Jerusalem 6th UFO hoax - simple audio analysis

[ufopolitics]

The fact is (about this video#6) that nobody (with the proper authority, knowledgeable of this fields, not a clown that just writes Fake, Fake...without any background) had step forward with a deep analysis related to 3D Animation utilized here, like bump mapping, blur , lighting, textures and animation of the UFO, related background positioning to the real place, etc,etc

And till then this video is considered real...

That is the facts, like it or not.

[toukoqouko]

@ufopolitics Facts count, not "authority" (nice argument from a YouTube pseudonym). The fact is that the audio was copy-pasted, produced in a studio, to sound more real. That, by definition, means this is a hoax. It may be "considered real" by you till infinity because you ignore the obvious and refuse to let this fantasy go. Why is reality so hard to accept? Eligael fooled a lot of people but over 99% have forgotten about this silliness a long time ago. I hope you'll get there some day, too.

[ufopolitics]

@toukoqouko : Then let's say I witness and film a UFO sighting...somebody next to me scream some bullshit, non sense , lead by his surprise..¿Why should I leave the stupid comment on my video?, no I won´t leave it there, I will edit the sound, put some music, maybe some subtitles...and according to you that is a fake..¿Right?

I will ask you exactly the same question "Why is reality that hard to accept?"

[toukoqouko]

@ufopolitics If you make a conversation in a studio and replace bits of the original audio with that fake conversation, trying to create a false impression, then that is called a hoax - misleading the viewer. If your video has a person playing guitar and you put Van Halen solo audio on it to mislead the viewer, it's a hoax. If you have background music without the intent to mislead, it's not a hoax. If you don't know what a hoax is, maybe you're not the right person to "investigate".

[ufopolitics]

@toukoqouko: I see it another way..."Eligael witnessed a real event, YDMU1 (4thVideo and best) also, and they were all silenced by the surroinding clowns that claim to be "debunkers" when they have no idea about what Specularity, Refractions, and Materials Opacity is about.

They were silenced by the Media, presenting the Stupidest video of the Mississippi (Video 3/ user 50nfit/ 2.6 Million views)

They were silenced by Religions, bringing their crap about the Angels and Messias...Cont.

[ufopolitics]

They were silenced by the "Ones" that you and I do not know, and that try by all means to hide this Unexplained Phenomena...because it will affect their interests...

They were killed by stupid comments from ignorant skeptics, from out of the crowd screamers and many low class mother f?ckers...

Without realizing the most important part...denying a real UFO evidence is a crime to ourselves in general, to our future generations, to the earth, and we all will be sorry one day...

[toukoqouko]

@ufopolitics It's a disturbing thought if someone still honestly believes in this story. I hope you have another reason to spread disinformation. May I ask, were you involved in the production? Do you think that listing terms like Specularity (next time drop the capital letters) will change someone's opinion? I think you're vastly overestimating the public's stupidity level. If a few YouTube debunkers can ruin the plans of our alien visitors, they probably should prepare their next trip better:)

[ufopolitics]

@toukoqouko : It is also disturbing to me , to find ppl like You , at this time of this sighting, where "nothing" had happened? No, I was not "involved" in the "production" because there no production...lol

The You Tube Debunkers have NOT debunked nothing, zero, it is "too much" for their capacity-abilities!

Look at intelligent facts: YDMU1 the uploader of the 4th video had only 260,000 views...no Google Ad Sense in Her channel...then look at 50nfit the ridiculous Mississippi Fake video/CBS..

[ufopolitics]

The 50nfit have over 2.6 Million views with add-sense...it is obvious they (the Video 4) was not looking for "revenue" out of this...so what is their point?

I have done many , many analysis of this videos, the more I search, the more real they look.

But it is OK, the more time it goes, the better it would be...

They did a very lousy work trying to cover up this sighting, it is very easy to unmask them.

[toukoqouko]

@ufopolitics All you can do is to speculate with motives. Your Adsense "argument" is even weaker that your previous ones, if possible. Millions of computers and devices run the Linux operating system, but its developers didn't ask for money. They put it on the internet for free. No Adsense. Does that prove Linux doesn't exist? Do you think people do nothing without money? Does someone pay you for spreading this nonsense? Media made the "Eligael" case and you're stuck in their story.

[ufopolitics]

@toukoqouko : Linux is a non sense example...and yes, Linux exist as well as this video 4 is real, precisely because she (YDMU1) was not after any profit or marketing anything.

