I found this little bit of fun in my alerts just last night, an article with the highly original title Jerusalem UFO baffles even skeptics as new details emerge though to be frank, the only thing that this skeptic is baffled by is the complete disregard for facts and credible argumentation that Mr. Cohen shows in this piece.
Loaded with, well, loaded language and all the precision and subtlety of a shotgun, this article is really little more than an apologetic temper-tantrum about we ‘evil debunkers’ concerning the both well-publicized and well-deconstructed series of UFO videos of an indistinct blob of light about 10′-15′ long judging by it’s surroundings and apparent proximity to them.
It’s obviously low-grade CGI effects, or perhaps alien technology that’s so advanced it’s supposed to look like low-budget CGI (Hmmm, how’s THAT for an unfalsifiable hypothesis?), Cohen fails to mention that there were no witnesses previous to the posting of these videos on YouTube, and the excellent work HOAXKiller1 has done in dismantling this shoddy charade definitively shows them to be well, a hoax, and nothing more despite Cohen’s circling of the proverbial wagons on this.
I couldn’t help but notice this statement by him in particular:
It has now been over two weeks since I broke the story and spoke (to) key witnesses regarding the Jerusalem UFO that hovered over the Dome of The Rock/Temple Mount before shooting up and away.
But wait! This is inconsistent with the following statement later in the post…
Meanwhile none of the witnesses are talking at all, to anyone(emphasis mine). This seems more indicative of a cover-up than a hoax. The fourth video was filmed by a group of Israeli teens Yuli Cohen, Michael Naumkoff and Dor Tibi. Even the vaguest mention of the UFO event is eerily absent from all their facebook pages. Why? Do teen hoaxers really behave this way?
Why yes, evidently they do, and the above statement also contradicts both itself and this…
Debunkers are also clinging to the untruth that there have been no additional witnesses beyond the videotographers (sic). At least three other witnesses have come forward and their testimonies appear pretty credible.(emphasis again mine)
So which is it, Mr. Cohen? Have or haven’t any witnesses talked? They either did or didn’t come forward with their story, and it seems to me that you’re trying to have your cake and eat it, too! It has to be one or the other, it can’t be both.
Also, in a city the size of Jerusalem, during that time of night, you would expect far more than just “at least three witnesses,” And regarding their testimony, if you can’t mind your own credibility, who are you to judge that of others? I’m highly skeptical that such a heavily populated city’s geography would have restricted the number of possible witnesses to so few. Surely more people would have noticed!
An orthodox Jew has posted on an Israeli forum that he and four other friends saw the red lights in the sky but not the desending (sic) UFO: That sounds about right for the vast majority of possible locations in Jerusalem where the Dome or the glowing UFO would certainly not have been visible. Interestingly, a Palestinian woman paying respects at the Al-Aqsa Mosque (at the Dome of the Rock) has claimed she saw a glowing orb floating above the Mosque months before the event and even asked the Mosque’s Grand Imam about it.
Really?? Why not give the names of the ‘orthodox Jew,’ the ‘Israeli forum,’ his ‘four other friends’ or that of the ‘Palestinian woman,’ and how is her testimony even relevant if the ‘glowing orb floating above the Mosque’ was allegedly seen months earlier and thus has no relevant connection to the videos?
Honestly, Mr. Cohen, is good journalistic fact-checking other than just a dismissive ‘google the topic’ really that difficult? All in all, this doesn’t help my confidence in the fringe media even one bit. Not even a little. *sigh*