UFO over Jerusalem: CONFIRMED HOAX

reply to post by Quartza


Nope I checked the weather cam video myself........the light appears on several occassions both BEFORE & AFTER 0:57.....

So that is proof if any were needed that this light is NOT the same light that was observed in the Dome videos.

It it were then we would have loads of sightings at those times and more because of the compressed time line of the video.

reply to post by faustus


I do give the movie makers an A+ for effort.
As to intentions: is it viral marketing for a movie? wannabe movie maker having fun? Disinformation? I don't know, but I do know that social media via the web is a powerful place to disseminate information. Just look at the pervasiveness of these 4 videos.
Like I said these 4 videos have gathered a lot of attention and I suspect that was the intention of the posters if nothing more.

Originally posted by Quartza

Originally posted by DeboWilliams

Originally posted by PhotonEffect
reply to post by Quartza

 

Yes, and research will show that Gilo is even further south and west of Nayot, moving further away from the temple.

So either way the dome is out of view.

I dont understand why they keep bringing the webcam stuff up. This is why we are not progressing. They are clearly in denial EVEN when the truth is right in their faces

The same can be said about you in regards to all your audio theories. I believe many people have challenged you on them. but yet.........


Mods, Everyone else, sorry to have clogged the thread up with useless noise between Debo and I. It will not continue.

There you go agian, I shutted up about the audio pages back. I've moved on since obviously that wasn't enough to convince you, if they wanted to clean this thread up, they should just remove every single post you added, you'd notice that the thread would not be thrown off track if yours disappeared.

Isnt -- a "known" hoax helper or something?

He just posted this on video 4's channel

"My conclusions on your video are irrefutable. You may fool others, but I myself was once a manager at Haaretz Newspaper in Tel Aviv-and this is just really bad acting...if one knows hebrew, and isnt a 16 year old. The UFO segment is clearly disjointed from the rest of the video-you can actually see the cut point. Why is their a cut point Yuli? The UFO segment was lifted off a Israeli video uploading site and fused with this crappy attempt at acting and the offensive act of taking a leak towards the Temple Mount which truly offends me as a Jew myself."

Originally posted by ExCloud
I am seriously leaving this thread for a few hours this time. Please keep it sane and make sure to look at all the facts guys.

I just did that and come back and see everyone talking about seeing aliens?

Oy vey....

"Do you believe in UFO's?"
"No, I just know about them."

LOVE that! Think I'll use it. Forgive me for not going way back in to this monster thread to find who coined that phrase. Take the credit that is due.

This event is not going to make or break my own personal world-view. Personally, I think this is probably the aforementioned viral marketing campaign. The whole thing just has that feel to it and I'm going to have to say that it's been pretty successful.

*IF* this is geniune, then the hoaxed video is obviously an attempt to increase the noise to signal ratio so as to further bury the ability of the population to give any credence to evidence presented for discussion.

In any field.

With regards to the audio (and I'm sure it's been brought up a number of times).

I heard some clicking noises when I listened to this video and I went looking around, came across a video where someone else had some issues with the supposed audio. He shows some badly edited A/B points in this video and I tend to agree with them. (Scroll to about 1:36)



I also tend to believe that the background itself is a static picture (which is also brought out in the video).

Just tossing it out there as I was hoping this might actually be an event with some teeth for the UFO Community, but sadly I think it's just a mildly decent hoax.

"My conclusions on your video are irrefutable. You may fool others, but I myself was once a manager at Haaretz Newspaper in Tel Aviv-and this is just really bad acting...if one knows hebrew, and isnt a 16 year old. The UFO segment is clearly disjointed from the rest of the video-you can actually see the cut point. Why is their a cut point Yuli? The UFO segment was lifted off a Israeli video uploading site and fused with this crappy attempt at acting and the offensive act of taking a leak towards the Temple Mount which truly offends me as a Jew myself."

the ANW video says the voices were re-dubbed with secret agents?....thats silly talk.

I believe a Hebrew speaker on the site said the dialog sounded believable

Yeah, that cut point proves everything.

Just a media whore trying to turn the light back on them.

I've been a lurker for some years now and this Jerusalem thread, like others, got me to post something.