Google is also for free, you decide if you want ad sense or not...

The fact that they study to become actresses-actors does not proves anything either, they could be whatever...

Eligael is an actor...so what?...where do that leads to?...he "acted" his role as a witness?, come on, be real!

[toukoqouko]

@ufopolitics You speculated that if the video was fake, they would have used Adsense to get money. Now you prove that people also do work without money. You've just disproved your own nonsense argument. I think Eligael and Allnewsweb had Adsense. What do you think this proves? If it proves nothing, why did it bring up the argument? That seems quite desperate.

[ufopolitics]

@toukoqouko : Video number four is much better in viewing angles and close up than Eligael's.

People will work without money, yes, I agree, I am working on a series of videos that proofs this sighting was real.... and yes, I will put "add sense"...

[toukoqouko]

@ufopolitics If they had a real event, why did they construct the audio track carefully in a studio, trying to make an impression of an authentic conversation? Why did they add fake camera shake? There wasn't any ufo to begin with, so Eligael's "investigation" was a part of the story, the guys on video are actors, the 6th video is a fake. The "best" video 4 came from a film school group. Does that ring any bell? FILM SCHOOL. Eligael's work is related to FILM MAKING. Please.

[ufopolitics]

@toukoqouko :¿construct the audio track "carefully" in a studio?..where tf did you get that?, ¿from your nonsense conclusions?

¿where did u get the "fake camera shake"?...¿from Hoax Killer?...LOL.. BS!

Come up with some better conclusions:

Why did they "invented" such an expensive Hoax?...What have they "achieved" so far?...Where is the Film, Documentary or Best Seller?...where??

You are just following whatever the media wants Us to believe...You are falling to be it's servant!

[toukoqouko]

@ufopolitics Constructing a discussion track by copy-pasting so that it's not immediately obvious requires some amount of carefulness. "LOL BS" isn't a valid criticism. You may not like my conclusions, but you haven't been able to refute them. Motive speculations don't affect my conclusions in any way. You should ask Eligael where his documentary is. His documentary and motives are totally irrelevant when assessing the obvious fabrication errors in these videos.

[ufopolitics]

@toukoqouko : The least of the analysis I would ever look at is audio...however it seems to be your "strongest" field of knowledge, therefore that is where you try to work...

This UFO are " Sightings", derived from Sight, View, Observations, Looks, and the way of showing them is only through Videos, they could have or not have audio, that is irrelevant when it comes to debunking or analyzing this specific type of phenomena.

You are not going to change this methods of analysis.

[toukoqouko]

@ufopolitics You don't decide which parts of the video are relevant and which are not. Proof of fabrication in any part of the video indicates the video is a hoax. In a murder trial it's not a valid defense to say "Ok there is victim's blood on my gloves, but none on my coat! Gloves are irrelevant in this type of analysis! Look at the coat! It has Buttons, Pockets, and Sleeves! There's no blood on them! Ok there's some on the left sleeve but that's LOL BS"

[ufopolitics]

@toukoqouko : Video says it all, it is about video, from "view". If we will be analyzing a sound an E.T made, then that is another issue. Again, in a video analysis like this one, the primary fields to be analyzed are about video, light, shadows, perspective, motion blur, topography and architecture of the buildings, etc.

Another "non sense example" ..."blood in the gloves" is not about sound, it is a physical proof.

The correct example would be...next

[ufopolitics]

@toukoqouko : The same example, but better applied would be to bring a video with sound as evidence of the crime...it could be seen clearly the guy killing the victim, but Mr. Toukoqouko, The defense attorney claims it is not a valid proof because the sound track was edited...and the screams of the victim while She was attacked does not match with the real voices they had recorded...

¿Do you think the Judge or the prosecuting attorneys will "buy" that?

perfect example, bring in "next"...

[toukoqouko]

@ufopolitics I was analyzing the authenticity of the YouTube videos. Etymology of the word has nothing to do with their authenticity. My question was "are these YouTube videos authentic or fake". The answer is "fake". You apparently don't want to know the answer and want to change the question.

[ufopolitics]

@toukoqouko : Ok, I see your point!, So, You mean, this videos are fake related to the audio track, however the images are real...Right?

If it is so I will not even argue with you any more about this...case closed!!

