1. Blake Stevison

    Blake Stevison New Member

  2. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    • Like Like x 1
  3. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    are you having deja vu? i think we've had this thread before but i cant figure out the right search terms to use.
  4. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    What is the background to the video? It seems to be lots of unrelated clips from different dates.

    This, for instance, looks to be a light from a building or vehicle on top of distant hills.

  5. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    There's some discussion here: http://forgetomori.com/2010/ufos/kumburgaz-turkey-ufo-yacht-window-reflections/

    It suggests that some of the images could be lights/reflections of boats at the marina to the east of the filming location:

  6. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Yeah, I've seen the cruise ship thing before, but I can't find it on Metabunk.

    Google Image Search seems to be giving very limited results recently.
  7. Kaen

    Kaen Member

    For your information: Some background and a rebuttal of the cruise ship hypothesis.

    This case was pretty big in Turkey, with a debate on national television and a subsequent investigation report by the Scientific and Technology Research Board of Turkey.
    Link to this report: http://turkeyufocase.blogspot.com/p/national-observatory-report-byprof-phd.html

    The case is elaborately described and analysed with links to all source material on:
    (Tip: Some links are present both on the left side and on the bottom of the web page. Sometimes one of these links will work while the other is broken).

    Some introductory background info from that site:

    The ‘cruise ship’ hypothesis has been rebutted, mainly on the calculated elevation of the object, which is based on video fragments where the object and the moon were visible simultaneously and the moon’s position and angular size could be used as a yardstick (plus 7 additional counter arguments).
    Source: http://turkeyufocase.blogspot.com/2013/02/multiple-reasons-suggest-turkey-ufo-was.html

  8. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    Sorry but this is off topic to the thread. While, the allegedly verified translation says the report is of video taken in 2007, 2008 and 2009..

    This is FALSE. the report itself here is dated January 31 2008. So NONE of the OP footage is analyzed in that report. (which is completely inconclusive)

    although the report there (based on this iffy translation) says
    Which makes sense because in the OP collage (which does not reflect the video) there are multiple pics of the exact same scene but dated a year apart. I call bull.

    This is dated, according to your website May 17, 2009. You would need to supply footage of that date if you want to try to claim some sort of debunk. ( I won't bring up fog at this time )
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2018
  9. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    I think the fact that it looks exactly like a cruise ship, and there are cruise ships in that general area raises the bar for counter evidence a significant amount.

    Like did they account for all the possible variations from refraction? And moon flaring in the camera?
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    You would also need to show that the time on the video camera was set correctly. In the days before times were set automatically using GPS, how many people kept their camera clocks correct?

    Moonrise on that day was 1.48 am. If the moon was too high by 3.07am then it must have been in the right place at some time between 1.48 and 3.07, so the camera clock wouldn’t have to be off by a huge amount - less than an hour at a guess.
  11. Kaen

    Kaen Member

    Yes, that’s why they also backtracked all cruise ships that were on the Sea of Marmara at that time from the AIS vessel traffic reports. AIS stands for ‘Automatic Identification System’, an automatic tracking system used by vessel traffic services worldwide for identifying and locating vessels by electronically exchanging ship data.

    No cruise ships were in the area (see picture below, the dots are the ships).


  12. Kaen

    Kaen Member

    The cameraman didn’t speak any English and did not understand the English AM/PM clock system on the NTSC Camera he bought. He did set the time right, but changed his mind whether it should be ‘AM’ or ‘PM’.

    Source: At 0:36 in the video below:

    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hb7YJdEnhpE
  13. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    That is not what Trailblazer said. He said if the camera was off by an hour (Daylight Savings Time etc) it would change the position of the moon.
  14. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    Also from looking at all of these videos there seem to have been "UFO sightings" by this same person on multiple dates over a period of two years. It seems highly unlikely that there were repeat visits by UFOs to the same area, where this same hotel security guard could repeatedly video them.

    The "object" doesn't really look like a cruise ship to me. It doesn't look like a real object at all, but more like a reflection.


    Apparently the footage was filmed using a camera that had a teleconverter on it. I can't help thinking it looks more like the reflection of a camera bezel or something.


    Regarding the moon height, in order to have the correct distance of about four and a half degrees between the moon and the horizon, the time would have to be about 50 minutes out. This is 2.18am:


    However note that the moon is then above the land, not above the sea.

