[Merged] UFO @ Jerusalem, 2011. Call Captain-D - Page 7

kageki · 6th February 2011, 08:10 PM

Originally Posted by AdMan

Yes, the dialogue was related to the UFO they were supposedly looking at. They are actors, reading lines.

And yes, of course the UFO was CGI. Did you watch the 'making of' video?

I did watch the making of video and again that isn't the point. Are you able to prove to me based on the video alone that it's cgi?

AdMan · 6th February 2011, 08:18 PM

Originally Posted by kageki

I did watch the making of video and again that isn't the point. Are you able to prove to me based on the video alone that it's cgi?

You don't accept the hoaxers' statements as enough evidence that the video is a hoax?

You're fall too gullible, my friend.

kageki · 6th February 2011, 08:38 PM

Originally Posted by Stray Cat

What you'll find is that some people made 9/11 videos to try to show how it could have all been faked, without taking into account all of the evidence supporting the fact that it wasn't faked. This UFO nonsense is the exact opposite. People have made some explanatory videos to show how it could have been faked because there is no evidence to show it is genuine.

What you are saying is that a video alone isn't proof then.

kageki · 6th February 2011, 08:39 PM

Originally Posted by AdMan

You don't accept the hoaxers' statements as enough evidence that the video is a hoax?

You're fall too gullible, my friend.

Again not the point and not what I asked.

23_Tauri · 7th February 2011, 12:23 AM

Originally Posted by AdMan

This is the one I actually had in mind when I was looking for a UFO hoax video with actors (supposedly shot from a Spanish fishing boat):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=geiZ61rRLmI

Sólo un día de pesca de calamar en Galicia!

23_Tauri · 7th February 2011, 01:32 AM

Originally Posted by kageki

I did watch the making of video and again that isn't the point. Are you able to prove to me based on the video alone that it's cgi?

We're back to burden of proof again, kageki. The film shows objects for which there is no evidence of their existence. They defy what we know about our physical world. Therefore, it is up to you to show how they are not CGI.

It's been demonstrated that it is CGI by way of the makers posting the 'making of' film on youtube. What more evidence do you need? Also, I'm not sure what you're trying to prove by demonstrating that one can't tell CGI from real, physical objects just by viewing a film clip in real time. That's not how most films of UFOs are shown to be fake, and it's not how various individuals have shown the Jerusalem UFO videos to be fake.

So modern CGI is convincing when watched in real time? Wow. Hold the front page...

Akhenaten · 7th February 2011, 01:34 AM

Originally Posted by kageki

Again not the point and not what I asked.

That's probably because what you keep trying to ask is completely pointless, as, it seems, are everyone's efforts to explain to you why these videos are fakes.

23_Tauri · 7th February 2011, 02:33 AM

Originally Posted by kageki

You can certainly link things such as this video you posted:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqzee...layer_embedded

What was the point of this video?

Look, better than that, which just shows you hown easily the UFO could be created on the film, have a look at this analysis of Video 1, which shows anomalies (mirroring effect) on the actual film as it has been presented on youtube:

http://www.ufoeyes.com/2011/02/05/ov...fake-giveaway/

Are you still unconvinced that video 1 is fake?

Sledge · 7th February 2011, 03:52 AM

What point are you trying to make, kageki? I can't see what you're trying to do by denying reality at the moment.

kageki · 7th February 2011, 03:53 AM

Originally Posted by Akhenaten

That's probably because what you keep trying to ask is completely pointless, as, it seems, are everyone's efforts to explain to you why these videos are fakes.

What I've demonstrated is that this fake video does not prove any point at all:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqzee...layer_embedded

Akhenaten · 7th February 2011, 04:13 AM

Originally Posted by kageki

Originally Posted by Akhenaten

That's probably because what you keep trying to ask is completely pointless, as, it seems, are everyone's efforts to explain to you why these videos are fakes.

What I've demonstrated is that this fake video does not prove any point at all:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqzee...layer_embedded

These comments are posted immediately below your linked video by the person who made and posted it:

Originally Posted by xbatusai

•This video was made JUST FOR FUN.

•This video was made JUST TO TRY TO REPRODUCE WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE ORIGINAL VIDEO.

•This video only shows how easy is to reproduce what happens in the original video

•This video was made so the people can have a better perspective and try to be open to the possibilities.

