Comments on: Proof: 3rd video of Jerusalem UFO is a fake

By: George

George — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 13:44:54 +0000

This thread does not seem to be that active. Oh well.

I wonder if this event where not an indicator of Archangel Metatron or Michael.

Artists seems to be intuitive about these things that’s why I like scanning random art.
http://niinac.blogspot.com/2010/10/201020112012-trinity-trida-metatron.html

This article was written last year.

Michael stopped abraham from offering his son to God.

By: George

George — Fri, 18 Mar 2011 12:29:04 +0000

At this point all the evidence has been manufactured. Haha!!

This project seems explanatory but it’s a little early?
http://www.robschrama.nl/schramafiles_eng/lichtpiramides/jeruzalemEng.html

I wouldn’t commit acts of sorcery above that temple though. BAD IDEA.

By: El OVNI de Jerusalén es FALSO | Diario Paranormal

El OVNI de Jerusalén es FALSO | Diario Paranormal — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 12:08:28 +0000

[...] http://www.ufoeyes.com/2011/01/31/proof-3rd-video-of-jerusalem-ufo-is-a-fake/ Compartir: [...]

By: Video del Ovni en Jerusalén es FALSO | InformaTeX

Video del Ovni en Jerusalén es FALSO | InformaTeX — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 14:10:14 +0000

[...] ufoeyes [...]

By: dan

dan — Thu, 10 Feb 2011 14:19:29 +0000

If there are no credible eye wtnesses. In which alot of people live there. The the video is fake for sure.

By: John

John — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 12:04:16 +0000

I see what you mean, and I think it’s because of the panning effect used to simulate camera movement and shake. The image becomes stretched and distorted in some parts due to this.

By: dan

dan — Tue, 08 Feb 2011 15:13:35 +0000

Theses 2 pictures seem to be the same. Can anyone explain something though.In the fake one. The barrel (bottom left)or what ever has a slight curve and no shadow on the wall.Also the 3 posts standing up at the far left bottom are positioned different.Thanks Dan.Mabye image blur but if its a copy which everything else looks the same. Why these 2 sections different?

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 07 Feb 2011 20:56:28 +0000

I completely agree the third video discussed here is a fake – outside of the fact that the view represented is a *perfect* match for the photo mentioned here, you’ll also notice that the “UFO” doesn’t doesn’t cast light on the dome, and the distinctive “double-flash” immediately before the object zooms away in the other videos is missing.

The forth video is quite compelling – the light cast on the dome seems quite accurate with the slight drifting of the UFO… and is synchs with the third video quite well. Unfortunatley, the third video shows possible evidence of “mirroring: on the left edge when the camera is panned up to follow the UFO… so what to make of it all?

By: Wayne

Wayne — Sat, 05 Feb 2011 10:49:46 +0000

3rd vid is DEF fake I just proved it with 2 min in Photoshop. The ‘still’ photo is not exactly the same as the vid image because the still image we see posted here has not been 2 dimensionally distorted. ie distorted by means other than camera lens distortion. Or it was distorted from being re-photographed off center and at an angle.

I deliberately distorted the still to match the vid image which suggests to me that the ‘vid image’ was a manipulated version of the still image in either photoshop or similar imaging/editing software.

Blurring and re-grading the colour, and adjusting contrast was a 20 sec job.

They line up perfectly after all that.. down to the tiniest detail!

I’d stake my career on it and I do this for a living. I’d like for this to be real, but vid 3 at least is definitely a fake!

By: Justin

Justin — Sat, 05 Feb 2011 08:14:17 +0000

I’m not entirely convinced the third is a fake. Take the wikipedia image scale it and overlay it on top of the video. It doesn’t entirely match up. All the perpective of the lines toward the left building are angled slightly different. Like somebody else said, this is probably a common tourist spot so strong similarities are very probable, like the viewing angle and the same lights that never change. As far as the tourist that speaks, I don’t really think that alone is reason enough to rule this out.