matter to be based on fraudulent material.Csimon

I just dont understand whats going on here ,it's a first for me to see this,thats all.


edit on 3-2-2011 by Immortalgemini527 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 07:01 PM
link   
Reply to post by enektyk
 


His excursions into After Effects produced a screen wide flash effect. The original videos show the flash to be localized, some even down to the pixel.

Therefore, the debunking video is incomparable.




 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Immortalgemini527
 


The answer you seek is in the tail end of the hoax version of this thread



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by pharaohmoan
[m

What I take from this video is that there was a brilliant flash - so enormous that it lit up several blocks of a populated religous center and tourist attraction in a heavily populated city. A city sensitive to explosions and flashes no doubt. And yet this brilliant illuminating flash is not reported or a source of concern for anyone other than a few videographers. And as yet no witnesses of this brilliant flash, including employees or people on the ground at the time, have come forward.
Based on this alone isn't it intuitively obvious this is a hoax? Shouldn't there have been dozens of people standing in or near where the flash occurred, yet not a single witness to the flash (that excited those who took the video hundreds of yards (miles) away) have come forward?
Really?



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 07:05 PM
link   
This audio evidence is crazy. Just watched the video and I can tell that the wave forms are similar but not exeact...just as it should be if two device were recording in the same area.



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeboWilliams
reply to post by ExCloud
 


No, in video 1, guy number 2 is at lets just say -10db, and guy number 1 is at -1db. This makes sense, he is closer to his own mic than the other guy.

In video 2, guy number 1 has been edited to -20db, but guy number 2 is still at -10db.


Im of the mind the change in audio can be explained by the fact that the cameras were rotated up towards the sky
where prior to the "whoa" they face the city, (with no direct line of sight between the ppl and the mics) after wards the mics are facing up and there is direct line of sight between the mics and the people



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Al E. Inn
reply to post by pharaohmoan
[m

What I take from this video is that there was a brilliant flash - so enormous that it lit up several blocks of a populated religous center and tourist attraction in a heavily populated city. A city sensitive to explosions and flashes no doubt. And yet this brilliant illuminating flash is not reported or a source of concern for anyone other than a few videographers. And as yet no witnesses of this brilliant flash, including employees or people on the ground at the time, have come forward.
Based on this alone isn't it intuitively obvious this is a hoax? Shouldn't there have been dozens of people standing in or near where the flash occurred, yet not a single witness to the flash (that excited those who took the video hundreds of yards (miles) away) have come forward?
Really?


If you were lying in bed at 1 am and were awake, and you saw a flash, wouldnt you just assume it was lightning ?



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by DeboWilliams
 



Short distance between the microphones.
Differences in the quality of the microphones.
Super-local external factors (wind-muffling, clothing movement)
Cheap audio processing technology (in terms of the cameras used - particularly the cellphone).
Distortions caused by digital compression during upload.



Any single one of the above, or a combination, could have led to the apparent anomaly. It is no mystery, and a weak argument. That's the whole point. The arguments are weak.

Another possibility: 'Intelligent' software causing the sound to be manipulated by the recording device in order to reduce background noises.

That one's the weakest I'm putting forward, because we have no way to prove or disprove it until the original recording devices are found and analysed. And how could we prove anything produced is the original recording device...? Mossad and/ or the CIA may already have been a-callin' at the doors of the witnesses.


This incident is compelling for a reason - it's so damn close to being the 'perfect' footage sought by UFOlogy.

Case still not closed.



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by pharaohmoan
 


great post dude!

this explains it right there. i dont know why people are still fighting about rather its real or not!
it is real guys!
deal with it.
i think we should get to the next level on this.
what do u think



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Quartza
This audio evidence is crazy. Just watched the video and I can tell that the wave forms are similar but not exeact...just as it should be if two device were recording in the same area.


I agree i hear nothing conclusive in the two audios that prove this was a hoax, they sound as i would expect them to sound under the circumstances described



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by enektyk
I haven't been following the debate over the last 24 hours but can someone explain to me why this is no longer listed as HOAX?

Was Hoaxkiller1's explanations for videos 1, 2 and 4 not enough? Not to mention the progressive/interlace issue brought up in the previous ATS thread.

How is this not a hoax?



Didn't you get the memo?
ATS decided to change it's motto from Deny Ignorance to Deny Reality.


Actually I've been reading all afternoon trying to figure out why this is no longer in the hoax forum.
laymanskeptic made a great post showing the 4th video contains both progressive and interlaced footage, then a couple of posts later Crakeur comes in locks the thread and sends everyone over here.



How is this not a hoax?



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Al E. Inn
 


Just a thought, but the time it spent hovering before it flashed and flew up into the air was only about twenty seconds. So far, all of the videos recorded it from a distance as opposed to right nearby the temple. When it was in the air before it floated down, I'm assuming it would have been easier to see it the farther away you were because of the angle you'd be looking towards the sky at. If you're by an overlook it would stick out at you, but if you were in the city, you most likely only would have seen the flash unless you were walking around with your head pointed straight up. And when it WAS over the temple, it was only for about twenty seconds. It's very possible that not a lot of people saw it, at least in my opinion.



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyInTheOintment
reply to post by DeboWilliams
 



Short distance between the microphones.
Differences in the quality of the microphones.
Super-local external factors (wind-muffling, clothing movement)
Cheap audio processing technology (in terms of the cameras used - particularly the cellphone).
Distortions caused by digital compression during upload.



Any single one of the above, or a combination, could have led to the apparent anomaly. It is no mystery, and a weak argument. That's the whole point. The arguments are weak.

Another possibility: 'Intelligent' software causing the sound to be manipulated by the recording device in order to reduce background noises.

That one's the weakest I'm putting forward, because we have no way to prove or disprove it until the original recording devices are found and analysed. And how could we prove anything produced is the original recording device...? Mossad and/ or the CIA may already have been a-callin' at the doors of the witnesses.


This incident is compelling for a reason - it's so damn close to being the 'perfect' footage sought by UFOlogy.

Case still not closed.






Na, not the case. Sorry but thats just not how audio works. Go out and record it for yourself and see. Because if I record it, people will still deny it. So you guys must do it on your own. Whip out your cellphone, call a buddy / sister / cousin / brother / mother and record it. I've spoonfed you guys enough, time to man up and actually put in some work



new topics

top topics



 
216
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join