•The effects showed on this video can be better done with more time and skills

Which part of this is giving you the most trouble?

kageki · 7th February 2011, 05:44 AM

Originally Posted by Akhenaten

These comments are posted immediately below your linked video by the person who made and posted it:

Which part of this is giving you the most trouble?

As I keep having to repeat myself, it's easy to make all sorts of fake videos including a fake 9/11 video.

Try reading. You seem to have difficulties with this.

Akhenaten · 7th February 2011, 05:58 AM

Originally Posted by kageki

As I keep having to repeat myself, it's easy to make all sorts of fake videos including a fake 9/11 video.

And this is news to whom?

Why do you keep mentioning 9/11? Isn't one infraction for it enough?

Originally Posted by kageki

Try reading. You seem to have difficulties with this.

No, I do not.

Stray Cat · 7th February 2011, 06:16 AM

Originally Posted by kageki

What you are saying is that a video alone isn't proof then.

Of course a video is proof. It's proof that some people will believe any old guff that's posted on WooTube.

There is no need to prove a video claiming to show things that defy the laws of physics is not genuine, the burden of proof rests with those that claim the video is genuine.

So for the last time. Any critical analysis that points to technical faults (lack of parallax, lack of foreshortening when zooming, mirroring of outer edges, signs of manual pixel lightening, non changing shadows, audio track manipulation) all have to be overcome by the people who are claiming this video to be genuine.

kageki · 7th February 2011, 07:12 AM

Originally Posted by Stray Cat

Of course a video is proof. It's proof that some people will believe any old guff that's posted on WooTube.

There is no need to prove a video claiming to show things that defy the laws of physics is not genuine, the burden of proof rests with those that claim the video is genuine.

So for the last time. Any critical analysis that points to technical faults (lack of parallax, lack of foreshortening when zooming, mirroring of outer edges, signs of manual pixel lightening, non changing shadows, audio track manipulation) all have to be overcome by the people who are claiming this video to be genuine.

No what you are saying is that a video isn't proof at all. The 9/11 video is proof to you and it's irrelevant if someone made a fake 9/11 video. So for the last time, the fake Jerusalem video proves no point at all.

How do the videos defy the laws of physics?

Anyways I guess there is no further discussion since apparently ALL the videos have been conclusively debunked. It would be nice if these "witnesses" or "actors" came forth, but that hasn't happened yet unfortunately.

Aepervius · 7th February 2011, 07:25 AM

"How do the videos defy the laws of physics? "

If speaking about the Jerusalem one, did you read what was written about shadow and light propagation ?

Stray Cat · 7th February 2011, 07:32 AM

Originally Posted by kageki

No what you are saying is that a video isn't proof at all. The 9/11 video is proof to you and it's irrelevant if someone made a fake 9/11 video. So for the last time, the fake Jerusalem video proves no point at all.

It is possible for one piece of evidence to stand up to scrutiny. However, in the bigger picture the fact that someone can make a fake video does not necessarily prove they did. Your comparison with the 9/11 is slightly pointless as the Jerusalem UFO left no lasting physical evidence with which to verify it. Therefore, all we have to work with is the video.

Originally Posted by kageki

How do the videos defy the laws of physics?

Lack of parallax, unexpected parallax, bright lights that only light up what was already light, bright lights that don't change direction of shadows, mirroring of night time lights in a landscape that shows no symmetry, exceleration without signs of propulsion, interlaced frames and progressive frames in the same bit of footage... you know, that kind of thing.

Originally Posted by kageki

Anyways I guess there is no further discussion since apparently ALL the videos have been conclusively debunked. It would be nice if these "witnesses" or "actors" came forth, but that hasn't happened yet unfortunately.

The young film maker people who published video 4 were supposed to be doing an interview. I haven't heard if that's happened as yet. It seems everyone else is clamming up.

Angel Love · 7th February 2011, 08:01 AM

Apparently The Temple Mount video maker has said that his video is a hoax to Israeli channel 2 news. I'm looking for corroboration on this.

