2008 UFO Footage From Kumburgaz, Turkey

Blake Stevison

New Member
This is one of the most famous pieces of UFO footage that is nearly an hour long and not easily explainable. How would one fake this, or is there some other explanation I am not thinking of?
ufo-tc3bcrkei_collage-by-fabrikant.jpg



Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFuivergbXA&t=1165s
 
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.

upload_2018-7-12_19-19-26.png
 
There's some discussion here: http://forgetomori.com/2010/ufos/kumburgaz-turkey-ufo-yacht-window-reflections/
Archived: https://web.archive.org/web/2019030...umburgaz-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:

External Quote:

From the videos and some reference points, Duarte suggests they were shot pointing southeast or east-southeast, in the direction of the Güzelce marina. You can see where this is going.

bb2bae71e040695b7dd9a38248344236.jpg

"Now we can summarize the probable characteristics of these alleged UFOs to suggest a specific hypothesis: the objects are straight or just slightly bent specular surfaces, there are different designs for them, they could be part of a bigger object that can't be seen given the circumstances, they are possibly sheets of transparent material, they are probably in the sea."

"All of this takes us to the following hypothesis: the objects are lateral 'shark' or 'moth' style windows in some boats or small yachts."
 
are you having deja vu? i think we've had this thread before but i cant figure out the right search terms to use.
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.
 
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:
http://turkeyufocase.blogspot.com/
(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:

External Quote:
Several local residents describe observing disc and oval shaped aerial objects with a metallic appearance that manoeuvred silently while sometimes accompanied by strange red and orange lights. Some of the witnesses lived in the nearby housing complex while others were curious onlookers and fishermen. In 2009, after a UFO conference held near Istanbul, Roger Leir and 7 to 8 other people became witnesses themselves and observed a strange disc shaped object hovering in the sky under a bright moon. Roger Leir personally witnessed Yalcin taking video of the anomalous object in the sky and was interviewed multiple times before he passed away.
External Quote:
Yalcin worked the night shift near the Yeni Kent facility located on the shore of Kumburgaz which gave him a good vantage point. But, when the sightings started to take place it began catching the interest of the local residents and more people began to take notice. Similar to 2007 the 2008 sightings were discussed in the Turkish national media, even on CNN , while soon gaining interest from the local Turkish scientific and astronomy community who ended up analyzing the footage. There were different individual segments over a three year period.
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

upload_2018-7-16_13-14-5.png
 
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

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..
oo.PNG



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)
b.PNG






although the report there (based on this iffy translation) says
External Quote:
The first observation made from the footage is that some of the images were recorded in nighttime sky at a certain altitude from the horizon. The footage also covers images of moon in some parts which proves that the video was shot in nighttime and open air. But, the fact that digital date display's showing AM in certain frames and PM in others, raises suspicion about the validity of the time in which the recordings were made
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.



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

upload_2018-7-16_13-14-5-png.33780

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:
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?
 
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.
 
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.

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).

Source: http://turkeyufocase.blogspot.com/2013/02/multiple-reasons-suggest-turkey-ufo-was.html

upload_2018-7-17_9-57-49.png
 
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.

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
 
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'.
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.
 
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.

upload_2018-7-17_15-11-11.png


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.

upload_2018-7-17_15-31-54.png



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:

upload_2018-7-17_15-25-16.png


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:

upload_2018-7-17_15-26-34.png


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.

upload_2018-7-17_15-28-58.png
 
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.
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.

I can't help thinking it looks more like the reflection of a camera bezel or something.
it does to me too, but a reflection wouldn't zoom, right?
 
Looking in that direction of the moon there you see Guzecle Marina (mentioned before by @Trailblaser)
Metabunk 2018-07-17 08-56-34.jpg


It is rather odd there's no other lights. But it is 3AM, maybe they were having power cuts or something?
 
It is rather odd there's no other lights. But it is 3AM, maybe they were having power cuts or something?
From another page about these videos:

External Quote:
Duarte [Chilean researcher Andrés Duarte] also notices that the cameraman seems to deliberately play with a nearby tree to obstruct the lights of buildings that should be visible to the left, as well as with the camera exposure to have only the object and the Moon appear in the footage.
I think I see what he means in the video:

upload_2018-7-17_17-26-32.png


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:
This video seems to show an identifiable star, Fomalhaut:


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


upload_2018-7-17_18-19-1.png


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

upload_2018-7-17_18-19-53.png


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?
 