Debo : I think JPhish said it right, the audio evidence is simply inconclusive due to varying (possible) compression, etc. If the waveforms were identical this would've been a done deal. Sorry, but this isn't the case. I know you put some work into this and feel strongly about defending it but all in all, it's not 100%. It simply isn't. Speaking of 100%, nothing I've read (and I'm on page 67 now) seems to be 100% for or against it being real.

quartza : my train of thought and perception of the analysis of these videos are very similar to yours. One of which is that I think more focus should be made on Video 4 as it has the best quality *data*. Attack that one with everything everyone has. I wish I was more technical because I would. Regarding the other vids, it's almost pointless to breakdown skewed or "grey area type data" because nothing conclusive will *ever* come from it because of that reason alone.

This being said, even though the data integrity of vid 4 is the best, and I don't know who mentioned it before, but proper analysis should be done on the *red lights* of all videos. If they are triangulated, mapped, measured, whatever, it would be more proof, although not 100%, that it could be real. I can only imagine the amount of geometric mathematics one would have to do to make those lights line up, move together and at the same time from different angles. This would entail some kind of CAD app which is a different skill set altogether.

All in all, I can't wait to read up on the remaining pages but this thread should definitely stay alive. I hope there will be a 100% definitive answer to these videos but I think we must prepare ourselves to take what we believe as individuals and run with it in the end. It's unlikely there will be a consensus unless new solid evidence pops up.

Originally posted by Quartza

"My conclusions on your video are irrefutable. You may fool others, but I myself was once a manager at Haaretz Newspaper in Tel Aviv-and this is just really bad acting...if one knows hebrew, and isnt a 16 year old. The UFO segment is clearly disjointed from the rest of the video-you can actually see the cut point. Why is their a cut point Yuli? The UFO segment was lifted off a Israeli video uploading site and fused with this crappy attempt at acting and the offensive act of taking a leak towards the Temple Mount which truly offends me as a Jew myself."

the ANW video says the voices were re-dubbed with secret agents?....thats silly talk.

I believe a Hebrew speaker on the site said the dialog sounded believable

Yeah, that cut point proves everything.

Just a media whore trying to turn the light back on them.

I bet all those like sites are pretty damn mad because as far as I can tell none of the people from the "real" vids will have anything to do with them despite being asked every other post. hahaha. Also maybe this is the jurnalist that injured his rights. In other words it means nothing.

Originally posted by bigbigjezza
I've been a lurker for some years now and this Jerusalem thread, like others, got me to post something.

Debo : I think JPhish said it right, the audio evidence is simply inconclusive due to varying (possible) compression, etc. If the waveforms were identical this would've been a done deal. Sorry, but this isn't the case. I know you put some work into this and feel strongly about defending it but all in all, it's not 100%. It simply isn't. Speaking of 100%, nothing I've read (and I'm on page 67 now) seems to be 100% for or against it being real.

quartza : my train of thought and perception of the analysis of these videos are very similar to yours. One of which is that I think more focus should be made on Video 4 as it has the best quality *data*. Attack that one with everything everyone has. I wish I was more technical because I would. Regarding the other vids, it's almost pointless to breakdown skewed or "grey area type data" because nothing conclusive will *ever* come from it because of that reason alone.

This being said, even though the data integrity of vid 4 is the best, and I don't know who mentioned it before, but proper analysis should be done on the *red lights* of all videos. If they are triangulated, mapped, measured, whatever, it would be more proof, although not 100%, that it could be real. I can only imagine the amount of geometric mathematics one would have to do to make those lights line up, move together and at the same time from different angles. This would entail some kind of CAD app which is a different skill set altogether.

All in all, I can't wait to read up on the remaining pages but this thread should definitely stay alive. I hope there will be a 100% definitive answer to these videos but I think we must prepare ourselves to take what we believe as individuals and run with it in the end. It's unlikely there will be a consensus unless new solid evidence pops up.

Yea, why don't you go do that and scrutinize them red lights, surely SOMEONE is gonna come outta the woodwork and say theres a plausible explanation why there would be any discrepancies. And then fail to produce evidence to back up their claims

Bottom line, you guys been had and just too salty to admit it. That's all.