Angel Love · 7th February 2011, 08:19 AM

http://www.facebook.com/pages/All-News-Web/302771843259

Quote:

Update: 5th Feb 2011

The battle rages on, from AllNewsWeb on facebook:

All News Web I can still confirm that I am the only person the witnesses have spoken (other than someone from Israeli TV station Channel 2) and that I know they were at Armon Hanatziv that night-this failed attempt at debunking kind of confirms that.
Will be going on Radio within the next few days to reveal what I know of the UFO jerusalem incident: It should be a pretty interesting interview

Anybody else have any info on this supposed confession?

tsig · 7th February 2011, 08:20 AM

Originally Posted by kageki

No what you are saying is that a video isn't proof at all. The 9/11 video is proof to you and it's irrelevant if someone made a fake 9/11 video. So for the last time, the fake Jerusalem video proves no point at all.

How do the videos defy the laws of physics?

Anyways I guess there is no further discussion since apparently ALL the videos have been conclusively debunked. It would be nice if these "witnesses" or "actors" came forth, but that hasn't happened yet unfortunately.

Are you trying to back around into the point that some fake videos don't prove that all videos are faked therefore aliens?

Akhenaten · 7th February 2011, 08:27 AM

Originally Posted by tsig

Are you trying to back around into the point that some fake videos don't prove that all videos are faked therefore aliens?

I'm more suspicious that it's "You can't prove that all videos are real/faked therefore 9/11 was faked."

kageki · 7th February 2011, 08:42 AM

Originally Posted by tsig

Are you trying to back around into the point that some fake videos don't prove that all videos are faked therefore aliens?

No I'm not trying to do that. I am criticizing that fake Jerusalem video just like what I have said, but I think it illustrates the double standard of so-called skeptics regarding video evidence. Also that it is actually hard to ascertain the authenticity of a video and that a so-called skeptic will never accept only a video as proof of ufo/aliens.

So can we agree that the fake Jerusalem video serves no point whatsoever?

Stray Cat · 7th February 2011, 08:51 AM

Originally Posted by kageki

No I'm not trying to do that. I am criticizing that fake Jerusalem video just like what I have said, but I think it illustrates the double standard of so-called skeptics regarding video evidence. Also that it is actually hard to ascertain the authenticity of a video and that a so-called skeptic will never accept only a video as proof of ufo/aliens.

So can we agree that the fake Jerusalem video serves no point whatsoever?

However, it's not just about the video. It's about the whole circumstance.
It's about a body of evidence building up, the video being just one part of it.

There are no double standards here.

Vortigern99 · 7th February 2011, 09:34 AM

What is a "so-called skeptic"? Either one is a skeptic or one is not.

Astrophotographer · 7th February 2011, 09:51 AM

Originally Posted by kageki

No I'm not trying to do that. I am criticizing that fake Jerusalem video just like what I have said, but I think it illustrates the double standard of so-called skeptics regarding video evidence. Also that it is actually hard to ascertain the authenticity of a video and that a so-called skeptic will never accept only a video as proof of ufo/aliens.

No skeptic will take a single video as proof of anything that is extraordinary. It is too easy to fake them. You need something more substantial and independent. So far, that independence has no appeared in the Jerusalem videos. Two of them came from the same spot (they appeared on the 29th as best I can tell), the third was a bad hoax trying to cash in on the first two, and the fourth appeared days later (on February 2nd from what I can tell) after the first two had been on the web for all to see. No real independent confirmation of the videos has occurred. That could be produced by live video from security cameras and multiple witness reports from the area. Nothing of the sort has occurred, which means the videos should be considered highly suspect (as if they weren't already).

Mike! · 7th February 2011, 09:55 AM

Originally Posted by Vortigern99

What is a "so-called skeptic"? Either one is a skeptic or one is not.

I think it has something to do with being skeptical of skeptics promoting skepticism, maybe.

I Ratant · 7th February 2011, 10:05 AM

Originally Posted by Mike!

I think it has something to do with being skeptical of skeptics promoting skepticism, maybe.

.
But can you be certain about that?

Akhenaten · 7th February 2011, 10:26 AM

Originally Posted by I Ratant

.
But can you be certain about that?

I think he might just be acting.

Belgian thought · 7th February 2011, 10:30 AM

Originally Posted by Akhenaten

I think he might just be acting.

