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.

 

NEW Jerusalem UFO Video Emerges

page: 2
8
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by cluckerspud

Originally posted by ziggyproductions05

Originally posted by cluckerspud
HOAX BIN

That's about all there is to contribute.

In case you aren't sure on my stance:

HOAX BIN

There, I said it.

That's right I said:

HOAX BIN


I had to post it again just to say it with you....HOAX BIN


Just so we are clear on this, are you suggesting (as I am) that this belongs in the:

HOAX BIN ?

Not the Aliens and and U.F.O. but the:

HOAX BIN ?

Correct?


Prove it. No really, prove it's a hoax... go on do it. All the debunking I've seen has been amateurish at best. This Eligael fellow has taken a pounding by youtube trolls and is sticking to his story and even doing his own investigative research. Hurry up and prove it before this thread gets shut down.




posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotrice

Originally posted by freelance_zenarchist


They still can't get the flash right.



Does that look realistic to anyone?


Looks good to me. As a guy who is interested in cameras, the dark corners some what validate the video. Cheap lenses will always have blurry corners with lower light levels. Typical for camera phone lenses. It would actually take quite a lot of work to fake that with CGI.


No seriously, this is the biggest argument for the authenticity of this video. I just never thought to analyze the video in such a way before. If they guys who faked the video were clever enough to darken the corners during the flash, they are really pro and they really pay attention to detail.
edit on 13-3-2011 by hotrice because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by hotrice
 


What do you mean "the dark corners some what validate the video"?
What are the dark corners telling you?

Take a second look at the things in the foreground. Then look at how far away the light is from the camera. Does anything seem unusual or odd?



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 05:06 PM
link   
If all it take to fool some people is a static image, some processed camera movements and a laughably pasted on flashing light effect then I really despair for the UFO community at large.

And it's isn't just one fake video, it's almost half a dozen all made using the same cheap CGI effects, wise up people.

Not sure if anyone said HOAX BIN yet...
edit on 13-3-2011 by skyjohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 05:08 PM
link   
delete
edit on 13-3-2011 by XelNaga because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by skyjohn
If all it take to fool some people is a static image, some processed camera movements and a laughably pasted on flashing light effect then I really despair for the UFO community at large.

Not sure if anyone said HOAX BIN yet...
edit on 13-3-2011 by skyjohn because: (no reason given)


then explain how its fake. if you are so sure, explain what these people did to create such a thing. come on mr. expert.

doesnt look like a static imagine in any of the videos. the object is move in one direct, that it takes off into the sky after a flash of light. the light is too far away to be pasted on there and it comes from the object. so again mr. expert (and this goes to all of you debunkers) explain how it is fake.
edit on 13-3-2011 by XelNaga because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by freelance_zenarchist
reply to post by hotrice
 


What do you mean "the dark corners some what validate the video"?
What are the dark corners telling you?

Take a second look at the things in the foreground. Then look at how far away the light is from the camera. Does anything seem unusual or odd?



The foreground is well lit even though it is not facing the light source. True enough. You forget that there is also a light source behind the videographer. When the flash takes place the camera doesn't have time to properly adjust the white-balance. Once again typical for camera phones. To prove this phenomenon, take your camera phone and suddenly point it at your ceiling light. You will also see that everything around it is bright.
edit on 13-3-2011 by hotrice because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by skyjohn
Not sure if anyone said HOAX BIN yet...


The previous videos were proven to be fit for the:

HOAX BIN

So that, in relation with this poorly constructed 6th video, I have made the suggestion for the:

HOAX BIN

And if a 7th video surfaces, most likely it will belong in the:

HOAX BIN



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by XelNaga
 


1. did you hear any audio other than the people and wind blowing in the other vids, no you didnt.

1. I'm not sure of the relevance of this.


2. this person recorded it without sound since you can record things without sound.

2. That's a valid point.


3. where are you going to get a floating flashy thing that can jump straight up into the sky in an instant and disappear soon after?

3. This is the CGI part.


4. there is obviously no cgi in this video.

4. Obviously? Please explain.


5. there are too many witnesses to this event and it was in the news for it to be fake.

5. The faked-by-an-ATS-member video (#3) was on the news.


6. that is waaaay to much work involved to make something this an elaborate hoax.

6. I can't agree here. A blob on a digital photo isn't really that elaborate.

I am not debating the validity of the event because videos 1, 2 & 4 seem real to me. This one doesn't.



