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.

 

Dome Of The Rock UFO: Hoaxes Are Easy - Extended Discussion.

page: 10
159
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Well I have personally enjoyed all the debates and threads, closed or open. Seeing what the members strip away frame by frame the faults and nuances of each vid in turn.

Yep it was like reading a short story by Arthur Conan Doyle with pictures. LOL

Hope to enjoy more debates in the furture a sort of cat and mouse game between the hoaxers and he debunkers.

Thoroughly enjoyed it.





posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:26 PM
link   
The people who say that this does not prove that the vids are fake, are missing the point.

It dosnt prove that they are fake, but it PROVES that thoes vids are NOT proof. If its possible to fake, then you cant take it as proof, simple as that. The sad truth is, there are many people out there who loves to try and fool people like this, so we have to be much more critical when looking at the countless of vids comming in.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:27 PM
link   
I appreciate your intent, but honestly your recreation looks nothing like the Jerusalem UFO videos. Your recreation wouldn't have fooled anyone.

Also, there are 4 videos of this event. Proving one as a hoax doesn't prove the others to be hoaxes. A standard smear campaign is to introduce one bad apple into a barrel - they all stink by association.

There were, apparently, lots of witnesses. I would like to hear from them.

I'm not utterly convinced of this "hoax" just yet.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by FOXMULDER147
 


You keep saying there were witnesses, why do you think that? There's ZERO credible witnesses that have come forward out of the hundreds, if not THOUSANDS, that should have.

The streets should be packed with the faithful waiting for the next "sign", they aren't. Don't feed the hoaxers.


Springer...



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by FOXMULDER147
 


Of course your not convinced its a hoax, your Fox Moulder for Whatzits sake! You need Scully to try and balance you out a bit.....and by that, yes, I mean have sex with you.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
I appreciate your intent, but honestly your recreation looks nothing like the Jerusalem UFO videos. Your recreation wouldn't have fooled anyone.


It looked better then the originals and more believable imo. If i was a blind believer I would have fell for it hook line and sinker.But i have seen enough countless CGI videos more realistic then the Jerusalem fakes to even spot the not.




Also, there are 4 videos of this event. Proving one as a hoax doesn't prove the others to be hoaxes.


If i upload a car pile up accident involving a semi and 3 cars created with CGI and it gets debunked, then a few days later another video surfaces from the same location and different angle that looks more fake then the first one would that make it more real? Any more plausible? Then another 2 surface and so on.... with all these videos surfacing one must be real huh?



A standard smear campaign is to introduce one bad apple into a barrel - they all stink by association.


What is a standard smear campaign?



There were, apparently, lots of witnesses. I would like to hear from them.


There are 6 people involved. Not what I would call lots of witnesses. None are talking the irony huh? Yes i would like to hear from them too, maybe you should hit up the hoaxer of the hoax tabloid site. Maybe he will surrender all these witnesses to you.



I'm not utterly convinced of this "hoax" just yet.



I will quote Fox Mulder in a X Files episode

Mulder: Do you know how difficult it is to fake your own death? Only one man has pulled it off. Elvis.

edit on 15-2-2011 by Unknown Soldier because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


Thanks for the recreation!

You showed me that it was possible to make a similar video of the "event".
I think moderate scepticism and unbiased critical analysis is da thing.

And I think ATS as a whole does its valuable part when it comes to that.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Thankyou for this thread. This should be linked in any thread with a "UFO 100% PROOF ETS ARE REAL" type title with a youtube or w/e video just like this one as the "proof", which you see soooo often here at ATS and sooo many people just accept as real without even caring about where/who it came from, if theres witnesses etc. Finally someone stood up and said enough is enough, I can fake this stuff and thus so can random youtuber dude you are all following blindly. This just proves really there is quite a heavy burden of proof on bold claims like ETs visiting and something like a random youtube video will never fulfill said burden of proof for anyone capable of critical thinking instead of blind belief. Bravo.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
There were, apparently, lots of witnesses. I would like to hear from them.

As has been stated previously, only one source which is someone with a stake in the game, is reporting there are any witnesses other than the creators of the YouTube videos.

The point of this thread, and the "extended discussion," is to highlight the need for independent corroboration of eyewitness accounts in the case of YouTube UFO videos.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Unknown Soldier
It looked better then the originals and more believable imo.

It lacked depth, and looked only slightly better than someone with the shakes holding a camera above a photograph.


Originally posted by Unknown Soldier
with all these videos surfacing one must be real huh?

No. But, equally, one "proven" a hoax doesn't make the others hoaxes too.


Originally posted by Unknown Soldier
What is a standard smear campaign?

The first, and easiest, method to ruin a barrel of apples.


Originally posted by Unknown Soldier
There are 6 people involved. Not what I would call lots of witnesses.

How do you know how many people were involved? I certainly don't. I've heard rumors of witnesses and I'm waiting to see if anything develops. What's wrong with that?


Originally posted by Unknown Soldier
I will quote Fox Mulder in a X Files episode

Mulder: Do you know how difficult it is to fake your own death? Only one man has pulled it off. Elvis.

