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.
Originally posted by h4y6d2e
i am amazed at all the hard work put in by the debunkers - and appreciative too. the debunkers largely come off as people who would GLADLY entertain the notion of the UFO phenomenon being real - but will NOT tolerate people who blatantly try to ruin a legitimate field with bogus videos. i am truly appreciative of the time and energy they put in to discredit this bunk. the people that facilitate these fakes are just the absolute worst and i wish nothing but the absolute worst for them.
...sucks though. would've been really something if was the real deal
Originally posted by Ashtrei
and it did feature in israeli news both on TV and web papers, all have been posted here
Originally posted by TheSearchforSpork
reply to post by Mr Mask
Thank You for the very thoughtful and considered post! This sure has opened a can of worms at ATS, and future sightings will continue to do so when the subject of 'real or hoax' is raised.
I posted in the original thread some thoughts about the technicalities of hoaxing. I'm sure some other members are involved in visual effects professionally (as am I) and rather than going into specifics about the pieces I think we have to address an insoluble problem: Visual Effects packages now make it relatively easy to produce flawless hoaxes.
Online tutorials teach not just the technical aspects but also the theoretical knowledge so that the average latchkey teenager can become very adept at this art in short time. I personally know dozens of people who could have produced these pieces, flawlessly, in an evening with little effort.
This means the only true measure of authenticity has to be 'multiple witnesses with no connection to each other'. The more, the better. Think about this, it's staring us in the face: 3 videos of the same event. World-famous landmark-tourist-destination in a densely populated city. Where are the eyewitnesses? What are the odds of 3 videos coming out and no 'man in the street' interviews, etc by the MSM? Believe me, they'd be all over it. This is a profoundly important site to a huge chunk of the world. If it had been seen by even a few dozen, or hundred citizens or tourists, the religious factions would be going ape about this 'sign from God'.
I am not concluding that this is a hoax. I am just saying: we must re-assess our 'authenticity priorities' and put 'convincing footage' lower on the totem pole.
Originally posted by TheSearchforSpork
reply to post by Mr Mask
Thank You for the very thoughtful and considered post! This sure has opened a can of worms at ATS, and future sightings will continue to do so when the subject of 'real or hoax' is raised.
I posted in the original thread some thoughts about the technicalities of hoaxing. I'm sure some other members are involved in visual effects professionally (as am I) and rather than going into specifics about the pieces I think we have to address an insoluble problem: Visual Effects packages now make it relatively easy to produce flawless hoaxes.
Online tutorials teach not just the technical aspects but also the theoretical knowledge so that the average latchkey teenager can become very adept at this art in short time. I personally know dozens of people who could have produced these pieces, flawlessly, in an evening with little effort.
This means the only true measure of authenticity has to be 'multiple witnesses with no connection to each other'. The more, the better. Think about this, it's staring us in the face: 3 videos of the same event. World-famous landmark-tourist-destination in a densely populated city. Where are the eyewitnesses? What are the odds of 3 videos coming out and no 'man in the street' interviews, etc by the MSM? Believe me, they'd be all over it. This is a profoundly important site to a huge chunk of the world. If it had been seen by even a few dozen, or hundred citizens or tourists, the religious factions would be going ape about this 'sign from God'.
I am not concluding that this is a hoax. I am just saying: we must re-assess our 'authenticity priorities' and put 'convincing footage' lower on the totem pole.
Originally posted by TheSearchforSpork
reply to post by Mr Mask
Thank You for the very thoughtful and considered post! This sure has opened a can of worms at ATS, and future sightings will continue to do so when the subject of 'real or hoax' is raised.
I posted in the original thread some thoughts about the technicalities of hoaxing. I'm sure some other members are involved in visual effects professionally (as am I) and rather than going into specifics about the pieces I think we have to address an insoluble problem: Visual Effects packages now make it relatively easy to produce flawless hoaxes.
Online tutorials teach not just the technical aspects but also the theoretical knowledge so that the average latchkey teenager can become very adept at this art in short time. I personally know dozens of people who could have produced these pieces, flawlessly, in an evening with little effort.
This means the only true measure of authenticity has to be 'multiple witnesses with no connection to each other'. The more, the better. Think about this, it's staring us in the face: 3 videos of the same event. World-famous landmark-tourist-destination in a densely populated city. Where are the eyewitnesses? What are the odds of 3 videos coming out and no 'man in the street' interviews, etc by the MSM? Believe me, they'd be all over it. This is a profoundly important site to a huge chunk of the world. If it had been seen by even a few dozen, or hundred citizens or tourists, the religious factions would be going ape about this 'sign from God'.
I am not concluding that this is a hoax. I am just saying: we must re-assess our 'authenticity priorities' and put 'convincing footage' lower on the totem pole.
Originally posted by TheSearchforSpork
reply to post by Mr Mask
Thank You for the very thoughtful and considered post! This sure has opened a can of worms at ATS, and future sightings will continue to do so when the subject of 'real or hoax' is raised.
I posted in the original thread some thoughts about the technicalities of hoaxing. I'm sure some other members are involved in visual effects professionally (as am I) and rather than going into specifics about the pieces I think we have to address an insoluble problem: Visual Effects packages now make it relatively easy to produce flawless hoaxes.
Online tutorials teach not just the technical aspects but also the theoretical knowledge so that the average latchkey teenager can become very adept at this art in short time. I personally know dozens of people who could have produced these pieces, flawlessly, in an evening with little effort.
This means the only true measure of authenticity has to be 'multiple witnesses with no connection to each other'. The more, the better. Think about this, it's staring us in the face: 3 videos of the same event. World-famous landmark-tourist-destination in a densely populated city. Where are the eyewitnesses? What are the odds of 3 videos coming out and no 'man in the street' interviews, etc by the MSM? Believe me, they'd be all over it. This is a profoundly important site to a huge chunk of the world. If it had been seen by even a few dozen, or hundred citizens or tourists, the religious factions would be going ape about this 'sign from God'.
I am not concluding that this is a hoax. I am just saying: we must re-assess our 'authenticity priorities' and put 'convincing footage' lower on the totem pole.
Originally posted by Mr Mask
I agree. I also roll with a lot of talented young artist types- and when I see people pointing at these videos and saying "that's either real or BIG Hollywood", I end up shaking my head and thinking of how my friends easily manipulated film in a far greater way.
Originally posted by Mr Mask
Originally posted by gift0fpr0phecy
Hey Mr Mask, is there any way you can edit a mistake in the original post, or ask a moderator to?
Leo fixed it. Thank the heavens for Mods who fix my mistakes.
Originally posted by QuantumDisciple
Hello ATSers,
I have a question for the debunkers.
In video 4 when the ball flashes it lights up the buildings in the background, which prior to the flash where completly black (under exposed). How does artifical light allow you to get detail out of an under exposed area? Remember this is video not film.
If this was lightening footage with a fake UFO the flash would've lit up the whole area without a noticable dissipation.
Why are there anomalous objects in a weather cam that corroborate the same time and date?
Just curious what you guys think as I'm on the fence still...