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: 6
159
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:47 AM
link   
Excellent job SO

IMO we may never know about this event BUT as I see it even though an event can be faked/hoaxed it doesn't mean this event didn't occur.

I believe there are at least five videos out there from different location so if this is faked/hoaxed all of these people worked well and timed everything together nicely or as individuals they all have the same mind frame at the same time to capture the same thing.

Like I mentioned above we will possibility never know the truth on this.




posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Draken
So what were the over 8 witnesses who wrote on that israeli forum ?

Do you have a link? This is the first I've heard of that.

Also... only eight people saw a bright object descend on one of the holiest places on the planet?

If we (owners) decided to pull a hoax here on ATS, how many people do you think we could arrange to play along?


edit to add...


As far as I can find, the only reference to the posts on the "Israeli Forums" (no URL is ever offered) is from the same source with a stake in this game -- the same source who has been lying and trying to convince the true believers that digital cameras will automatically mirror-and-tile images at the edges as part of normal, default operation.
edit on 15-2-2011 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by observe50
I believe there are at least five videos out there from different location...

There are four videos, and each can be traced back to using an image found online as the backdrop.

Jerusalem is a highly-photographed place. Finding several vantage points of the Dome of The Rock is relatively easy.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Draken
Your asking this person to describe to you how an alien craft could do what it does ? lol Nice one


No; you are purposefully twisting my argument.

In order to make a cogent argument that these videos depict a real event, you must explain the evidence that this is a real event and explain how the evidence that it isn't does not.


Originally posted by Draken
Anyways, like i said a post up. If videos can not be used as proof now, then you cant disprove events via making your own video.


I saw that, and laughed. It is complete idiocy.

Not only are you trying to move the goal-posts but you are attempting argue for the exclusion of evidence that is contrary to your beliefs. First, believers argued that because no one had produced a similar video, that it proved the Jerusalem video was real; but now that someone has, you want to argue that such videos do not prove anything and must be dismissed. And you want to use the debunking video as evidence debunking videos must be excluded. Rather circular reasoning you are using there.

Sorry, but it does not work that way. Videos such as SkepticOverlord's demonstrate how videos such as Jerusalem can be faked and how easily.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:54 AM
link   
I stated this would happen way back on the first page and low and behold here come all the "true believers" claiming almost exactly what I said they would while at the same time missing the entire point of SkO's work.

You guys (believers) will never be happy because subconsciously you have already made up your minds that the original videos are real. And no matter what you profess to want to see as proof that its a hoax you will never accept what has been handed to you as sufficient proof. There will always be an excuse.

As I stated 4 pages back, it won't be enough to show how easy it is. The believers will want too see an elaborate duplication of two collaborating videos with moving cars, low quality cell phone camera effects, and recreated shot for shot to even remotely be happy. And to what point? Even if SkO or someone else invests the countless hours of their time to do that, what will it accomplish? The believers will then spout "just because you can dupe it exactly doesn't make the originals a hoax". NEVER happy because they are already convinced it was real.

SkO's work was meant to show how much can be done in only a few short hours using off the shelf free tools and basic tricks which can be learned via numerous online tutorials. Anyone that's unscrupulous enough to create an elaborate hoax such as this is also unscrupulous enough to have acquired professional quality tools via any one of the many pirated software channels. So with professional tools in their hands, a little talent and about 3-5 days or so of time on their hands can now put it together.

Again, SkO was not using these vids as proof the originals were a hoax. That proof was already presented in the original monstrous thread. His vids were meant to show that a reasonably convincing hoax can be pulled off in only a couple hours. It's obvious the original hoaxer(s) spent WAY more than two hours doing it.

For those complaining about the original having moving cars and blinking traffic lights, etc. If you bothered to read SkO's OP and his consecutive comments in this thread you would have seen where he stated that he did not add those because he only wanted to put something quick together and that given enough work and time all that stuff could easily be artificially added. Regardless, these people also missed the point of this thread.

-TM
edit on 2/15/2011 by Terrormaster because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Also... only eight people saw a bright object descend on one of the holiest places on the planet?

Lol... Sorry, I have to laugh. I absolutely agree with you, for I know where you are going. If such of an event were to actually happen in Jerusalem, the massive population that lives in that one location would have noticed. Since most of them live in constant war, they are always looking out for the unusual. Don't forget the massive influx of tourists.

edit on 15-2-2011 by Section31 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by observe50
IMO we may never know about this event BUT as I see it even though an event can be faked/hoaxed it doesn't mean this event didn't occur.


I have a joke for you: how many believers does it take to move a goal-post?


Originally posted by observe50
I believe there are at least five videos out there from different location so if this is faked/hoaxed all of these people worked well and timed everything together nicely or as individuals they all have the same mind frame at the same time to capture the same thing.


You are assuming that these videos were produced independently. You say "all of these people" as if it were a large group. However, all the evidence we have is that only six people were involved (Two in the original video, four in the car-scene). It is not had to coordinate a group of six people.