Hmmm- this case is a bit like the old and trusted (and one of my favourite) sayings "Build a mousetrap and the world will beat your door"

Akhenaten · 7th February 2011, 10:33 AM

heh heh

dudalb · 7th February 2011, 11:05 AM

Originally Posted by Akhenaten

That's probably because what you keep trying to ask is completely pointless, as, it seems, are everyone's efforts to explain to you why these videos are fakes.

Wow, this is just like a discussion with a Holocaust Denier...

Oh wait, Kegeki is one......

kageki · 7th February 2011, 04:56 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

Wow, this is just like a discussion with a Holocaust Denier...

Oh wait, Kegeki is one......

Wow someone else that can't read a thread.

Well I'm glad we established that the fake Jerusalem video serves no point at all.

manniequinn · 7th February 2011, 05:13 PM

Originally Posted by Angel Love

manniequinn your link doesn't work. If it did I will assume that it's video 4 not video 3, that would explain why you see cars

Notice the title : Jerusalem UFO update - Three angles on synch - 4th footage Ultimate proof

And yea I was right.

yea i was tryin to put the link correct on here but when i posted i was a new member so it wouldnt let me, i had to find a way to cheat it haha, but thankss

manniequinn · 7th February 2011, 05:18 PM

Originally Posted by Stray Cat

Welcome to the forum Manniequinn.
As Angel Love has said, the middle video (video 4) is actually a video.
The still photo was used for video number 3.

But if you believe the event to be genuine, I await with excited antici...

.... pation, your analysis to show how everything is perfectly in place and to be expected in a video.

well thank you haha, and honestly I am a person who would like to believe that there is something out there, so when i see videos like this I am always hoping that they are true. I'm no video analyst and i dare not even put myself in any category close to that but I just figured i'd put my two cents in so maybe someone with more knowledge could shed some light on the matter. if its fake then so be it, but if not then I would like to have had some part in showing that it isn't.

Mister Earl · 7th February 2011, 05:45 PM

Having just read this thread from front to back, I just had to pop in to say:
Kageki, you are an incredibly dishonest person. You've been shown to be wrong multiple times, and each time you react by goalpost moving and attacking the people who show you to be wrong. Whatever reason you are here for, it isn't for finding the truth of the matter.

Also, hat tip to Stray Cat's excellent sleuthing.

kageki · 7th February 2011, 06:31 PM

Originally Posted by Mister Earl

Having just read this thread from front to back, I just had to pop in to say:
Kageki, you are an incredibly dishonest person. You've been shown to be wrong multiple times, and each time you react by goalpost moving and attacking the people who show you to be wrong. Whatever reason you are here for, it isn't for finding the truth of the matter.

Also, hat tip to Stray Cat's excellent sleuthing.

None of that is true and no one has disagreed that the fake Jerusalem video serves no point at all.

If the videos have been conclusively proven to be fake then so be it. I haven't pursued the matter at this point so your post was not just wrong, but unnecessary.

RoboTimbo · 7th February 2011, 06:34 PM

Originally Posted by kageki

None of that is true and no one has disagreed that the fake Jerusalem video serves no point at all.

If the videos have been conclusively proven to be fake then so be it. I haven't pursued the matter at this point so your post was not just wrong, but unnecessary.

Still attempting to switch the burden of proof, then?

AdMan · 7th February 2011, 06:37 PM

Originally Posted by kageki

...so your post was not just wrong, but unnecessary.

That's what I'd say about all of your posts, actually.

Mister Earl · 7th February 2011, 07:32 PM

Originally Posted by kageki

None of that is true and no one has disagreed that the fake Jerusalem video serves no point at all.

Everything I said was true. The second part of that statement is a dodge. You have been shown to be factually incorrect in this thread, and you refuse to address this. A simple "I'm sorry, I was wrong" would do much for your credibility.

Originally Posted by kageki

If the videos have been conclusively proven to be fake then so be it. I haven't pursued the matter at this point so your post was not just wrong, but unnecessary.

Are you conceding that the video you were viciously defending as real is a forgery, as was stated by pretty much everyone else earlier?

kageki · 7th February 2011, 07:34 PM

Originally Posted by AdMan

That's what I'd say about all of your posts, actually.

Well I guess that makes the both of us.

