"UFO Over Temple Mount in Jerusalem" [discussion and analysis of multiple videos HERE]

reply to post by old_god

Agreed. Apart from the "still pan and scan (and zoom) image and the soundtrack, isn't the dome rather reflective?

Well it seems someone beat me to it, here is a video showing just how 'real' this footage is:
*sorry I can't seem to embed this video*
www.youtube.com...

Sorry folks but this one has been a joke from the start...It's crap like this that ruins the real investigations.

You might be right. I know you cant believe everything you see. But dont you also need to see to believe? You cant be a witness if you didnt see it. But if you did see it and no one else did then how can you prove it happened? If someone else saw it with you then they are in on it. Just seems like you can never really prove anything. I guess we will just have to wait for them to show up at the White House and for thousands to witness it. Wait wait... that happened already. What ever happened with that one?

Wow .... a true UFO, I have never seen one in real life, my friend couple of weeks back told me that he saw a UFO, he said that it look like a red triangle flying over L.A. unbelievable.

I wonder what they from that Temple, every day I'm staring to feel like we being watch, like a mouse in a glass cage. to see how we react or do in a normal life, study study study, maybe the ET are addicted to studying

It is the angel of the lord, sent down from heaven to place something in the dome of the rock, which will be discovered later, and will change the world as we know it....

reply to post by old_god


I agree simply look at the lenseflare coming from the bright street lights in the scene, notice how the light beams are perfectly static even when the camera moves? Dead give away that the video is either a still frame from a real video, or a picture, with some camera movement to make it seem like a real shot, with the glowing ball adding in post. when the ball shoots up you can see that the framerate used for the 3d software didn't match the framerate of the camera so you get a weird delayed ghosting instead of a nice clean arch when it flies up.

Side note.

If you're sole purpose of posting videos here is to have people 100% agree it's real with no investigation, just post it to youtube. We're here for the truth, the truth does not fear investigation. It's on YOU to prove the video is real, and if so, it's on YOU to prove the object in the video can not be explained by natural or man made phenomena. If YOUR level of quality investigation was placed on everything, every plane, light, meteor, shaddow, glowbug, ciggarette butt, burning ember, and falling leaf would be 100% proof of aliens.

Now that said, I'm merely commented on this 1 video as it's appears clearly faked to me, the others I really don't know, but when posting composite proof that is fake, I'd rather not spend much time on it.

Having re-watched the close up video I obviously didn't want this to turn out to be a static photo.

The fact that there areother languagesin the audio tells me they either spent more time on the hoax than most are giving credit for or that it's a genuine tourist gathering.

I've found little to show that this video is not a photo being that perspectives of the objects should change I looked closer and all I found was the T.V through the window in the first 5 seconds of file... the perspective definitely changes and the T.V. becomes obscured. This should not happen with a static image. I'm not saying it's 100% not a photo, but we have to look into every anomoly. Check out the t.v. in the bottom left of these 2 screenshots and tell me if you think this is a static image now...





I will admit that the perspective of pretty much everything else is suspect. And that where the UFO appears there's a convenient gap in the city lights... And the light refraction is always constant, as in a static image. But, I can't dismiss entirely without adressing the television perspective in the video... doesn't add up. Help?!

Originally posted by liveandletlive

You might be right. I know you cant believe everything you see. But dont you also need to see to believe? You cant be a witness if you didnt see it. But if you did see it and no one else did then how can you prove it happened? If someone else saw it with you then they are in on it. Just seems like you can never really prove anything. I guess we will just have to wait for them to show up at the White House and for thousands to witness it. Wait wait... that happened already. What ever happened with that one?

I agree. I saw something others did not. I was too slow to record it. Others do not believe my claim. But I know what I saw and found like minded people on this site. I was sceptical before the event and am still sceptical. But nevertheless I believe.

But that doesn't mean I believe all the claims of proof that I see because there are those out there who for whatever reason feel a need to fool people into believing untruths. That is why I feel a need to test the claims of others.

The disclosure process is a slow one. I think it has to be.

Originally posted by Thunda
But hey, you seem to have it all worked out- how would you do it??

For the ball of light I would take one of the other lights in the picture as my starting point, that way I automatically get the right hue and tone for a light at that distance. Moving the light around would be fairly simple.

The difficult part would be the flash of light before the object ascends. You would have to get that just right because it creates shadows and reflections over the city scape that are all dependent upon local geography. I have no idea how somebody would do that. Which is the point of my post and still frame analysis on page 34.

I was pretty sure that analysis would show up positive signs of digital image manipulation. I cannot find anything wrong with it though.

Originally posted by old_god
That's a fair enough challenge, anyone who thinks they can, should try producing their own similar UFO video

It has been recreated and debunked all ready
www.youtube.com...

Also it is interesting to note that the only "News release" on Google News when you do a search for UFO Israel seems to come from the ANW site... Just saying...

reply to post by old_god


Well spotted, old_god. The UFO is nothing but a white dot on a transparent layer between the background and foreground with various blurs applied and animated in something like After Effects, as your linked video suggests.