    This is the moon position for the time noted on the video:


    That puts the moon almost exactly above the coastline from the filming position. It seems strange that there are no other lights visible along the coast there.

    (The filming location is here, at the beach end of the Yeni Kent apartment complex.

    • Like Like x 2
    • Useful Useful x 2
  15. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    and where no one else videotaped them, even though there were 'news' segments about them early on. You'd think there would be UFO viewing parties on that beach every night.

    it does to me too, but a reflection wouldn't zoom, right?
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

  17. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Looking in that direction of the moon there you see Guzecle Marina (mentioned before by @Trailblaser)
    Metabunk 2018-07-17 08-56-34.

    It is rather odd there's no other lights. But it is 3AM, maybe they were having power cuts or something?
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    • Useful Useful x 1
  19. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    From another page about these videos:

    I think I see what he means in the video:


    Video here:

    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlpacP0wnfw

    As @deirdre points out, that seems to rule out any kind of camera reflection, as I suggested earlier. The "UFO" moves consistently with the moon as the camera moves and zooms.
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2018
  20. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    This video seems to show an identifiable star, Fomalhaut:

    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baQa0GRAS6M


    From Stellarium (NB time zone incorrectly shows Turkey as UTC +2, so I have adjusted the time by one hour)


    It then cuts to six minutes later showing a series of "UFO" lights, but nowhere does the video show both, to allow them to be related to each other. Why cut out the intervening footage?
  21. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    why set your camera to use American English date formats, when you don't even know what am or pm is. Even my cheesy little camera I can set European format and/or all numerals.
  22. Kaen

    Kaen Member

    It could simply be some clouds, like in the picture below.

  23. Kaen

    Kaen Member

    He does have both the UFO and this star (?) in view from 3:36 in the video below.

    It seems to get bigger when he zooms in (not just due to blur), so it may be a planet instead of a star?


    Later he has the object in view again, and it really comes across as something floating in the air:



    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BX3VTg1uQrw
  24. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    At the start of the moon segment, at 2:02 AM, May 17, 2009, there's a brief glimpse of the moon with two lights.
    Metabunk 2018-07-17 13-14-24.

    There's two lights visible, the exposure adjust so you can see a bit more detail.
    Metabunk 2018-07-17 13-19-16.
    The moon is also better defined, we can use this to match up with a (four minutes) later shot that shows the UFO and the moon:
    Metabunk 2018-07-17 13-25-24.
    (I've offset the images slights so you can see both moon images match)

    So those two lights, which are obviously artificial, seem to have been deliberately hidden - probably along with many other lights.
  25. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    That's a very different object, four red lights. Probably on a ship.
    Metabunk 2018-07-17 13-31-33.
  26. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    This type of thing:
    Metabunk 2018-07-17 13-36-20.
  27. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    Yes, there's a bit of tricky editing where a zoom into the star (Fomalhaut?) then cuts to a zoom in on the four lights, which the earlier footage showed was actually close to the horizon, some way below and to the left of the star.

    Yellow is the star, red is the cluster of lights:


    The cluster of lights is clearly very close to the horizon, consistent with being a ship. It doesn't look anything like the "disc" UFOs in the other clips.

    Somewhere fairly close to the coast, around this area.

  28. Z.W. Wolf

    Z.W. Wolf Senior Member

    The author of that debunking you linked to reckoned that the Moon was 12.3 degrees above the horizon at Latitude: 41° 01' 15.89" N Longitude: 28° 28' 49.19" E at 3:06 a.m. local time on May 17, 2009. And that is correct. And he uses the angular size of the Moon to estimate how many degrees the Moon was above the UFO. A valid method.


    But there are problems he did not address.

    The moon in a zoomed in shot.


    There's a problem with this zoomed out shot. If this is the moon, and it is, where is Jupiter?


    Jupiter was just a few degrees away from the Moon that night. Where is it in the video?


    As already pointed out in post #24, in an earlier part of the video there are two artificial lights below the Moon. You can even see the pole one of them is sitting on.


    But by using that same method the debunking author used, we can see that the Moon was about 4 to 5 degrees above these artificial lights, just 5 minutes earlier.


    According to this, the Moon was 4.4 degrees above the UFO, and the UFO was 7.9 degrees above the horizon. But 4.4 degrees is pretty close to how far the Moon is above those artificial lights - and probably pretty much the same number of degrees above the horizon.