Originally posted by observe50
Like I mentioned above we will possibility never know the truth on this.


Except for the preponderance of evidence that point to it being a hoax. All the believers in the video have is a grasping at straws and nonsense arguments.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:03 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Terrormaster
Awesome job SkepticOverlord. Your quick couple hour presentation actually looks a lot better than the original hoax.

However, having sat through the entire original thread, my gut tells me that sadly the "believers" will not be satisfied. They never will be unless someone takes the time to reproduce the hoax shot for shot, effect for effect, with multiple videos showing different synchronized angles. Or the original hoaxers come out and confess.

-TM
edit on 2/14/2011 by Terrormaster because: Grammar and spelling corrections.

This has probably been said elsewhere but I think this needs clearing up. Just because Skeptic Overlord or anyone else familiar with modern video editing could hoax something, that does not make it a hoax. With modern PC power anything could be hoaxed, which is why video evidence has less and less value. Can you not see that simple fact?

However, with corroborating evidence such as multiple witness sightings or physical evidence (radiation, landing marks, burns to persons in contact etc.) video evidence should be becoming MORE USEFUL. Why? Because as so many people carry a camera there ought to be more of it. Also lots of folks are now getting their hands on good quality commercial camera technology so you would think that the corroborated footage would be more valuable.

So this case is so weak not due to the fact that it can be hoaxed. That is a specious argument as any video can be! However as SO does state, the absence of strong corroborating evidence AND the fact that it isn't tough to hoax makes this case pretty dull. The only thing that is so interesting is the level of interest.

That though, now brings us to another question. Why is so much corroborated footage still poor quality? For a start lots of the 'good stuff may be confiscated'. Maybe any covert technology or potential alien observers are aware that their cover will be blown and are better hidden.

Then we have Zorgon's theory.


Originally posted by zorgon
IF the UFO's are Plasma Life Forms (Critters) then you would not expect to get a clear photograph of a fuzzy ball of glowing energy
85%ish

IF the UFO's are black of stealth aircraft testing various cloaking technology like special coatings that scatter energy such as light and radar waves, or use plasma charged skins to do the same, then you would not expect to get a clear photograph
15%ish

IF the UFO is a true 'visitor' using an exotic gravity/magnetic/plasma drive that creates an energy field around the craft as part of its operating function, then you would not expect to get a clear photograph
5%ish

You want a clear photo of a UFO? Catch one on the ground with its engines off


Ever try taking a clear picture through a jet exhaust?

Different mechanism... same concept



I find it amusing how people talk about exotic drive systems on UFO's and expect to take a clear picture
Stop blaming the camera or the photographer

www.abovetopsecret.com...

AND

Originally posted by zorgon
I wonder if it uses the "Plasma Actuator" technology for steering?

Looking at page 4 of the 'Vulcan' document I would say yes...





Revolutionary Hypersonic Aerospace Vehicles
With Plasma Actuators That Require No Moving Parts
Air Force Research Laboratory

Plasm Actuators


Finally (I know I go on), there may have been a policy change. Perhaps a widespread belief in UFOs and Aliens is no longer being actively encouraged? The suspicion has to be there that it has been used as a smokescreen in the past. That could have changed.

Just a thought...
edit on 15/2/11 by Pimander because: typo



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:15 AM
link   
Thank you sir for finally doing this. Many of us could easily have done it, but I really don't see how trying to prove I can't fake it means it's real, we're not here to prove a negative, that's impossible.

Your video is perfect, actually, much better than the hoax videos. Personally if I were to do this I'd probably default to lightwav as I'm more versed with it than the other top 3d apps. blender is a freeware linux 3d app that is extremely powerful but you're subject to the community to learn it.

First I'd either grab a video or still image to use as the background. I'd do my best to camera match the scene in the software. For this to be perfect, I.E. movie quality, you need a few things in place. first you really need to know as much about the camera as possible, type, lens, shutter speed aperture size etc etc. Also, for believable 3d, movie studios use computer controlled motion on the camera allowing them to import directly the exact motion of the camera, so the software camera matches the image camera as best as possibly.

Using google earth and street view you can usually narrow down where something was imaged from, and that gives you a focal length. I'd use the dome as a distance reference and model the top of the dome, or any other objects I want to react to the light. by adjusting the properties of that surface you can make it react and reflect light, but not block out the actual dome behind it, giving you the illusion that the dome is reflecting when in fact it's an invisible object in software. then a simple volumetric light as the object with some type of effect to make it appear to pulsate in an organic manner (default light map effect with gradients)

Once all of that is done, you can easily add in, using a random deviation, shaky camera movement. You encode the video out, compress it to youtube quality THEN upload to youtube, which of course reprocesses the file even more.

that's how I'd hoax this one, but I've just got way to much on my plate to sit down for more than 5 minutes to dissect hoaxes like this. I'm glad someone did, that should shut some people up.