You are hoping that the professionals that will check this out will say "Hey guys, its real", lol your gonna be waiting for the second coming for a looooooong time

I almost feel sorry for you guys being in denial.

If us amateurs can find all these flaws whats that tell you? You guys aren't a authority on what is and what isn't supposed to happen in audio, or cgi for that matter. You have countless people who atleast appear to know some credible knowledge telling you that all aspects of this is wack. From interlaced / progressive framing to lighting to audio, to sociology. True videos don't exibit this kind of crap. Wake up.

Oh yea and bashing me isn't gonna change this

Can someone please tell me what kind of language they are speaking in video 1 and 2, and also on video 4.

I am begining to believe the videos, the purpose of the flying orbs is unknown. I work outside most of the time and I know people some are watching at the wrong time and wrong place and few of us look at the right time and at right place. I am expecting at least 20 people to come out with video, picture and stories.

If they are fake then this mean that, they need a purpose, just like a tagger or vandals, they need a purpose, and what is the purpose, still is unknown.

reply to post by freelance_zenarchist


Nice catch freelance_zenarchist! I wonder how (or why?) "expert" David Biedny missed that? Here's what he said a bunch of pages back.

Originally posted by davidbiedny
Folks,

Looking at the 4th video, knowing the 3rd one is bogus, I'd go so far as to say you're seeing some of the best genuine UFO footage shot in recent memory. I'm kind of stunned that there was so much discussion on here about the stabilized footage, a basic understanding of parallax tells you the obvious, and this fourth video is nothing short of stunning. I'd love to be in Israel tracking down primary witnesses - I suspect that others saw this thing besides the sources of the videos. Outside of determining the precise provenance, and doing some actual analysis work on the original video data, not the compressed Youtube files, I'd say this is a hot one.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Emphasis are mine.

How bout those red lights? I am sorry I am not really equipped to do anything with the video in terms of software driven analysis. I understand from Ashtrei that the lights in #2 and #4 should be a mirror image as they are being seen from opposing directions (have I got that right?). I have gone back to SpiritualMystics Youtube page. I gotta hand it to the guy. He has put a great deal more work in to this than I. His may be the only specific analysis of the red lights. His interpretations of the symbols that he shows that red lights make are his alone. But it does appear to me that he is using his software properly and the red lights do trace the symbols. I will re-post his response to me describing his reasoning behind his interpretations if anyone wishes it. Meanwhile here is the link to his Youtube channel with explanatory videos. Seems like a super bright guy. I understand that this is a hoax. I am intrigued by what might be discovered by analysis. The red lights do seem to have some over-meaning.

www.youtube.com...

You have to wonder about the people that recorded the videos, and other witnesses talking about it so I would think that it shouldn't be to hard to track someone down, to simply upload a YouTube video and be done with seems really absurd. ask yourself if you were the one witnessing and recording the event would you just upload a youth video and disappear or would you want to talk and share about it as much as possible?

Where have those extra weathercam images come from??
When I searched through the months I found 2 with the light.. Now we have 4 extra images?

One thing that is irksome, is why ITN chose to use a crappy still make up, and not the first video. In fact, I'm not even sure if it was an ITN story, or if so, that it was the footage they used, or is it AOL's take on it. There is also another fake using a "better" still made by an ATS member, just to add to confusion. There is also the strange closing by a mod, of an original, (first) thread, who added a link to a thread started a day later, but saying that this was the original thread??? Both threads were started by the same person, Not MM. I did enquire at the time with the threadmaker but had no response. Also a "detail" change occurred around the same time in my information box at left, which I will discuss with anyone in a u2u, although it can be considered a childish event.

I have been gone and I am now drunk and I will officially say this thread is turning to none sense. I did my best to make people work for actual facts and in my drunken ness I just can not follow. Maybe tomorrow when I wake up I will not feel this way. See you tomorrow. maybe

reply to post by UKWO1Phot


I guess with no link thats why I said Im out like no one is presenting anything its turned into look at this picture. Debo was doing awesome now hes just arguing. So I am done till tomorrow I think. If I come back.

reply to post by promomag


My thoughts exactly.......further more If I had filmed a "UFO or caught a ghost on film, I would be going straight to the local tv station and newspaper.......not YouTube!