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: 88
216
<< 85  86  87    89  90  91 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 01:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by ExCloud
reply to post by Mr Mask
 


Also I would like to state we have not waved this off as evidence. I have stated many time this is good evidence but not concrete evidence. The Audio as of now means nothing because either way as the guy has shown audio can be different. Audio Means nothing to the video at hand.

I want video 1,2 to be shown to be hoaxes video 1,2 im not asking 3,4


I agree in it not being conclusive. But I think that is due to us not knowing the facts. I personally think it rings as "dead on truth" what Debo shows. But allow a level of error in my own understanding- cus really- what am I?

A guy who thinks he knows sound from using it. Nothing more. I may be wrong.

I'd bet a house on it, saying I'm not...but thats just how strong I feel about it. I've been wrong before, so I won't cry if I'm wrong here.

I really would like an educated view on this that concludes his findings or shows actually how this is possible from two different mics.

As for the other clips...I personally care more about clips one and two.

Since proving anything later as a hoax can be discredited as a copy cat event.

But, I do support anyone trying to validate or disprove clip 4 as well.



edit on 5-2-2011 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by jboogienoj
 


Ive asked the same thing man no lie. This is why I am not sure on anything. I would like our members from that area or use to claim to be from that area to speak up that might end this.



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 01:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Mask

Originally posted by ExCloud
reply to post by Mr Mask
 


Also I would like to state we have not waved this off as evidence. I have stated many time this is good evidence but not concrete evidence. The Audio as of now means nothing because either way as the guy has shown audio can be different. Audio Means nothing to the video at hand.

I want video 1,2 to be shown to be hoaxes video 1,2 im not asking 3,4


I agree in it not being conclusive. But I think that is due to us not knowing the facts. I personally think it rings as "dead on truth" what Debo shows. But allow a level of error in my own understanding- cus really- what am I?

A guy who thinks he knows sound from using it. Nothing more. I may be wrong.

I'd bet a house on it, saying I'm not...but thats just how strong I feel about it. I've been wrong before, so I won't cry if I'm wrong here.

I really would like a educated view on this that concludes his findings or shows actually how this is possible from two different mics.

As for the other clips...I personally care more about clips one and two.

Since proving anything later as a hoax can be discredited as a copy cat event.

But, I do support anyone trying to validate or disprove clip 4 as well.




Thanks for the post this is what I am getting at I love his work I am not trying to tell him you know he did garbage work or what not he didnt. Its not concrete or conclusive. We need to kill the video itself. I am not a believer in these videos I just want the evidence.

3,4 meaning less to me. Once 1,2 are debunked it kills them all.



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 01:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pinke


Just perhaps seems like you maybe went to a lot more effort than was necessary.



yeh, i can understand that. My approach to R&D, especially when getting into a field that has a certain knowledge gap from my existing knowledge is to develop a conceptual model from first principles. Its hard work and it is a personal trait that is extremely valued in R&D. The overwhelming majority of researchers have bias towards using a blend of existing knowledge and 'networking' first to make quick impact in a certain area. But what happens is that most of these researchers will penetrate the subject to a very limited depth (this trait also has its place in R&D too). The one that spends more time developing an understanding from first principles will take longer to make measurable impact. But in the end, the contributions to that field are usually the ones that will make the greatest impact and advance that field immeasurably, the so called 'leaps'.


I will give the following example of above that is roughly related. Quite a long time ago I worked on a project that involved research and design. The product developed was patented and one of its kind. With some development work we created high volume manufacturing process for this device. It truly represented a leap in this field.

Then some guys in China used existing knowledge and networking to not only clone the product, but find cheaper materials to make it from, marginally reducing its reliability but significanlty reducing cost. They even copied all our mistakes. They had no intention of understanding how it worked or what it did. But they made quite a buck out of it. In the end we got screwed. An neat contrast between scientific innovation and engineering.


edit on 5-2-2011 by pezza because: add story



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 01:47 AM
link   
WHAT IS DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE?

Overview

Demonstrative evidence is a tool of persuasion. It clarifies and simplifies points. It helps the jury understand the issues raised at trial. Demonstrative evidence can be as simple as a word written on butcher paper in front of a jury or as elaborate as a three dimensional animation.



Accident Reconstruction Boards
Expert testimony can be confusing. To clarify the technical testimony, boards that visually explain the expert’s opinions are often useful. On occasion, multiple boards are used to explain different aspects of the accident or the accident avoidance sequence.
Click here to see an example of an Accident Reconstruction Board.

Celebration of Life Videos
When someone dies, he or she leaves behind loved ones who continue to suffer a loss. To enable the jury to understand who the decedent was and how much he or she meant to the family left behind, that person’s story must be told. To assist the jury in getting to know the decedent, photographs, letters, cards and home videos an be collected, edited and videotaped to show the jury.

Closing Argument Boards
After the evidence has been presented to the jury, the attorney has the right to give closing argument. Some trials are over in days, while others may go on for months
Using boards to illustrate the points the attorney is making during closing will help the jury understand the points.
Computer Animation
If one picture is worth a thousand words, a computer animation can tell the entire story. Computer animations can allow the jury to see the accident through the eyes of the plaintiff, the defendant or a third person.

Day in The Life Video
Although people can intellectually understand the effects of crippling injuries, a day in the life video can allow the jury to see what a person with those injuries has to endure 24 hours a day. Activities of daily living that we take for granted can be a struggle for someone with catastrophic injury. The jury needs to understand the full extent of the plaintiff’s injuries in order to award the compensation the plaintiff deserves.

Enlargements
In any case, even those with thousands of exhibits, there may be three or four documents that are the key to success. In these few documents, the crucial information may be limited to a few words or sentences. Highlighting and enlarging these points will allow the jury to concentrate on what is important.
A document or a deposition or trial transcript may contain too much information. Taking excerpts from lengthy documents and displaying that to the jury will help them focus on the important information.
Click here to see examples of Excerpts.

Graphs and Charts
Graphs and charts can assist the jury in making sense out of testimony or voluminous documents. Graphs can often tell the story much better than the most eloquent speaker. Charts can also help the jury focus on the important issues in a case.

Jury Instructions
At the end of the trial the Judge will read a number of instructions to the jury. It can take as little as 15 minutes or as much as an hour for the Judge to read to the jury the law they must follow. Enlarging the important Jury Instructions and using them during Closing Argument is an effective way to demonstrate why the jury should vote in favor of the client.
Marking Pen and Butcher Paper
Sometimes less is more. A simple line drawing can explain what happened. A simple word written on the board can often sum up the motive behind a defendant’s action.

Mechanism of Injury Animation
Sometimes using a still illustration does not fully express how an actual injury occurred. In these circumstances it may be helpful to use an Accident Reconstruction Video.

Medical Illustrations
Medical testimony in personal injury and medical malpractice cases can be confusing. Custom designed medical illustrations assist the jury in understanding technical expert testimony.

Models
Anatomical models and specially created models depicting an accident scene or a defective piece of equipment that is used during the testimony of an expert witness and during closing argument can often emphasize a point more than an illustration.
.

Photographic Enlargements
If one picture is worth a thousand words, the photo shown to the jury must be large enough for all the jurors to see and appreciate.

Timelines
Certain cases require the jury to understand not only the final event but what led up to it. At times the events may span years or decades. A timeline is a visual aid for the jury to track the events in a chronological order.

Medical Illustrations
Medical testimony in personal injury and medical malpractice cases can be confusing. Custom designed medical illustrations assist the jury in understanding technical expert testimony.

Models
Anatomical models and specially created models depicting an accident scene or a defective piece of equipment that is used during the testimony of an expert witness and during closing argument can often emphasize a point more than an illustration.
Photographic Enlargements
If one picture is worth a thousand words, the photo shown to the jury must be large enough for all the jurors to see and appreciate.
Timelines
Certain cases require the jury to understand not only the final event but what led up to it. At times the events may span years or decades. A timeline is a visual aid for the jury to track the events in a chronological order.

Conclusion

How one displays demonstrative evidence is dependant upon the evidence one wishes to introduce and the physical limitations of the courtroom. One or more easels can be placed in the courtroom to display demonstrative evidence boards. Demonstrative evidence can also be displayed on projection screens or television monitors using PowerPoint, Elmo, DVD or video.

Considerable care should go into deciding the type of demonstrative evidence to use, as well as the information to display. Too much information can confuse the jury. Too much demonstrative evidence can diminish its effectiveness. Demonstrative evidence that isn’t accurate is worse than no evidence at all.


Having an enormous amount of evidence presented let's submit the evidence to the jury:

ATS what say you? Hoax or real?



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 01:48 AM
link   
reply to post by QuantumDisciple
 


Has David Biedny been on this thread and I missed it? I have him as a friend on fb and was considering asking him to look more closely at #4. Should I?


I would really like to hear hear his assessment, wouldn't ya'll?



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 01:50 AM
link   
Being new to ATS I was wondering what it means if one of the stars in the upper left of a members reply turns blue? Is there a legend somewhere for this stuff.



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 01:50 AM
link   
reply to post by DeboWilliams
 


I have followed your directions I have wiki'd db I have read more on audio thanks to you just to make sure man. Trust me I wouldnt shoot you down for 100% proof if this was. I circled them area's to show the differences. It shows the audio isnt the same and audio can be messed with either way if you are right good if I am right good.



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 01:52 AM
link   
These videos were nothing more than a school project.

Think about this. The first 2 videos were released which have a sense of being genuine. Within a day or two 3 more videos of the same event are released, which for the most part are fake.

This should tell you that apparently it's not very hard and time consuming to create a hoaxed video of a light hovering and speeding away.