Believing is great. Blindly believing is ignorant. I do believe in E.T. life, sadly, I really don't think they are coming here to anally probe drunken truck drivers. nothing I've seen in my life has swayed that opinion, and I feel it my duty to label hoaxes for what they are in the hopes that we'll find one we can't debunk.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:32 AM
link   
As with most pictures we will probably never know. As I see it when you are to see and know they will make it so it will not be denied.

This may be fake/hoaxed really doesn't matter one way or the other to me...I know Alien's and UFO's are the real deal just don't know about these events.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:38 AM
link   
I was wondering if ATS staff will be uploading SO's videos to the yt channel? I think that would be a great idea and would help put a dent in to the deception taking place on yt concerning the hoax videos.

www.youtube.com...

The humongous amount of evidence of HOAX in the original thread is solidified. I think now, at least for me needs to circulate the evidence of the hoax where it has gone viral. On yt hence the platform, the enabler of this great deception. If anything that aggravates me is the audacity of the hoaxers and the "source" of the story coming from certain tabloid site. Maybe it is hopeless thinking some people can be reached, saved from being manipulated. But the fool hearty embellish in the belief systems they have created for themselves so much that it is impossible to reverse this mind state. The whole very principals of ufology seem to be a thing of the past among most circles.. very tragic. It has turned in to a circus, a dog & pony show , gypsies and fortune tellers. I take this subject very serious and this is why we go together like vinegar and oil. Truth vs Fantasy. This is example why MUFON has devolved in to a exhibition.

The believers preach of disinfo agents, cover ups yet they are in fact what they have grown to bec0me fear and loathe. The irony. SO did what i expected to happen sooner or later, a reproduction of the original hoax. And as expected the lunatic fringe becomes unhinged once again in the face of logic. If this proves anything it proves no matter the evidence and scientific data, common sense applied THEY will resist.
edit on 15-2-2011 by Unknown Soldier because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by observe50
 


Very true, if it is a hoax, they should be proud and will probably admit to doing it soon. I am surprised no one has claimed it yet....Usually people who put together something elaborate like this want some attention...remember that
"sasquatch" head a few years back? None of the debunkers seem to want to talk about the ufo in Utah....come on guys whats up with that?



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by nitro67
Very true, if it is a hoax, they should be proud and will probably admit to doing it soon. I am surprised no one has claimed it yet....Usually people who put together something elaborate like this want some attention...remember that
"sasquatch" head a few years back?


You only admit to it a hoax if the point of the hoax is just that. But if the point is deception, you will not make such an admission.


Originally posted by nitro67
None of the debunkers seem to want to talk about the ufo in Utah....come on guys whats up with that?


What about it?



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by nitro67
 





Very true, if it is a hoax, they should be proud and will probably admit to doing it soon.



Proud of what exactly?

That is a unrealistic assumption, Billy Mier, Stan Romaneck, Blossom Goodchild and the countless other hoaxers of lore have yet to confess to hoaxing. Even after the results of a hoax are in... most people are not willing to incriminate themselves. For example the New Jersey hoaxers were charged with a misdemeanor and fine. www.youtube.com...

I am not educated in Isreal law but can imagine the hoaxers could face some kind of legal problems in admittance to the hoax. Then you have a reputation to ruin for yourself, the hoaxers remain anonymous for a reason. What they did was wrong and shameful. I can imagine embarrassment and disgrace after being exposed. That is probably why eligael removed his fb.
edit on 15-2-2011 by Unknown Soldier because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:57 AM
link   
Has anyone posted the weather cam video of the event? I can provide if not.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by WingedBull
 


Have you seen the Utah video? Its very similar to the Jerusalem video. And multiple people (non-believers, by the way) admit to seeing this. Its too similar to not comment on. Do you think that the community in Utah was in league with the people in Jerusalem? www.youtube.com...
I am not saying its aliens, just that it is not a cgi hoax.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:08 AM
link   






Ok, the problem with your first one was the pixelation , so that one would have been debunked in 2 seconds with no objections. The next one has the light all wrong and doesn't compensate for distance and looks cheap, so that was also doomed to the fakery bin. However, three of the videos on the Jerusalem UFO were definite fakes, and laughable. Only the one with the people in the car is real so far as can be determined. You start to see the UFO at 5 min 30 sec and a hoaxer is not going to think about such fine details. Also there is no pxelation and the light is spread out as it should be and compensating for distance and night time. A close up frame by frame also shows a shape shifting being and not a metallic UFO, and the flashes were not like flash bulbs as in the fakes and the ones you made. Check it out, give me your opinion and make one like it to disprove it, and it would have to be better than hollywood because that one sure is.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:14 AM
link   
Hi

Nice work, you have put together very compelling evidence that these videos are indeed fake.

Does this put all UFO evidence into the fake catogory, not a chance.

The absolute biggest event in human history, may be about to reveal itself. You could expect a few fake videos to turn up.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by nitro67
None of the debunkers seem to want to talk about the ufo in Utah....come on guys whats up with that?


What about it?

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.



new topics

top topics



 
159
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join