6th February 2011, 08:10 PM	#241
kageki Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,418	Originally Posted by AdMan Yes, the dialogue was related to the UFO they were supposedly looking at. They are actors, reading lines. And yes, of course the UFO was CGI. Did you watch the 'making of' video? I did watch the making of video and again that isn't the point. Are you able to prove to me based on the video alone that it's cgi?
kageki Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,418

6th February 2011, 08:18 PM	#242
AdMan Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 7,164	Originally Posted by kageki I did watch the making of video and again that isn't the point. Are you able to prove to me based on the video alone that it's cgi? You don't accept the hoaxers' statements as enough evidence that the video is a hoax? You're fall too gullible, my friend.
AdMan Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 7,164	__________________ It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan

6th February 2011, 08:38 PM	#243
kageki Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,418	Originally Posted by Stray Cat What you'll find is that some people made 9/11 videos to try to show how it could have all been faked, without taking into account all of the evidence supporting the fact that it wasn't faked. This UFO nonsense is the exact opposite. People have made some explanatory videos to show how it could have been faked because there is no evidence to show it is genuine. What you are saying is that a video alone isn't proof then.
kageki Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,418

6th February 2011, 08:39 PM	#244
kageki Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,418	Originally Posted by AdMan You don't accept the hoaxers' statements as enough evidence that the video is a hoax? You're fall too gullible, my friend. Again not the point and not what I asked.
kageki Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,418

7th February 2011, 01:34 AM	#247
Akhenaten Heretic Pharaoh Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia Posts: 24,641	Originally Posted by kageki Again not the point and not what I asked. That's probably because what you keep trying to ask is completely pointless, as, it seems, are everyone's efforts to explain to you why these videos are fakes.
	__________________ Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon The Australasian Skeptics Forum

7th February 2011, 12:23 AM	#245
23_Tauri Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: UK Posts: 4,947	Originally Posted by AdMan This is the one I actually had in mind when I was looking for a UFO hoax video with actors (supposedly shot from a Spanish fishing boat): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=geiZ61rRLmI Sólo un día de pesca de calamar en Galicia!

7th February 2011, 01:32 AM	#246
23_Tauri Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: UK Posts: 4,947	Originally Posted by kageki I did watch the making of video and again that isn't the point. Are you able to prove to me based on the video alone that it's cgi? We're back to burden of proof again, kageki. The film shows objects for which there is no evidence of their existence. They defy what we know about our physical world. Therefore, it is up to you to show how they are not CGI. It's been demonstrated that it is CGI by way of the makers posting the 'making of' film on youtube. What more evidence do you need? Also, I'm not sure what you're trying to prove by demonstrating that one can't tell CGI from real, physical objects just by viewing a film clip in real time. That's not how most films of UFOs are shown to be fake, and it's not how various individuals have shown the Jerusalem UFO videos to be fake. So modern CGI is convincing when watched in real time? Wow. Hold the front page...

7th February 2011, 02:33 AM	#248
23_Tauri Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: UK Posts: 4,947	Originally Posted by kageki You can certainly link things such as this video you posted: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqzee...layer_embedded What was the point of this video? Look, better than that, which just shows you hown easily the UFO could be created on the film, have a look at this analysis of Video 1, which shows anomalies (mirroring effect) on the actual film as it has been presented on youtube: http://www.ufoeyes.com/2011/02/05/ov...fake-giveaway/ Are you still unconvinced that video 1 is fake?

7th February 2011, 03:52 AM	#249
Sledge Grammaton Cleric Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Swingin' on a star Posts: 7,123	What point are you trying to make, kageki? I can't see what you're trying to do by denying reality at the moment.
	__________________ "The perfect haiku would have just two syllables: Airwolf" ~ Ernest Cline "Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop" ~ Dara O'Briain.

7th February 2011, 03:53 AM	#250
kageki Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,418	Originally Posted by Akhenaten That's probably because what you keep trying to ask is completely pointless, as, it seems, are everyone's efforts to explain to you why these videos are fakes. What I've demonstrated is that this fake video does not prove any point at all: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqzee...layer_embedded
kageki Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,418

7th February 2011, 04:13 AM	#251
Akhenaten Heretic Pharaoh Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia Posts: 24,641	Originally Posted by kageki Originally Posted by Akhenaten That's probably because what you keep trying to ask is completely pointless, as, it seems, are everyone's efforts to explain to you why these videos are fakes. What I've demonstrated is that this fake video does not prove any point at all: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqzee...layer_embedded These comments are posted immediately below your linked video by the person who made and posted it: Originally Posted by xbatusai •This video was made JUST FOR FUN. •This video was made JUST TO TRY TO REPRODUCE WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE ORIGINAL VIDEO. •This video only shows how easy is to reproduce what happens in the original video •This video was made so the people can have a better perspective and try to be open to the possibilities. •The effects showed on this video can be better done with more time and skills Which part of this is giving you the most trouble?
	__________________ Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon The Australasian Skeptics Forum

7th February 2011, 05:44 AM	#252
kageki Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,418	Originally Posted by Akhenaten These comments are posted immediately below your linked video by the person who made and posted it: Which part of this is giving you the most trouble? As I keep having to repeat myself, it's easy to make all sorts of fake videos including a fake 9/11 video. Try reading. You seem to have difficulties with this.
kageki Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,418

7th February 2011, 05:58 AM	#253
Akhenaten Heretic Pharaoh Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia Posts: 24,641	Originally Posted by kageki As I keep having to repeat myself, it's easy to make all sorts of fake videos including a fake 9/11 video. And this is news to whom? Why do you keep mentioning 9/11? Isn't one infraction for it enough? Originally Posted by kageki Try reading. You seem to have difficulties with this. No, I do not.
	__________________ Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon The Australasian Skeptics Forum

7th February 2011, 06:16 AM	#254
Stray Cat Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: The Land That Time Forgot Posts: 6,508	Originally Posted by kageki What you are saying is that a video alone isn't proof then. Of course a video is proof. It's proof that some people will believe any old guff that's posted on WooTube. There is no need to prove a video claiming to show things that defy the laws of physics is not genuine, the burden of proof rests with those that claim the video is genuine. So for the last time. Any critical analysis that points to technical faults (lack of parallax, lack of foreshortening when zooming, mirroring of outer edges, signs of manual pixel lightening, non changing shadows, audio track manipulation) all have to be overcome by the people who are claiming this video to be genuine.
	__________________ It's only my madness that stops me from going insane!

7th February 2011, 07:12 AM	#255
kageki Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,418	Originally Posted by Stray Cat Of course a video is proof. It's proof that some people will believe any old guff that's posted on WooTube. There is no need to prove a video claiming to show things that defy the laws of physics is not genuine, the burden of proof rests with those that claim the video is genuine. So for the last time. Any critical analysis that points to technical faults (lack of parallax, lack of foreshortening when zooming, mirroring of outer edges, signs of manual pixel lightening, non changing shadows, audio track manipulation) all have to be overcome by the people who are claiming this video to be genuine. No what you are saying is that a video isn't proof at all. The 9/11 video is proof to you and it's irrelevant if someone made a fake 9/11 video. So for the last time, the fake Jerusalem video proves no point at all. How do the videos defy the laws of physics? Anyways I guess there is no further discussion since apparently ALL the videos have been conclusively debunked. It would be nice if these "witnesses" or "actors" came forth, but that hasn't happened yet unfortunately.
kageki Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,418

7th February 2011, 07:25 AM	#256
Aepervius Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Bierland. I mean , germany. Posts: 7,737	"How do the videos defy the laws of physics? " If speaking about the Jerusalem one, did you read what was written about shadow and light propagation ?
	__________________ Omnes Blessant Ultima necat "I want, and this is my last and most dear wish, I want that the last of the king be strangled with the guts of the last priest" (Jean Meslier / 1664-1729 / Testament) A very early french atheist, a catholic priest in life.

7th February 2011, 07:32 AM	#257
Stray Cat Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: The Land That Time Forgot Posts: 6,508	Originally Posted by kageki No what you are saying is that a video isn't proof at all. The 9/11 video is proof to you and it's irrelevant if someone made a fake 9/11 video. So for the last time, the fake Jerusalem video proves no point at all. It is possible for one piece of evidence to stand up to scrutiny. However, in the bigger picture the fact that someone can make a fake video does not necessarily prove they did. Your comparison with the 9/11 is slightly pointless as the Jerusalem UFO left no lasting physical evidence with which to verify it. Therefore, all we have to work with is the video. Originally Posted by kageki How do the videos defy the laws of physics? Lack of parallax, unexpected parallax, bright lights that only light up what was already light, bright lights that don't change direction of shadows, mirroring of night time lights in a landscape that shows no symmetry, exceleration without signs of propulsion, interlaced frames and progressive frames in the same bit of footage... you know, that kind of thing. Originally Posted by kageki Anyways I guess there is no further discussion since apparently ALL the videos have been conclusively debunked. It would be nice if these "witnesses" or "actors" came forth, but that hasn't happened yet unfortunately. The young film maker people who published video 4 were supposed to be doing an interview. I haven't heard if that's happened as yet. It seems everyone else is clamming up.
	__________________ It's only my madness that stops me from going insane! Last edited by Stray Cat; 7th February 2011 at 07:34 AM.