If any of these are fake, then they are all fake.

Edit to add-
IOW the fake videos prove that this whole thing is fake
edit on 5-2-2011 by PhotonEffect because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 01:52 AM
link   
reply to post by jennybee35
 


Have him look at 1,2 not 4 I dont care about 4 as a lot of us do not.



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 01:54 AM
link   
reply to post by pezza
 


I starred that post. I must admit though, the stuff you are speaking about often slipped into areas that baffle me. But the physics side sat well with me, and I have also pointed out how nothing is actually illuminated by this light.

There have been a few posters here who have pointed out issues with the flash, and I agree with them wholeheartedly. The light doesn't behave in way I would expect them to do. But, light is often unpredictable in how it reflects and acts, so I know people can argue that.

In my amateur act of observation- yes, the light seems to not play right and looks very very fake.

I can not prove that.
So I do not attach my entire case to that evidence as "conclusive".

But, there are members here and elsewhere who have stated they think finding the real "fakeness" behind this is probably in the light.

I agree...but have no way of testing or proving this theory.

MM



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 01:54 AM
link   
reply to post by PhotonEffect
 


Thats where you are wrong my friend. Know matter what if someone comes out with a real video of something someone will copy it for the hits on youtube. Also they will copy it just for the sake of trying to copy it.



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 01:59 AM
link   
reply to post by ExCloud
 


really?

can you please show me an instance when 3 or 4 different people copied a random ufo video within 5 days of the first videos being released??




edit on 5-2-2011 by PhotonEffect because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 01:59 AM
link   
The thing is, nothing else is going to pop up. Theres nothing else to be had from the first 2 videos. In fact, for debunking OR proving, the best thing you could ask for is 2 videos from the same vantage point.

Why? to collaborate what each other is experiencing. Yet clearly between 2 videos we have so many anomalies that its mind boggling this thread is still going on after over 160+ PAGES.

The videos do not collaberate each other. Maybe 1 light missing, ok a tree in the way, Video 1 only has 2 flashes of light, yet video 2 has 3, maybe you could chalk it up as frame rate differences?

But we are talking about EVERYTHING WE SEE AND HEAR are not matching each other EXCEPT THE DAMN ORB.

Why is it so hard to believe that these aren't real.

You have, progressive and interlaced artifacts in the same video. You have audio that has been copied and altered, you have lights GONE, you have light flashes coming from nowhere, not making sense, parallax issue, we have the first person to post the damn video state he was the one who filmed it YET HE WASNT.

Lets not get on the little minute details, lack of contact with parties involved, Eligael being friends with a person who directs FILM for a living, also is a friend with someone who clearly loves Adobe After Effects, one of the kids from video 4 is a amateur music producer (explains the amateur mistakes in the audio).

There isnt 1 nail in the coffin, the damn coffin has been completely nailed shut and is waiting to get buried!

If the audio isnt 100% proof enough for you (honestly if it's not, your holding out for false hopes, because the audio is), then it should atleast be 80% on your scale, the OBVIOUS rest of it should take care of the 20% of doubt.

People have been sent to the chair with less info
edit on 5-2-2011 by DeboWilliams because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 02:03 AM
link   
reply to post by ExCloud
 


I asked him to look at all but #3. He already had the other ones posted on his wall, and he seems to consider them authentic. He considers #3 a total hoax, as well. I hope to hear something in the morning, if he is receptive.

I also invited him to join us here and sent him a link, so with any luck, he'll show!



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 02:05 AM
link   
seriously though- use logic here

all these videos generally look the same. they all share the same background and lighting effects.

so if you've determined that any one of these videos are fake, then how can they not all be fakes?



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 02:06 AM
link   
reply to post by DeboWilliams
 


I would put video 2 maybe just maybe 40% debunked with your audio like i said I have not discredited it. it is the only substantial piece of evidence for video 1,2 the rest can be argued a lot more then your audio can thats why I say great find. Video 1 still has not been debunked at all. Its an amazing video fake or real. Video 2 the guy if its real F'd up he should have stayed back next to the guy. Thats if its real but i understand you would want to get a closer zoomed in, These videos are great I have said from the start go back to page where ever and you will see the only videos I have really defended are 1,2 because they hold the most legit facts. Though I still ask please debunk them conclusively.

I want them debunked trust me I dont grab for straws and havent been at all.



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 02:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Mr Mask
 


He says it's the wind, the wind is that precise. Or the combination of 2 microphones which we do not know the models of.




posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 02:07 AM
link   
reply to post by jennybee35
 


Thanks can you have him mostly study 1,2 as 3,4 to me well dont matter even if 4 was real I dont care. debunk the first series that were "together"



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 02:10 AM
link   


it's a bunch of little kids trying to figure out how the magician pulled a bunny out of his hat.

ewww, he's good

good night guys...



new topics

top topics



 
216
<< 85  86  87    89  90  91 >>

log in

join