I fully agree with him.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:16 PM
link   
i'll give you that overlord to discontinue any further debate over the mount video, but the entire problem with UFO investigation is it doesn't matter how many eye witnesses or testimonies are threw out into the public and media with video and photos, no one wants to except the reality that the phenomenon really exists, and that its not all mass hallucinations and hoaxes

you can deny ignorance all you want but the smoking gun has been presented every step of the way in more ways in one and by every walk of life.

what is it going to take for humanity to realize that this is in fact a truth and not a fiction. must it be touch and feel to force this change? is this the only way?

do you honestly think an advanced civilization is just going to drop into the national press club and say , here we are?...lol



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


I agree that independent witnesses make for a much more compelling story/video. Thats why the Utah County ufo is so interesting....still want to hear some more thoughts as to what people think it was.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by nitro67
Am I the only one that finds the Utah video and its similarity to the Jerusalem video amazing? Two videos recorded and witnessed by people on different continents that show and describe the same thing is amazing.


No similarities at all, except the most superficial. This is another grasping at straws. Someone seeing something strange in no way proves that someone else's claim elsewhere in the world has validity. Especially when the preponderance of evidence tells us beyond a reasonable doubt that the Jerusalem videos are fakes.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:33 PM
link   
It was the rushed quick to make sure people thought it was a hoax that had me believing there was something more to this particular UFO case.Seeing how so many people took interest in this particular case over the hundreds of thousands that hit you tube every week or month.

Another reason why I didn't think it was a hoax was because I could see the ufo on the guy in front's cell phone.And if you look at the guy in front's cell from the guy in back's video the footage looks identical to the the guy in front's video..hope you caught all that.

That and the fact when you upload a video from youtube the quality changes slightly.That added with the crappy quality of the cell phone would cause visual errors.You can't come to your hoax conclusion unless you analyze the original footage.

Wow ATS seems bound and determined.So many dome of the Rock ufo hoax threads to prove your point...seems a little odd.You wonder why people think what they do.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
How do you know how many people were involved? I certainly don't.


Simple math. There were two people in the original video (photographer and witness) and four people in the fourth video (four passengers in the car).


Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
I've heard rumors of witnesses and I'm waiting to see if anything develops. What's wrong with that?


Because you seem to be confusing rumor with reality. As of right now, there are only six verifiable "witnesses" to the event.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by FOXMULDER147
 


There were 6 people in the videos total. I stand corrected, there are NO witnesses at this time just perpetrators of a hoax. A shady tabloid website that supports CGI hoaxes before. A compulsive liar publicist hell bent on spamming viral promotion of the hoax.

The sequence of videos go like this

1 and 2 are fake

So the user eligael got a leg up on the real footage and provided a hoax video to discredit video 4? A smear campaign to ruin the credibility of video 4 correct? They must of caught wind from ANW then right? Or MOSSAD said we want you to create a hoax video because a real video is going to be uploaded in the coming days to discredit it with said bad apple.


The baby found in the dome of the rock is what they are hiding of course.

Sure FOX video 4 is still real and yet to be debunked. Lets just forget it had CGI incorporated in to it, was cut and produced. To add insult with bad acting from a bunch of teenagers. All the videos are bogus and no testimony to hold any water with it. Obvious Hoax is obvious Hoax.
edit on 15-2-2011 by Unknown Soldier because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Section31
FoxNews: Dome of the Rock UFO Just a Marketing Stunt?

Discovery.com: Jerusalem UFO 'Almost Certainly a Hoax'

AOL News: Close-Up Video Casts Doubt on Jerusalem UFO

UFO Eyes: Overly symmetrical lights tell us the Jerusalem UFO is a hoax

If you read through those articles (and Skeptic Overlord's analysis), the people who think this is a hoax are making a good argument.


Add "the Paracast" to the list. The most recent episode is a debunking of the Jerusalem video. Several different, independent sources all coming to the same conclusion. They have cogent arguments and evidence to support the Jerusalem video as hoax. Those who believe it to be real have nothing. Nowhere has anyone produce a single cogent argument about why these videos depict a real event. All they have is a grasping of straws and illogical arguments.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by WingedBull
 


Of course they are similar. Stationary lights in a triangular formation dropping a ball of light, very similar. How can you not see that? I am not saying it is the same thing, its clearly not. Its mainly the ball of light that drops down that is interesting to me. The video does not show it shooting back up like the Jerusalem one, and the lights that the light falls from are not the same as the Jerusalem video but its the fact that a ball of light is falling from other balls of light that is intriguing, thats what both videos show. And to be redundant it is interesting that they were seen within a few days of each other.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


Nobody is denying the fact that the video can't be re-created.With all the new technology anything is possible.

But you can't call it a hoax without analyzing the original footage.

Why is there so much interest in this particular ufo case?THAT is what makes me go hmm..something is amiss.Then to put it out on tv that it was a hoax over ALL the ufo cases out there..why this one?There are sooo many ufo hoaxes they could put on tv yet they chose this particular case.


One can't help but feel something is up with this ufo case.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by nitro67
I agree that independent witnesses make for a much more compelling story/video. Thats why the Utah County ufo is so interesting....still want to hear some more thoughts as to what people think it was.


It is interesting but to the topic at hand, irrelevant. You are using red-herring tactics to shift the discussion away from the Jerusalem videos, so that you may argue for the validity of the Jerusalem video, not based on evidence, but by proxy. The Utah sighting in no way supports the Jerusalem video.

If you want to discuss the Utah video, based on it's own merits, then perhaps you should create a thread about it.
edit on 15-2-2011 by WingedBull because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
159
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join