UFO over Jerusalem: CONFIRMED HOAX

reply to post by DeboWilliams

What's very suspect of very 4 is that the camera person doesn't say a word. Yet clearly this person find the fact that he has to pee funny enough to record, even when the pee guy laughs at the camera, this person remains silent

Oh really? why is that suspect? Maybe he is the quite type? I dont know about you but I'm not familiar with spoken Hebrew. Hard to tell voices apart but I would say I heard four distinct voices. Its easy to rule out two of them by watching lips move and listening.

reply to post by DeboWilliams


Correct, but I can circle and have circled where that is just the back camera isnt picking up the light so well. I am going to see about uploading someplace else. maybe my file is corrupt and I need to redownload the image and circle again. Im 98% sure I have the right area's circled and I think its correct just need a second look to be 100% sure.

If you see above the guy posted something I find strange and we need to look into it further.

must've been santa's new sledge while reinderes are operating it lol like starwars

Trying at these images again

Why are not any of my images working? Let me just direct link.

Originally posted by DeboWilliams
What's very suspect of very 4 is that the camera person doesn't say a word. Yet clearly this person find the fact that he has to pee funny enough to record, even when the pee guy laughs at the camera, this person remains silent

Im not sure thats true, there are plenty of time we only see Yuli and desperate for a pee guy, while there is a male voice from either the driver or guy with camera.
that and the fact i dont understand the language makes it hard to say either way, i dont feel we can clearly conclude he was silent.

there are a number of times when there is a male voice that might be the driver or the camera man, its hard because we cant see the camera man

reply to post by Quartza


well said, i too think i hear 4 voices, but its impossible to tell because we cant see everyone all the time.

again not conclusive proof of anything

reply to post by Quartza


SAG rules camera operator cannot talk or he violates union contract.

Originally posted by ExCloud
reply to post by freelance_zenarchist

 

This i s pretty compelling is this from video 4? or 1,2?

It's from the 4th video. I used davidbiedny's screenshots.

Originally posted by davidbiedny
Here is a sequence of 10 stills I captured from a download of the 4th video from Youtube (the 720p version)

www.facebook.com...

reply to post by Ashtrei

Welcome. For what it's worth I signed into my youtube account and emailed and pleaded them to join this thread. I originally commented it but was immediately spammed.

subject: an invitation to greatness

There is a great debate/discussion involving your video here....www.abovetopsecret.com... Very respectable and anonymous. PLEASE JOIN. If you do your words would be famous and you can remain anonymous.

Sent to: ydmu1

Originally posted by Ashtrei

Originally posted by DeboWilliams
What's very suspect of very 4 is that the camera person doesn't say a word. Yet clearly this person find the fact that he has to pee funny enough to record, even when the pee guy laughs at the camera, this person remains silent

Im not sure thats true, there are plenty of time we only see Yuli and desperate for a pee guy, while there is a male voice from either the driver or guy with camera.
that and the fact i dont understand the language makes it hard to say either way, i dont feel we can clearly conclude he was silent.

there are a number of times when there is a male voice that might be the driver or the camera man, its hard because we cant see the camera man

Your reading too much into what I said. I'm not saying OMG THIS IS PROOF. All I am saying is that is what personally thru me off about video 4, thats all

reply to post by II HAL II


Thanks for posting your story. I too saw something identical to this, and posted about it in another thread. I have been following this intently though, from when Disclosure first posted abgout it. I then went and read through the now hoaxed thread and so far all of this one. I saw mine in 1978 or 1979, you saw yours in 1994. I find it rather interesting that our stories are nearly the identical description to these movies. It intrigues me quite a bit.

@ExCloud

The red circle to the far left only accounts for 3 lights, not the whole wad of lights thats next to them

Originally posted by Ashtrei

I agree, the guy gets out of the car, its logical he might turn his camera off at that point.
He walks towards the lookout, maybe even has a pee himself, the light is noticed hovering over the rock and the cam is reactivated to film it

Originally posted by Quartza

Yes, The way I saw it..

-Girl motions to driver and Camera man to come over. Camera man stops recording.
-Camera rolls again after that have been watching object in sky for unknown amount of time.

I've posted this twice now but no-one's commented on it. Might as well try again; perhaps nothing suspicious about it at all:

And no-one else seems to find the fact that the 4th video shows exactly the 23 seconds that the object was directly above the ground for at all suspicious? If they'd have been filming and you'd heard someone shout and the camera panned to the object that would have worked. But the camera was switched off and so presumably they'd have switched it on and then you'd have seen a scramble to focus and film it.

But no.

The camera suddenly cuts to the object in perfect focus and they just happen to record the object above the ground for the same length of time as the first video. *Extremely* fortuitous, if you ask me.

reply to post by Ashtrei


Not "through" the window - "on" the side window.....

reply to post by freelance_zenarchist


I think we need to look at video 4 closer as this video might be debunkable I have been saying that for a while. Im still standing by video 1-2. Though I still think 4 is a maybe/could be legit, but not nearly as much as 1-2. Lets kill 4 so we can work on 1-2? Then come back to 4 or are you thinking keep looking into 4 till we can look at it as debunked so far thats good proof, but not to say its a hoax yet.

Originally posted by DeboWilliams

Originally posted by Ashtrei

Originally posted by DeboWilliams
What's very suspect of very 4 is that the camera person doesn't say a word. Yet clearly this person find the fact that he has to pee funny enough to record, even when the pee guy laughs at the camera, this person remains silent

Im not sure thats true, there are plenty of time we only see Yuli and desperate for a pee guy, while there is a male voice from either the driver or guy with camera.
that and the fact i dont understand the language makes it hard to say either way, i dont feel we can clearly conclude he was silent.

there are a number of times when there is a male voice that might be the driver or the camera man, its hard because we cant see the camera man

Your reading too much into what I said. I'm not saying OMG THIS IS PROOF. All I am saying is that is what personally thru me off about video 4, thats all

Not to sound like an a$$, but A LOT of little minute details have been throwing you off.

reply to post by DeboWilliams


yes that wad of loghts shows up better on the front camera though if you zoom in and look you do faintly see some of them on that one picture they are just being drowned out by the distance i think. Like i said this is a good find but still not 100% proof. Dont give up man I am not I am still trying to figure out how to do this red light show to see if they mess up much. I understand not all can be on film. Not all the same angle. Some lights will be missed on 1 camera, but im plugging away.

reply to post by faustus


Oh, my! is that the orb already over the Temple Mount that I see thru those trees from 3:23 t0 3:28??

Somebody, please isolate that clip and see what that really, really bright light is in the direction of the Temple Mount!

That was a really good catch there, Faustus. To me it looks like the orb is already hovering over the mount from that clip of the video. Isnt that the direction they were filming from the overlook, or am I getting the direction wrong?

@Quartza

wtf you talking about. Show me minute details thats been throwing me off, what posts did this happen.

You know, for 2 videos being recorded at the EXACT same time, there sure as hell seem to be alot different in each video, it seems the only thing that IS the exact same, is the damn UFO.

But in your world, this is normal

reply to post by BrownDwarfStar


If they are who people say they are they are good film makers on camera 4 and would have aimed it well enough to not scramble. Just my 2cents.