• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged UFO @ Jerusalem, 2011. Call Captain-D

King of the Americas said:
I don't recall saying it was real...

But what passes for debunked here is laughable.

What specific element(s) led you to "fake"?
Click to expand...

i am one that actually wants to believe.
but this is nonsense. only by the reaction of the people you hear.
 
DC said:
i am one that actually wants to believe.
but this is nonsense. only by the reaction of the people you hear.
Click to expand...


Yeah, that's a big part of it.

Woman 1 (casually): Is that a UFO?

Woman 2 (just as casually): Amazing.

Woman 3: We've seen 'em in Miss'ssippi like this, but never like this . . . never like that.​

Sure you have, Darlin', sure you have.
 
Last edited:
DC said:
you never saw one that you could not explain?
Click to expand...
Lots...

...that's the thing about UFOs, the 'U' stands for unidentified.
All I can do is suggest possibilities for ones that can not be shown to be faked or misidentified.
 
From the youtube stray cat posted :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXr8sWo5Ju4 said:
A video examination of the recent claimed UFO in Jerusalem (January 28th 2011).

The event was allegedly filmed by three people. Two of those were together and the third was from a different angle.

This comparison shows that the two do not sync up correctly.

Also, in the second video (the close up view one that I have split onto the laft half of the screen), there is no distortion due to camera zoom, nor signs of parallax as the video pans around the buildings. And the most telling part is that the 'flare' from the street lights, does not alter as the camera tilts and pans. Because of these observations, I sya it's most likely that the second (close up) video is a CGI object superimposed onto a still photo, with the 'camera shake' added afterwards.

As the original (distance shot) is so unclear, it is impossible to determine, but the flash just before the object takes off looks very unrealistic as the main flash light's the whole sky (something not seen in the second close up video), but not the buildings, as if someone has just masked an area in the video and lightened it manually.
Click to expand...
 
Yup, that's my video analysis, my YouTube Channel... Just so no one gets confused. :)
 
Last edited:
Have you EVER seen a video of a U.F.O. on youtube that you DIDN'T surmise was a fake?
Click to expand...
Have you EVER seen a shot from a Star Wars movie that you DIDN'T surmise was CGI or plastic models?
 
Did anyone notice how sharp the edges of the object were in the first video? I mean, come on! At least add a blur to the edges to match the original video quality.

I'm not even talking about if the UFO could be real or not. I'm saying that the camera itself could not have taken that image. Look at how blurry the edges of everything else were, that camera was incapable of showing an object with edges that crisp.

I think if I were to redo it properly I would use a lens flare based on the surrounding lights. That way it would fit into the scene much better.
 
I didn't go through the youtube comments, but two things stand out to me about the video: 1. NOTHING appears to be moving in the city. No cars, no people, nothing moving at all. 2. When the camera zooms in, it looks like there's a pattern, like they zoomed in to an LCD monitor.
 
Some things that make me suspicious...

1. No names attached to either of these videos. Posted were anonymously posted on Youtube.

2. No corroborating reports from eyewitnesses. In a town as populated and touristy as Jerusalem, I find it very hard to believe that these two videos would be the only witnesses to an event such as this. No local or larger mainstream press coverage. The buzz seems contained to Youtube and the usual suspect UFO websites.

3. No corroborating security cam footage. Due to the state of affairs in Jerusalem, the city is fairly bristling with surveillance cameras... so where is that footage of this event?

4. The fact that these videos could easily be hoaxed with current cgi technology, and look exactly like they have.

5. The commentary on the first video is laughably hokey.

6. The fact that plenty of just such UFO videos have come and gone in the past, and ALL of them have led to exactly nothing.
 
Last edited:
Shouldn't the lens flare (correct term?) from light sources in the town change as the camera pans and focuses?
 
Looks like a still photo displayed on a (computer) screen, laptop maybe. The light could be a flash light pointed at the screen.

At one moment, where the camera zooms in, you can make out what looks like the screen's pixels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom