UFO over Jerusalem: CONFIRMED HOAX

3: Webcam servers go down ALL THE TIME when UFO fanatics think they are on to something. Everyone flocks to the website and bombards the webcam server with so many data requests that the server locks up and or becomes unavailable. Many server operators will even stop access to said webcam just to save their bandwidth usage from skyrocketing past their limits.


-And just to reiterate, live web cam itself is working. Just can't load past dates. But maybe that's all the UFO lovers were trying to do.

Originally posted by hootlj
www.02ws.com...

Search past dates, maybe it'll work for you.

I had a feeling you were talking about the weather cams, but frankly they are unlikely to help either way.

You only see pin prick dots of light that don't determine anything, and the compression of 24 hours into a one minute video means you don't have any clues as to how long any dots of lights have stayed on, and indeed you can miss dots of light in between.

I'm not sure if you have looked at the webcam videos but take it from me really they are worse than useless as an investigation tool here.

reply to post by hootlj


Full video
I saw this one once
www.youtube.com...

Still, I'd like to hear from the ATS member who said they got the web cam videos to load and to put a screen shot if they did. Because I'm thinking either they were lying...which is just weird...or they just were mistaken. I'd like to hear from them, though!!!

reply to post by puntito


And that video's private, what is it?

Originally posted by hootlj
Still, I'd like to hear from the ATS member who said they got the web cam videos to load and to put a screen shot if they did. Because I'm thinking either they were lying...which is just weird...or they just were mistaken. I'd like to hear from them, though!!!

Trust me on this one, the weather cams loaded or not will tell you zero,nada, nothing,zip......you getting my point here?

If an ATS member lied about getting the weather cams to load, after me pressing about how they went down, and it could be a cover up? That would tell me nothing? On this very thread that went down itself, with a pretty crappy explanation? I don't think you guys have people on here that work for a cover up...so I'm just trying to put a stop to my paranoia...since there are easy explanations I could get from just asking.

For example, @THEJerusalemUFO is now going with the I'm not a hoax angle...so I remember thinking it was weird it was tied to Space.com anti-hoax site, but maybe since it's going in other direction now, it was more of a coincidence. See? I'm reasonable! Sharing and update! haha

reply to post by hootlj


It is the full video with the faces of the impostors. At the end is where they see the ufo

There are other very basic questions we could have probably found out by now...what is average amount of people walking around dome at 1 am? How many people could have potentially seen it? Wonder how to find out such stats...

Again, getting these basic answers - to support video analysis that is convincing but still comes from imperfect source, keeping in mind at face value more than 1 of the videos is very real to a laymen - could just help us get this hoax theory very solidly positioned in ground.

Originally posted by hootlj
If an ATS member lied about getting the weather cams to load, after me pressing about how they went down, and it could be a cover up? That would tell me nothing? On this very thread that went down itself, with a pretty crappy explanation? I don't think you guys have people on here that work for a cover up...so I'm just trying to put a stop to my paranoia...since there are easy explanations I could get from just asking.

For example, @THEJerusalemUFO is now going with the I'm not a hoax angle...so I remember thinking it was weird it was tied to Space.com anti-hoax site, but maybe since it's going in other direction now, it was more of a coincidence. See? I'm reasonable! Sharing and update! haha

You said it hootlj......you're being paranoid over something that has no bearing on this case whatsoever.

Let it go!...(I'm only thinking of your health by the way! )

And I realize servers go down and people delete blogs. But I am always on the Internet, for work or for fun. I research stuff constantly and I click tweeted articles all the time. In my experience, blogs don't vanish without a trace - usually blogger will at least acknowledge deleting...stuff doesn't just stop loading permanently over several days...and forum threads definitely don't randomly get 404ed for several hours. I work for an Internet company that has multiple web sites I touch.

I think it's very likely of course - most likely - that these are all unrelated events. But if you had experienced all this first hand, in a series of a few days, you'd probably be paranoid, too.

Just try to show you where I'm coming from. ; )

Logical one

And hey, I appreciate that !!!! More angles I can peruse and figure out though, the better for the case for the hoax - which can help us quiet other believers. So, I don't think it's in vein.

And you know what though - hoax or not...there's plenty else going on that threatens any kind of massive cover up. So i should really think of it from that angle more.

The wikileaks stuff for example is getting goofy
www.ufo-blogger.com...

sorry this i meant

www.ufo-blogger.com... %28UFO-Blogger+Uncover+The+UFO+Truth%29&utm_content=Twitter

reply to post by Extreme Pilgrim


Honestly, as a student with adobe aftereffects, I can think of more than one way to do something like this.. All you really need is the right software and some basic knowledge.. AE can view any scene in 3d - all you would need would be the initial video clips along with audio from every angle you want to shoot from, then you create one object, superimpose that 3d object over your first vid and render out, then do the same thing, only moving your camera around and replacing the base footage.. you don't change your object, just the direction the software looks at it from, so it moves perfectly..

Give me about 5-10 hours and I could do this.. and I'm not even that great with the software..

I don't think some of you realize just how powerful the tools at artists disposal are nowadays.. easily obtainable commercial software can do *incredible* things in the hand of a gifted artist

I think the 3rd and possibly the 4th video(even though I haven't seen the 4th yet)are faked to throw off the original 2.

And we all know how crappy quality cell phone videos are.It is possible we are seeing visual errors due to the quality of the cell phones.

Who are the so-called experts who claim editing?Names and occupations please!

More Evidence of Video 4 Hoax

I've obtained an MP4 version of the video, made available on the ATS servers temple-mount-video4.mp4 (13mb)

When I open the video in Soundtrack Pro (the audio editing component of Final Cut on the Mac), it's very clear that the "UFO footage" is significantly different than the in-car footage.

Scaled-down look at the audio spectrum analysis...

Full-size is here.

As soon as the video cuts to the "UFO footage," we have a very different audio waveform that exhibits all the characteristics of post-production mixing -- very little background noise as compared to the in-car footage.

More than anything else, this is clear evidence the "UFO footage" portion of the video was fabricated in post-production.

Originally posted by GodIsPissed
Who are the so-called experts who claim editing?Names and occupations please!

Skeptic Overlord Owner and chief creator of this forum

for one

GodIsPissed

Here's the thing. All we have to go on is the video analysis of the people on this thread and elsewhere on Internet who claim to know a thing or two about video analysis...I have to take their word. And I definitely trust their judgment over my own.

Every video has been picked apart on here, and if you want to see proof for each video being a hoax, you can find it. But it is not perfect, comprehensive proof, so I say if one finds evidence that supports theory that there is a genuine video in the mix...it should be carefully considered.

Doesn't the theory go the so-called 'Original unedited 4th version' has been tampered with via cover up? that the actors were hired to make the original 4th video - without actors in it - seem fake?

not saying either video is authentic. But SkepticOverlord, that doesn't really disprove cover up...more so supports. Just saying.

Again, let's stop providing individual video analysis on individual videos randomly. It's really not helpful at this point.