Join the Discussion

ForumHave your say at our forum.

Popular Forum Topics

 

Hot Topics!
mod_vvisit_counterToday182
mod_vvisit_counterYesterday1007
mod_vvisit_counterThis week4968
mod_vvisit_counterLast week7123
mod_vvisit_counterThis month17286
mod_vvisit_counterLast month34703
mod_vvisit_counterAll days627882
We have: 19 guests, 6 bots online
Today: May 18, 2012

*Update* Amazing UFO captured on film FOUR times over Jerusalem!

Why the Dome of the Rock?Why the Dome of the Rock?  

 

This story has been updated 17/03/2011 - Please clcik on the folowing link for the latest - UFO over Dome of the Rock

Amazing video surfaced late last night of a UFO hovering over the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem - at first it hovered before descending directly above the sacred site then in an explosive burst of light it headed skywards where it appeared to disappear into an array of red lights. Initial thoughts in the UFO community were that it was an incredible piece of footage - but a guarded stance was taken as many of us know just how clever viral advertisers can be. Now, 24 hours later a second video of the same event has emerged strengthening the view of the first as being genuine. Again it may well be that viral advertisers are turning up the heat but for which movie or video game? None spring immediately to mind. Watch both videos and decide for yourself if this is the 'real thing' or some clever advertising ploy?  *Updated* Since publishing this article more 'UFO type' events have come to light from the same evening, captured on film in Kazakstan and Utah. They are included below.  The final video (at this stage), video no 4 in the series, is pretty impressive - we are convinced however that video 3 (wrongly lableled video 2 by its producer) - is a fake.



A forum discussion on these videos can be found here at Planet Flipside

 




 

In the last few hours the video immediately below was offered as showing the Temple video is a fake - By 'steadying' a segment of the image the compiler of this video claims that the movement of the wall against the backdrop of the city shows that the background image is 'Green Screened' - whilst we can see what the compiler of this video means, this does not exclude other explanations, and it does not explain the supporting evidence of a second video - and the claim that light hits the back of the jacket of the man in the foreground can equally be explained by reflected light, which in any intense light situation is a well known issue for photographers. Light bounces off any reflective surface and can end up anywhere unless diffused by artificial means.

 

 

Our Thanks to Novolve at Youtube for compiling this side by side comparison of both videos, which show that both are precisely in synch with one another and yet filmed from differing angles and distances.

 

 

An astonishing third video has emerged of the ufo spotted over the Dome of the Rock - this one is quite clearly taken from a differing angle and up close.

 

 

 

It's looking more and more like at least one of these videos is faked. For what purpose isn't yet clear but it is very disappointing and makes me wonder if there will be a consumer backlash against the movie or video game responsible if it is Viral Marketing. To fool the public by presenting videos as authentic is quite simply lying - any way you put it. One of our researchers spotted that this image from Wikimedia Commons;-

Wikimedia ImageWikimedia Image

And a stills image from the third video show identical light sources.

Video StillVideo Still

This of course, strongly suggests that the Wikimedia image has been used as the backdrop for the video and the 'shaking' has been introduced by software.

Another video has surfaced of a strikingly similar phenomena but this time it happened last night over Utah, USA. Unlike the Dome video, witnesses have been prepared to step forward and name themselves. We at Planet Flipside have always thought that if genuine, indisputable UFO video emerged then the disinformation powers would move quickly to discredit it - it leaves us wondering if video 1 and video 2 above are genuine, and that video three which obviously uses the Wikimedia image - was hastily thrown together as an obvious hoax to discredit the others? There is no flash of light from video 3 which strongly suggests it was put together quickly as this would be the most difficult and time consuming part to achieve - and by calling itself video 2 when in fact it is video 3, strongly suggests no collaboration with the other two as the maker of video 3 has no idea that a video 2 was about to emerge. Last nights Utah Video is below.

 

 

At the same time this 'Comet' was being filmed over Kazakstan - this is highly interesting because no reports of a Comet visible from Earth were mentioned by Astronomers or media sources. The idea that it is a rocket of some type is plausible however the length of time it remained visible would seem to discount this idea - it was in the sky for hours, throughout the night and was still visible during daylight hours.

 

 

 

A new video has surfaced showing the UFO again from a completely different angle - this one does have the blinding flash of light seen in the earlier two videos!

 

Yet another video has surfaced which lends weight to the idea that at least three of these videos may well be genuine. This is a webcam set up by the bureau of meteorology giving a panoramic view of Jerusalem - it is time delayed but appears to have caught the 'flash' of the UFO if you freeze frame between 10 and 11 seconds on the video - you will see that the area around the Dome of the Rock 'lights up'. (A stills image of the relevant frame is included below also)

 

 

Stills image from videoStills image from video

 

Comments  

 
0 # 2011-02-01 00:47
It's most likely an elaborate hoax.

But seeing that historical buildings generate considerable public interest, where is the footage from security cams, surely the place must be covered with surveillance cams?
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # 2011-02-01 10:13
Quoting anonymous:
It's most likely an elaborate hoax.

But seeing that historical buildings generate considerable public interest, where is the footage from security cams, surely the place must be covered with surveillance cams?


I completely agree with hoax for video 3 (which is wrongly labelled video 2). Was it hastily put together to discredit video one? The fact they numbered it vid 2 implies they did not know another was about to surface bearing the title vid 2 - meaning there was no collaboration, weakening the argument that it is viral advertising. And then of course the similar event over Utah. It's all very baffling at this stage.

Ed.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # 2011-02-02 20:31
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6YwqM9iUf8&feature=player_detailpa ge#t=72s[/youtube] Best comparison of the three good videos.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # 2011-02-06 14:24
Notice the time on the webcam says about 11:30 pm or so. Wasn't the sighting supposed to have taken place around 1 am?
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # 2011-02-06 15:08
Joe - Good point - so much so I'm looking into something now which I just think might explain this whole episode! Watch for an update today as I really do think I may have an answer.

Ed.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 

Add comment


Security code
Refresh

Follow us on Twitter

Sponsors
Recommended Reading

 

 

tarot