7th February 2011, 08:01 AM	#258
Angel Love Scholar Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 99	Apparently The Temple Mount video maker has said that his video is a hoax to Israeli channel 2 news. I'm looking for corroboration on this.
Angel Love Scholar Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 99

7th February 2011, 08:19 AM	#259
Angel Love Scholar Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 99	http://www.facebook.com/pages/All-News-Web/302771843259 Quote: Update: 5th Feb 2011 The battle rages on, from AllNewsWeb on facebook: All News Web I can still confirm that I am the only person the witnesses have spoken (other than someone from Israeli TV station Channel 2) and that I know they were at Armon Hanatziv that night-this failed attempt at debunking kind of confirms that. Will be going on Radio within the next few days to reveal what I know of the UFO jerusalem incident: It should be a pretty interesting interview Anybody else have any info on this supposed confession?
Angel Love Scholar Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 99

7th February 2011, 08:20 AM	#260
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 26,688	Originally Posted by kageki No what you are saying is that a video isn't proof at all. The 9/11 video is proof to you and it's irrelevant if someone made a fake 9/11 video. So for the last time, the fake Jerusalem video proves no point at all. How do the videos defy the laws of physics? Anyways I guess there is no further discussion since apparently ALL the videos have been conclusively debunked. It would be nice if these "witnesses" or "actors" came forth, but that hasn't happened yet unfortunately. Are you trying to back around into the point that some fake videos don't prove that all videos are faked therefore aliens?

7th February 2011, 08:27 AM	#261
Akhenaten Heretic Pharaoh Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia Posts: 24,641	Originally Posted by tsig Are you trying to back around into the point that some fake videos don't prove that all videos are faked therefore aliens? I'm more suspicious that it's "You can't prove that all videos are real/faked therefore 9/11 was faked."
	__________________ Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon The Australasian Skeptics Forum

7th February 2011, 08:42 AM	#262
kageki Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,418	Originally Posted by tsig Are you trying to back around into the point that some fake videos don't prove that all videos are faked therefore aliens? No I'm not trying to do that. I am criticizing that fake Jerusalem video just like what I have said, but I think it illustrates the double standard of so-called skeptics regarding video evidence. Also that it is actually hard to ascertain the authenticity of a video and that a so-called skeptic will never accept only a video as proof of ufo/aliens. So can we agree that the fake Jerusalem video serves no point whatsoever?
kageki Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,418

7th February 2011, 08:51 AM	#263
Stray Cat Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: The Land That Time Forgot Posts: 6,508	Originally Posted by kageki No I'm not trying to do that. I am criticizing that fake Jerusalem video just like what I have said, but I think it illustrates the double standard of so-called skeptics regarding video evidence. Also that it is actually hard to ascertain the authenticity of a video and that a so-called skeptic will never accept only a video as proof of ufo/aliens. So can we agree that the fake Jerusalem video serves no point whatsoever? However, it's not just about the video. It's about the whole circumstance. It's about a body of evidence building up, the video being just one part of it. There are no double standards here.
	__________________ It's only my madness that stops me from going insane!