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by cluckerspud

Originally posted by skyjohn
Not sure if anyone said HOAX BIN yet...


The previous videos were proven to be fit for the:

HOAX BIN

So that, in relation with this poorly constructed 6th video, I have made the suggestion for the:

HOAX BIN

And if a 7th video surfaces, most likely it will belong in the:

HOAX BIN


I'm sure that you think that this video is a hoax - great. Flaming this thread while there is a serious discussion going on is not helpful to the others in it.



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   
There is no discusion to be had anymore.
The whole thing is a proven hoax and should be treated with the contempt that it deserves.

If you are late to the party and don't know the back story then go read the dozens of threads on ATS about this hoax.



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 05:22 PM
link   
reply to post by hotrice
 


White-balance?
I thought you were a guy who was interested in cameras.
White-balance has nothing to do with the flash or this video.




posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 05:24 PM
link   
reply to post by hotrice
 


A serious discussion has taken place on numerous occasions and the "event" has been accepted as a hoax by most right minded people .
Enough already , those who still accept this as real are entrenched in their view so no end of discussion will change their minds.

I have posted this before and hopefully this is the last time
SkepticOverlord's recreation of the Dome footage ..... better quality too

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by freelance_zenarchist
reply to post by hotrice
 


What do you mean "the dark corners some what validate the video"?
What are the dark corners telling you?

Take a second look at the things in the foreground. Then look at how far away the light is from the camera. Does anything seem unusual or odd?



The dark corners are a typical characteristic of cheap lenses, such as those found in camera phones. They validate the video because I seriously doubt that who ever faked the video would put so much effort in to such detail. Meaning that he would either have to do some brilliant CGI work or use a really bright artificial light source to duplicate this lens characteristic.

Here's an example I found on Google:

i.ytimg.com...

(a picture taken by a camera phone)

This phone review comments on this phenomenon:

www.gsmarena.com...



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by freelance_zenarchist
reply to post by hotrice
 


White-balance?
I thought you were a guy who was interested in cameras.
White-balance has nothing to do with the flash or this video.





It does if the camera doesn't have an iris. Camera phones don't have iris's.



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 05:29 PM
link   
Proven by whom? Guys who use BIG text to make a point? It's astounding looking through this website. I see everything from fake moon landing conspiracies to HAARP causing all the ills in the world. With people actually arguing their points with a straight face irregardless of how insane they appear. And something like this gets immediately discarded by the "HOAX" crowd (emphasis on the BIG letters) because they just hate the fact they might be wrong. Show me some real proof. Not the psuedo analysis I mistakenly read through on the other threads, wasting my time.


Originally posted by cluckerspud

Originally posted by skyjohn
Not sure if anyone said HOAX BIN yet...


The previous videos were proven to be fit for the:

HOAX BIN

So that, in relation with this poorly constructed 6th video, I have made the suggestion for the:

HOAX BIN

And if a 7th video surfaces, most likely it will belong in the:

HOAX BIN



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 05:31 PM
link   
I believe this is a hoax as the flashes of light come way to close to the camera given the distance of the said object.
You can tell the flashes are CGI.



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by backpage
 





Show me some real proof. Not the psuedo analysis I mistakenly read through on the other threads, wasting my time.


Show me proof that it is real



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by hotrice
 

It's not hard to fake. Here's a photo of mine. I just added a gradient fill on top.




posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by backpage
Proven by whom? Guys who use BIG text to make a point? It's astounding looking through this website. I see everything from fake moon landing conspiracies to HAARP causing all the ills in the world. With people actually arguing their points with a straight face irregardless of how insane they appear. And something like this gets immediately discarded by the "HOAX" crowd (emphasis on the BIG letters) because they just hate the fact they might be wrong. Show me some real proof. Not the psuedo analysis I mistakenly read through on the other threads, wasting my time.


Originally posted by cluckerspud

Originally posted by skyjohn
Not sure if anyone said HOAX BIN yet...


The previous videos were proven to be fit for the:

HOAX BIN

So that, in relation with this poorly constructed 6th video, I have made the suggestion for the:

HOAX BIN

And if a 7th video surfaces, most likely it will belong in the:

HOAX BIN


I have watched all the videos and have read both arguments and I have concluded that this is a

HOAX

Therefor it would stand to reason that this belongs in the:

HOAX BIN

But that is just one mans opinion based on the information.

And that opinion again is that this belongs in the:

HOAX BIN




top topics



 
8
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join