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: 41
216
<< 38  39  40    42  43  44 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ExCloud
 


It could be a viral video done by some Islamic sect proclaiming the coming of the messiah. Point here most people talk about a movie viral that doubt it, if the video is fake it has to done by Islamic people.

If the video is real then this explain that UFO is link to ET from the past that has return.

I am not put any religion here because I myself not religious in any form.

I don not know the importance of Temple Mount all I know for what I read is a Islamic Temple.

If you want my opinion the whole 4 videos are fake.




posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by gift0fpr0phecy
So I studied the audio in the second video some more... On the other topic a while ago I mentioned that you can hear "stereo" issues going on.... so I'm checking again and there is a trove of proof that this is a hoax.

In the second video, if you use headphones, you can hear the audio manipulation straight out.. You can hear the right ear gets louder and the left ear gets softer, and you can hear it changing and shifting volume ear to ear... as far as I know cell phones cant do that.

Besides the issues Debo pointed out... there is a blatant mistake...

In the first video the guy1 holding the camera says "whoah, shhoohoho, sshh...", then the second guy2 in the foreground says something like "what da fu?" (but in a different language) right after...

In the second video, with the issues, you can hear guy1 faintly in the background say "whoah, shhoohoho," but the "sshh" part is played at a really high volume. Why did the volume of guy1s voice jump?? They made it sound like guy2 said "sshh what da fu?", but guy2 didn't say "sshh" that was guy1.

HA, this hoax is completely destroyed...


I am inclined to think that no:1's is a camcorder, no:2's,

www.phonegg.com...



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Al E. Inn
So basicly a UFO lit up several square blocks of a highly trafficked religious and tourist center inside a highly populated city with a brilliant flash. A brilliant flash in a city populated with citizens sensitive to brilliant flashes and bangs, and somehow not a single witness to the event has emerged other than anonymous video posters on youtube? Not a single employee of the religious center? Not a single bystander Really? Really?

Oh wait, the flash was a Men in Black forget flash impairing the memory of any witness.

Isn't it intuitively obvious to the casual observer that this is a hoax?



It was one in the morning most ppl would be asleep, ie have their eyes shut.
Those that did see a flash would likely pass it off as lightning.



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by AstroBuzz
Consider this....

The Utah UFO sighting happened THE DAY BEFORE the Jerusalem video was posted on YouTube. Since both videos are somewhat similar with the red lights and dropping of bright white plasma looking things, could that mean that it only took less than one day for someone to fake the Jerusalem videos to make it look like they were connected?

Carry on....


Precisely, good point and the right questions to be asking.

So the clarifty to hoaxers managed to close down the Utah Army bass to support their agenda, creating actual physical UFO type effects (just like those seen on video at Jerusalem) witnessed by many and even making it onto the news stations, all this to back up a non-phyisical video of the physical event that they were able to manifest the day ealier. Oh yes and in the mean time splemake 3 very clever videos (the last being the best).

Um are they alien hoaxers with super powers by any chance?????????

Come on debunkonairs, lets face it this is what you are asking us to swallow! Sorry but I know where my head is at, I can deal with it, can you?.
edit on 3-2-2011 by pharaohmoan because: spelling



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Hi Zorgon,

I think it can be done if indeed it is planned well, but why go through all this if there is not some consensus as to the production.

Is their aim to fool the likes of ATS type conspiracy sites?

To make the ultimate hoax video for the masses?

It just seems to me like a lot of production for a later little group get together saying, "cheers we fooled em"

Guz



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by ExCloud
 


I never said it comes out one ear but not the other, I said there is volume differences between each ear, and I am not talking about voices. I am talking straight out NOISE volume. One ear will play more noise than the other.... that is impossible unless the cellphone has multiple microphones, one for each left and right channel.

I know how sound works I am a musician and have been in and out of bands and recorded many times.

Cell phones only have one recording microphone. If you got a good phone sometimes they will have an extra noise cancellation microphone, but it is not used for sound recording. The only way to get the effect heard in video 2 is to play with the volume of each channel.

Yes, the voices do it too... It's basically like they failed at trying to throw the voice by making it play more in one ear.

They didn't fade in and out the volume difference, but instead did abrupt changes in volume. They used a step instead of a curve...


edit on 3-2-2011 by gift0fpr0phecy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by pharaohmoan
 


pharaoh, theres a thread for those, please keep the discussion of the UTAH video in it's thread. We're here to discuss THIS series of videos in Jerusalem



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:25 PM
link   
theres so many flaws but at the same time its a pretty good video for a hoax and there 3 viable povs on the footage :s



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Unknown Soldier
 


I am giving examples of why people might not go to the media. My reason I wouldnt go is because it would be pointless. People would deem it a hoax know matter what. I have read/looked into a lot of UFO stories and as of yet I have not seen one video that is nearly nearly as good as this. Its plausible its a hoax, but the people calling out a hoax already when the evidence its a hoax is not here.