7th February 2011, 09:34 AM	#264
Vortigern99 Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 5,011	What is a "so-called skeptic"? Either one is a skeptic or one is not.
	__________________ "I'm 'willing to admit' any fact that can be shown to be evidential and certain." -- Vortigern99 / Noah D. Henson "One thing we've learned (and the Internet confirms this) is that humans will screw just about anything." -- Theagenes

7th February 2011, 09:51 AM	#265
Astrophotographer Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Manchester, NH Posts: 1,890	Originally Posted by kageki No I'm not trying to do that. I am criticizing that fake Jerusalem video just like what I have said, but I think it illustrates the double standard of so-called skeptics regarding video evidence. Also that it is actually hard to ascertain the authenticity of a video and that a so-called skeptic will never accept only a video as proof of ufo/aliens. No skeptic will take a single video as proof of anything that is extraordinary. It is too easy to fake them. You need something more substantial and independent. So far, that independence has no appeared in the Jerusalem videos. Two of them came from the same spot (they appeared on the 29th as best I can tell), the third was a bad hoax trying to cash in on the first two, and the fourth appeared days later (on February 2nd from what I can tell) after the first two had been on the web for all to see. No real independent confirmation of the videos has occurred. That could be produced by live video from security cameras and multiple witness reports from the area. Nothing of the sort has occurred, which means the videos should be considered highly suspect (as if they weren't already).

7th February 2011, 09:55 AM	#266
Mike! Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it! Join Date: May 2010 Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not! Posts: 10,213	Originally Posted by Vortigern99 What is a "so-called skeptic"? Either one is a skeptic or one is not. I think it has something to do with being skeptical of skeptics promoting skepticism, maybe.
	__________________ "Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes... Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes."

7th February 2011, 10:05 AM	#267
I Ratant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 15,305	Originally Posted by Mike! I think it has something to do with being skeptical of skeptics promoting skepticism, maybe. . But can you be certain about that?

7th February 2011, 10:26 AM	#268
Akhenaten Heretic Pharaoh Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia Posts: 24,641	Originally Posted by I Ratant . But can you be certain about that? I think he might just be acting.
	__________________ Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon The Australasian Skeptics Forum

7th February 2011, 10:30 AM	#269
Belgian thought Muse Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 664	Originally Posted by Akhenaten I think he might just be acting. Hmmm- this case is a bit like the old and trusted (and one of my favourite) sayings "Build a mousetrap and the world will beat your door"
Belgian thought Muse Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 664

7th February 2011, 10:33 AM	#270
Akhenaten Heretic Pharaoh Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia Posts: 24,641	heh heh
	__________________ Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon The Australasian Skeptics Forum

7th February 2011, 11:05 AM	#271
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,782	Originally Posted by Akhenaten That's probably because what you keep trying to ask is completely pointless, as, it seems, are everyone's efforts to explain to you why these videos are fakes. Wow, this is just like a discussion with a Holocaust Denier... Oh wait, Kegeki is one......

7th February 2011, 04:56 PM	#272
kageki Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,418	Originally Posted by dudalb Wow, this is just like a discussion with a Holocaust Denier... Oh wait, Kegeki is one...... Wow someone else that can't read a thread. Well I'm glad we established that the fake Jerusalem video serves no point at all.
kageki Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,418

7th February 2011, 05:13 PM	#273
manniequinn New Blood Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 3	Originally Posted by Angel Love manniequinn your link doesn't work. If it did I will assume that it's video 4 not video 3, that would explain why you see cars Notice the title : Jerusalem UFO update - Three angles on synch - 4th footage Ultimate proof And yea I was right. yea i was tryin to put the link correct on here but when i posted i was a new member so it wouldnt let me, i had to find a way to cheat it haha, but thankss
manniequinn New Blood Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 3

7th February 2011, 05:18 PM	#274
manniequinn New Blood Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 3	Originally Posted by Stray Cat Welcome to the forum Manniequinn. As Angel Love has said, the middle video (video 4) is actually a video. The still photo was used for video number 3. But if you believe the event to be genuine, I await with excited antici... .... pation, your analysis to show how everything is perfectly in place and to be expected in a video. well thank you haha, and honestly I am a person who would like to believe that there is something out there, so when i see videos like this I am always hoping that they are true. I'm no video analyst and i dare not even put myself in any category close to that but I just figured i'd put my two cents in so maybe someone with more knowledge could shed some light on the matter. if its fake then so be it, but if not then I would like to have had some part in showing that it isn't.
manniequinn New Blood Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 3

7th February 2011, 05:45 PM	#275
Mister Earl Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 2,118	Having just read this thread from front to back, I just had to pop in to say: Kageki, you are an incredibly dishonest person. You've been shown to be wrong multiple times, and each time you react by goalpost moving and attacking the people who show you to be wrong. Whatever reason you are here for, it isn't for finding the truth of the matter. Also, hat tip to Stray Cat's excellent sleuthing.