From another page about these videos:

External Quote:
Duarte [Chilean researcher Andrés Duarte] also notices that the cameraman seems to deliberately play with a nearby tree to obstruct the lights of buildings that should be visible to the left, as well as with the camera exposure to have only the object and the Moon appear in the footage.
I think I see what he means in the video:

View attachment 33810

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

upload_2018-7-17_22-5-9.png
 
This video seems to show an identifiable star, Fomalhaut:

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?

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?

upload_2018-7-17_22-8-58.png


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

upload_2018-7-17_22-9-29.png



Source:

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BX3VTg1uQrw
 
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.jpg


There's two lights visible, the exposure adjust so you can see a bit more detail.
Metabunk 2018-07-17 13-19-16.jpg

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.jpg

(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.
 
That's a very different object, four red lights. Probably on a ship.
View attachment 33824

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:

upload_2018-7-17_22-14-51.png


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.

upload_2018-7-17_22-27-6.png
 
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

View attachment 33780
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.

e14ae41ddd4f16c65751d9a3f3165261.jpg


But there are problems he did not address.


The moon in a zoomed in shot.

ac025e8de8df27ee09f008d45de15e81.png




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

00b03b0f057c4d6727ee45c1efc87127.png





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

6266e179152dffb99fbcaf1520d26f82.jpg



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.

a803c328b3181396b9a38b105b72bfae.png



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.

e14ae41ddd4f16c65751d9a3f3165261.jpg


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)

5190a1d0ac88530cdee5a665b3b42a8a.jpg



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.

http://turkeyufocase.blogspot.com/2013/02/multiple-reasons-suggest-turkey-ufo-was.html

597d9dd335954f81a8569509d5246190.jpg
 
Last edited:
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.

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

upload_2018-7-18_9-42-17.png

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:

upload_2018-7-18_9-42-43.png


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:

upload_2018-7-18_9-45-16.png


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

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread594456/pg29#pid9317109

External Quote:
Community sign has been torn down due to a recent storm
upload_2018-7-18_12-26-1.png


http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/49b033d907bb.jpg

External Quote:
I was told that this is the exact spot Yalcın places his camera to get his recordings. I think this is very important. I've always thought that he did his recordings on an upper balcony. But apparently, he was always on the ground level
upload_2018-7-18_12-25-40.png


http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fa7911d99017.jpg


External Quote:
This is the view right in front of those stairs
upload_2018-7-18_12-25-5.png


http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7c4e406f96ba.jpg


External Quote:
view to the left. City of Istanbul is 30 kms that direction
upload_2018-7-18_12-24-42.png


http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/cb2fa3675de7.jpg


External Quote:
view to the right direction. Greece and Bulgaria are 2 hrs that direction
upload_2018-7-18_12-24-15.png


http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7a966e45072d.jpg

External Quote:

Lupelius
link
When I went there yesterday morning and started taking pictures, some people in YeniKent came up to me and asked me why I was taking pictures. I told them what it was for and they all immediately became very happy. Apparently, they are all glad about their little summer community to have made a name about this.

I wanted to meet Yalcın but they told me that he was still sleeping probably. Now get ready for this, it turns out that Yalcın is a night watchman for that community and lives there all year around. Some people called Yalcın a lunatic and some called him a genius because of the concepts he talks about. He apparently talks a great deal about dimensions, abductions, etc etc.

I asked them about the possibility of a hoax and they said that Yalcın was not at all savy in computers or cameras. Some people seem to believe him and some find him ridıcolous.

[Mod note: replaced broken external image links]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've found some photos of the Yeni Kent Apts.

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)?
 
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)?

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.



Several local residents describe observing disc and oval shaped aerial objects with a metallic appearance that manoeuvred silently while sometimes accompanied by strange red and orange lights
Yalcin worked the night shift near the Yeni Kent facility located on the shore of Kumburgaz which gave him a good vantage point. But, when the sightings started to take place it began catching the interest of the local residents and more people began to take notice
 
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:

upload_2018-7-18_9-45-16-png.33832


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.

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.

metabunk-2018-07-17-13-14-24-jpg.33821
 
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.

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.
 
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.

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?
 
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.

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.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-7-18_15-28-15.png
    upload_2018-7-18_15-28-15.png
    62.8 KB · Views: 757
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?

The only information relevant to the case is:

External Quote:
I asked them about the possibility of a hoax and they said that Yalcın was not at all savy [sic] in computers or cameras.
In my opinion, you can leave out the rest.
 
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.
Metabunk 2018-07-18 07-08-04.jpg


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.
 
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.

upload_2018-7-18_16-16-8.png


The light at the beach front was discussed earlier by the way:
http://turkeyufocase.blogspot.com/2013/02/moon-phases-in-footage-examination.html

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.
 
Back
Top