[ufopolitics]

A more "clever" approach is done by Hoax Killer, analyzing the Lens Flare and relating it to Adobe After Effects "Prime 35", and again it is not enough proof either....the AE creates SIMILAR TO REALITY effects, we can find this same exact lens flare reflection in a real video or even in Hollywood expensive Cameras Movies!!

It is NOT sufficient proof...

[toukoqouko]

@ufopolitics I thought even Eligael considers this a hoax. If you think Hoaxkiller1's analysis proves nothing, why do you think it's "smarter"? This is conclusive proof. Sure, you can say again that maybe the ufo was real even though the background sound was faked in a studio. Ok, if the ufo was fake, there might been a real ufo behind it anyway... and so on. This is a pathological thought pattern. For people thinking this way, any argumentation, investigation, and reasoning is pointless.

[ufopolitics]

@toukoqouko : Eligael had never considered this is a hoax!..wtf are You talking about?

He just said "he can not stand up to its veracity, because it is not his" is a very different statement !

My opinion:

The actual witness who filmed video #6, did not wanted to reveal his name-identity, much probably 'cause of religion...then He gave it to X Guy, who edited the great piece of evidence and mixed with a Monk and keys for a cheap edition, actually -to my opinion- it killed the real sighting.

[ufopolitics]

And, again, the fact they edited the sound track is not sufficient evidence to declare this video as a Hoax either.

It is ALL about the video we are analyzing here, for God sake!!, it is all about a beautiful Sighting, where sound goes automatically to the Bottom-End of a Fair Analysis!

[toukoqouko]

@ufopolitics If a part of the video is faked, the video as a whole is a hoax. This is the status of every Jerusalem "UFO" video released so far. Sure, you can dismiss any fake part and say "so what, the rest could be real". Judging that way, fake videos don't exist and every UFO, ghost, bigfoot, nessie, fairy, unicorn, etc. video in the world is genuine. For blind believers thinking that way, it's a waste of time to even start investigating anything. If you don't want the truth, dont' seek it.

[ufopolitics]

@toukoqouko :"If a part of the video is faked"...No, by changing the audio track , that does not means "faking" nothing guy!!

It is just changing the audio for the reasons I mentioned before..and even more, simply, just to add some music to video, does not means is fake...if not every video here that have a musical background means is fake??...be real man!!

I meant HoaxKiller is a bit more "clever" not smarter 'cause He brought somehow better issues to be observed, rather than audio tracks!!

[toukoqouko]

@ufopolitics The motive of faking the sound track is irrelevant. Even if they had a "valid reason" (in your opinion) to fake it, e.g. "they didn't want people to hear something", manipulating the audio and trying to make it sound authentic makes the video, as a whole, a hoax. Same reasoning: you could say that they knew aliens exist, so it "doesn't matter" they made a fake ufo with computer. They could have posted it without audio, but didn't. They wanted it to sound more real. It worked for you

[ufopolitics]

In such a complicated and expensive video like this one (referring to just the UFO, it is obvious they added the Monk and Keys and Music....) and that means nothing...they just got an incredible video sighting of a UFO and tried to add some (they thought so ) sophisticated music and filming some acting to it. Which in my opinion was a big mistake.

However, the video effects of just the UFO in this 6th video is incredibly well done (in the event of being fake)

[ideservehell4mysin]

Jerusalem is the holiest place on planet earth,angel's and demons r real,i believe video 4 was real regardless of u hoax ppl say.this spot is not a spot to play hoaxes at.

[ideservehell4mysin]

i think video 4 was real,i dont think it was a ufo.i believe it was either an angel or a demon.

[toukoqouko]

@ideservehell4mysin There's no doubt that "video 4" was a hoax, too. Part of the conversation was cut and pasted - studio software manipulation just like this one. See the link on my page.

[carlosmariopinho]

Is sure that some of Jersusalem videos are faked. They can be easily debunked. But the phenomena is real as least 4 videos were proved to be real. One is from a school security camera.

[toukoqouko]

@carlosmariopinho Sorry, I don't think any of them have been proved to be real. The "security camera" referred by Jaime Maussan is a weather camera (02ws). Owner of the weather camera has stated that Dome of the Rock is not in its field of view.

[Grzegorz00]

wow OMG jezus fuck, mama mia, super XD lol, shit , wanzen :D

[janne808]

Obvious cat is obvious.

[toukoqouko]

@janne808 Nothing is obvious in the ufo land! I know thousands will now believe it was hoaxed by MIBs or Mossad or Illuminati to discredit the real ufo :)