I will usually be the first person to shoot down a ufo video. This one I just will not until the evidence says other wise. Video 1 stands as so far not one person can debunk it. The video that goes with it all you have is someone saying the sound is the same or whatever. We can not judge it based on sound I am sorry(I will still try to prove i can get the same effect just to see).

The other videos sure. They could be put out to basically kill off 2 real pieces of evidence.



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 


Iphone4 has 2 microphones ones for vlogging or image talking the other works like normal. Just so you know.



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by R_Clark
The fact that Sorcha Faal has posted this info to the disinfo site shows that there is some truth involved. More or less any event that ends up being quoted in a bizarre and curious way in Faal tells us that TPTW are putting efforts to discredit the event.

So my guess is that version 3 of the vid on the net was a disinfo.. version 4 with the voice over (but great video) another attempt.. and of course our hapless disinfo agent... Faal...

Must be important with so much efforts being wasted on this. It almost worked too.. with ATS first Hoaxing it..


Exactly, it's not over till the fat lady sings, lets not count our eggs and make an omlette of this just yet, stil early days.



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 


Exactly, it's a decent attempt because they tried to compensate for the location, but theres no fades at all, its sharp volume changes. If I did the video, I wouldve recorded the audio seperately, then you couldve added a edited copy to 1 then altered it for video 2 perfectly, then add in the street background noise overtop of it to completely cover up any minute flaws.



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by FlySolo
 


Hey, i Would just like to point out that in your weathercam evidence, when you say it appears on the 26th at the exact same time, yes the search bar says Jan. 26 2011, but the time and date on the camera still say January 28th.

Other than that...great find.



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by ExCloud
 


That makes no sense, you can judge it on sound, because clearly the sound is fake. I'm basically to the point to say, yall are just ignorant and don't really comprehend basic location placement in audio, I'm surprised ya'll are even able to walk / drive without bumping into a objects since your ears help your mind understand objects location relative to your head.

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



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Ashtrei
 


No... listen to video 2 really closely... only video 2... use headphones, specifically the ones that go inside your ear, and turn up the volume loud....

You can hear volume differences between each ear, and I am not talking about their voices only. You can hear the fuzz really quiet in one ear, and a loud fuzz in the other ear, and they abruptly switch. It moves around, and not in a way a stereo recorder would work.

At one point you can hear the traffic noise switch around... they ABSOLUTELY edited the sound, there is no doubt about it... they tried to fake surround sound, and fake the volume difference... basically they use the sound from the first video and edited it... no doubt about it...



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Guzzeppi
reply to post by zorgon
 


Hi Zorgon,

I think it can be done if indeed it is planned well, but why go through all this if there is not some consensus as to the production.

Is their aim to fool the likes of ATS type conspiracy sites?

To make the ultimate hoax video for the masses?

It just seems to me like a lot of production for a later little group get together saying, "cheers we fooled em"

Guz


Exactly, we should be thinking like homicide investigators, well kinda. How do we establish motive regarding this event? MOTIVE, MOTIVE, MOTIVE.


Could be a movie studio hyping us up ready for the next release of BATMAN!



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ExCloud
 


No.

The iPhone does have two microphones but one of them is for noise cancellation.... not recording.



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by AstroBuzz
Consider this....

The Utah UFO sighting happened THE DAY BEFORE the Jerusalem video was posted on YouTube. Since both videos are somewhat similar with the red lights and dropping of bright white plasma looking things, could that mean that it only took less than one day for someone to fake the Jerusalem videos to make it look like they were connected?

Carry on....
edit on 3-2-2011 by AstroBuzz because: (no reason given)



Originally posted by DeboWilliams
reply to post by pharaohmoan
 


pharaoh, theres a thread for those, please keep the discussion of the UTAH video in it's thread. We're here to discuss THIS series of videos in Jerusalem


Let the MODS decide that fellow newbie.



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by pharaohmoan
 


Why don't you gents with the sound variances of the vids post something that we can hear as an example of what you claim, instead of posting just words of what you hear?

I would like to better understand what your claiming.

Thanks



posted on Feb, 3 2011 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by DeboWilliams
 


You obviously do not. Like I said I will prove you wrong tomorrow. Stop trying to debate me on this till I am proven wrong or you are. Like I said why dont you test it and I test it. 2 different tests and see what our results come out as. You will not do this though. Well you do have a pretty bad mic judging by the video so we might not want to use that one.

When you test you need to do different angles of the mic etc. I will do the same lets do a set of 4 each? Also try and mimic them as much as possible.



new topics

top topics



 
216
<< 38  39  40    42  43  44 >>

log in

join