For further proof of this, see the 'flashes' that the UFO makes before shooting up:



Flash1- you can clearly see this is a white 'adjustment' layer at around 50% opacity- look at the line on the right of the figure- this layer is visible for 1 or two frames I also think there could be a fourth layer which is a repetition of the background image, but brightened, for the duration of the white layer.

Note: Cant seem to embed these stills- any ideas anyone?





Flash 2- this is a transparent layer with a white blur positioned on top of the white dot 'UFO', again, only shown for 1-2 frames to give the impression of a 'flash'- note, these lights have no effect on buildings or the figure as we can see here, a second after the flash, note the buildings on the mount are no more or less illuminated by this flash:




If you can imagine an adjustment layer to be like a sheet of clear acetate, the UFO is simply a white dot with some blur on it on the layer being moved around the screen.

Originally posted by BruceWayne
Also it is interesting to note that the only "News release" on Google News when you do a search for UFO Israel seems to come from the ANW site... Just saying...

Yes exactly and reeks of Cohen Hoax, as it is featred on his YT channel as well. Has ANW all over it and that in itself is more then suspect since his site content features nothing but CGI hoaxes and disinfo. www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Thunda
Note: Cant seem to embed these stills- any ideas anyone?

You can either upload them to ATS Media ( Under Tools>Pictures on the navigation menu above) and link link the [img] part of the link from the upload or you can allow us all access to your desktop.

What operating system/browser are you using anyway?

Good luck with the image uploads and you'll figure it out easy once you see how it works.

-m0r

reply to post by Unknown Soldier


Proves nothing I'm afraid. I could easily add 3 additional 'orbs' and set a motion path in line with the 'original'. They didn't perform 3 additional flashes so what exactly is debunked?

reply to post by Pr0t0


Ive tried to address this above, but cant embed the images at present. Try freeze framing the 'flashes'. You can plainly see the edges of the layers, particularly the first 'flash'.

I dont want it to be (Im a believer, honest!), but I would consider this well and truly debunked..........

I have a serious problem with the new and so-called 2nd material... it's wavy.

Now someone or several has been uninlightend enough to do a simple layover comparison. That is obviously not enough, since the 2nd material is more than just a crop and zoom.

I think what happend here is after having cropped and zoomed up on the 1st video, maybe initially to try and remove the guy in the front, the hoaxer found out that when you crop in on something that is ever so slightly unstable, it looks even more unstable once you get closer.
So he probably ran it through after effects or similar to stabilize it a bit.

But the thing with stabilize is that even though you have some nice fix points, once the contrast is low... either generally dark or generally light, stabilize motion will screw up a little bit.
I've seen this happen quite a few times in video production, and the result looks a lot like the effect in the 2nd clip... wavy.

I have no doubt in my body that there's absolutely nothing interesting to see here.

Originally posted by old_god
Well it seems someone beat me to it, here is a video showing just how 'real' this footage is:
*sorry I can't seem to embed this video*
www.youtube.com...

Sorry folks but this one has been a joke from the start...It's crap like this that ruins the real investigations.

Quoted for truth... and now I can even see how the original's been tampered with. What a waste of 30-something pages -.-

Fake or real I've definately found the discussion on ATS of the Temple Mount UFO videos educational and entertaining. Nowadays, with video so easily manipulated and the advancement of hologram technology "seeing is believeing" is no longer an acceptable form of truth. The only way we all will ever know for sure is if an extraterrestrial/extradimensional craft lands on Earth in front of a large crowd of people and beings actually walk out of the craft to great humans face to face with various news media present to record the event along with all the hundreds or thousands of witnesses documenting the same event from their own perspectives.

Some insights I have from these Temple Mount UFO videos are:

1. First video is pretty cool when viewing it as is.

2. The "so-called" 2nd video to me, just looks like someone used the 1st video and zoomed in and labeled it the 2nd video supposedly from the witness in the background of the 1st video. So I wouldn't consider the 2nd video to be what the other guy in the 1st video filmed with his cell.

3. The 3rd video also looks pretty cool when viewed as is and I really don't find the reaction of the tourists to be out of the ordinary or rehearsed. I can easily see some tourists who aren't familiar with the area seeing a strange light drop down and hover the Temple Mount not be able to , at first, comprehend what they're seeing and possibly think this is some kind of staged tourist event that might happen normally like some kind of added attraction (people are naive).

4. The fact that the 3rd video cuts off so quickly after the light ascends instead of continuing with the tourists reactions to what they had just witnessed, is suspicious. I know if I would've filmed something like that I would've posted every bit of the video, including the boring parts lol.

Lesson learned: Do NOT believe ANY UFO video anymore. It's too easy to manipulate video and add various types of special FX and lighting variants and the more video manipulation technology advances the harder it will be to spot fakes. Sad but true.

reply to post by Pr0t0


It shows how easy this can be done. It does not prove it is fake however there is no evidence to support the story. No witnesses, just a couple of YT channels and a hoax news web site breaking the story with a viral agenda to it.

For those unfamiliar with Micheal Cohen here are some links. You will notice a pattern here.


newsodrome.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
ufocasebook.conforums.com...
www.disclose.tv...