    Several problems are resolved if we assume that the camera clock was not set correctly. Let's wind Stellarium back to the time the rising Moon was 4.4 degrees above the horizon. It turns out that it was 2:18 a.m., and Jupiter was low enough to be hidden by ground clutter. (Also see post #14)


    This solves the problem of missing Jupiter, why the Moon is so low above the artificial lights, and puts the UFO on the horizon.

    What remains is why those artificial lights are missing from the later part of the video. We can assume that they were masked or the camera position was changed.

    As already pointed out, the Moon in this scenario would be over the land. Where are all the other ground lights you'd expect in the suburbs of Istanbul? I'm guessing that they were masked by moving the camera behind a wall or foliage to get the shot just right. No reason to assume deception. Just getting a better shot. That's what I would do.

    BTW, the author of that cruise ship debunking doesn't have the stars and planets "turned on" in Stellarium. That's why the Jupiter problem isn't a problem in his scenario.


    Last edited: Jul 17, 2018
  29. Kaen

    Kaen Member

    This is an actual picture of a lamp post at the Sea of Marmara:

    Source: https://www.agefotostock.com/age/en/Search.aspx?query=marmara sea lamp post

    It looks similar to the lamp post in the video.

    The top of the lamp post is 7 degrees below the moon:


    If you add the pole to scale, you’ll get very close to the 12,8 degrees that the top of the moon is above the horizon:


    Jupiter may be simply obscured by clouds or haze, just as the moon is partially obscured by some clouds.
    So the position of the lamp post is consistent with the time indicated by the camera.
  30. Z.W. Wolf

    Z.W. Wolf Senior Member

    I've found some photos of the Yeni Kent Apts.












    [Mod note: replaced broken external image links]
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 18, 2018
    • Useful Useful x 1
  31. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    That shows how the lights along the shoreline could easily be hidden by moving the camera, as there is a wall (and tree) blocking much of the view in that direction.
  32. Kaen

    Kaen Member

    Don't know what you want to convey with these photos?

    I really like this site because it is fact-driven to a level that is rarely seen on the internet (including many other ‘debunking’ sites). And it generally gives room to several views, based on several confirmation biases, in a respectful way.

    This is the best way to get to the truth, since nobody is immune to the mechanisms of confirmation bias (source: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...onfirmation-bias-affects-you-every-single-day)
    If this site was any different I wouldn't bother to join the discussions.

    So let’s stick to the facts here and refrain from these kinds of ad-hominem attacks based on village rumors. How would you feel if your real name was mentioned on the internet suggesting some of your neighbors think you’re a lunatic (while others think you're a genius)?
  33. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    Yalcin has made himself a limited public figure. His name is already all over the internet.
    AND you are the one who brought up local residents as alleged witnesses, to support your claims.

    While there is absolutely no proof that ZW's source is not just making that up, there is also no proof that a lot of what you are quoting is not just people making stuff up.

  34. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    The problem with that it that there's TWO lights visible in the shot, so it can't be looking up at a single light.

  35. Kaen

    Kaen Member

    I'm really sorry to see that you don't seem to recognize the difference between ad-hominem attacks and other information you can give about people.
  36. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    calling someone a genius isn't an ad hominem. if I blip out 'lunatic' from that quote and put in ' [ ] ' , would that read better for you?
  37. Kaen

    Kaen Member

    What problem? The lamp post might as well have three lights that shine in different directions if you look at the picture of it. And even if this were a different lamp post that was slightly shorter it would still fit within the 12,3 degrees.

    Attached Files:

  38. Kaen

    Kaen Member

    The only information relevant to the case is:

    In my opinion, you can leave out the rest.
    • Funny Funny x 1
  39. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Metabunk 2018-07-18 07-08-04.

    I'm thinking the best match for this might be ship masts. There's one bright light on a pole, then what looks like another light underneath it, then possibly two pole to the right without lights, and a third light just below that .

    Note we can see the actual shape of the moon (roughly), and the light has a distinct shape also - although that could partly be glare. It's a very similar size to the moon, so that give an angular size (0.5°), from which a rough range of sizes and distances could be calculated.
  40. Kaen

    Kaen Member

    In the picture below I added a drawing of a pole beneath the lamp light to make my argument independent of a specific lamp post.

    It all seems to fit.


    The light at the beach front was discussed earlier by the way:

    The light you see shining from underneath might be the one of the side lamps on the lamp pole shining upwards or a next lamp post that is shining just outside the field of view.