2008 UFO Footage From Kumburgaz, Turkey

Can anyone 'straighten out' the curve in the images ? I just get a feel that that would provide the biggest step forward. I know NASA can do this with gravitational lensing images of galaxies, but whether such software exists for a home PC is another matter.
Done with "warp" tool in Photoshop Elements. I may have introduced some lateral compression or stretching in some areas to get them to "look" straightened out. This is fast and dirty, I see a few places now that I might tweak if it becomes important (or let somebody else with a more mathematical warping tool give it a try...)

I don't see anything immediately striking, other than if you think it was something that was originally straight, curved by camera or video qualities/setting at some point, it now looks more like a straight thing. But maybe somebody will see something I'm missing...


turk 2 straight.png
turk 1 straight.png

turk 3 straight.png
turk 4 straight.png


Edit to add -- I DO see more clearly that the 6/8/2008 and May 17, 2009 "objects" really look like the same thing -- whether the same bracelet or the same gate in a wall or something else I don't feel confident in specifying, but they look very much like they are the same thing.
 
There is one instance in the video where he pans to the moon, zooms in, and then pans back to the "saucer" in the distance. Moon and "saucer" are in the same frame. The crescent moon seems to be consistent with the date and time displayed.

Yes, in the video dated 17 May 2009, at 3:07.
Zoomed back, out of focus much of the time.
With nothing in the image except the Moon and the saucer.
I am still skeptical, as this shot would be the easiest to fabricate, if one was so inclined.
It would have helped if he had panned across to show buildings and clouds and people, something else in the view.
He does very well at keeping something else's out of his video (in focus something else's at any rate).
 
Done with "warp" tool in Photoshop Elements. I may have introduced some lateral compression or stretching in some areas to get them to "look" straightened out. This is fast and dirty, I see a few places now that I might tweak if it becomes important (or let somebody else with a more mathematical warping tool give it a try...)

I don't see anything immediately striking, other than if you think it was something that was originally straight, curved by camera or video qualities/setting at some point, it now looks more like a straight thing. But maybe somebody will see something I'm missing...


View attachment 70360View attachment 70361
View attachment 70359View attachment 70358

Edit to add -- I DO see more clearly that the 6/8/2008 and May 17, 2009 "objects" really look like the same thing -- whether the same bracelet or the same gate in a wall or something else I don't feel confident in specifying, but they look very much like they are the same thing.

If you want to match up these images with something other than bangles, I suggest a boat with oarlocks.
stock-photo-closeup-of-brown-wooden-oar-in-rowing-boat-rowlock-at-sea-in-sunlight-368113070.jpg


I rejected that long ago. But look at the oarlock shaped thing. In the recess. I hope you can see it.

oar-locks-marine-boat-bronze-vintage-chain-nautical-maritime-2.jpg
 

Attachments

  • oar-locks-marine-boat-bronze-vintage-chain-nautical-maritime-2.jpg
    oar-locks-marine-boat-bronze-vintage-chain-nautical-maritime-2.jpg
    334 KB · Views: 44
Yes, in the video dated 17 May 2009, at 3:07.
Zoomed back, out of focus much of the time.
With nothing in the image except the Moon and the saucer.
I am still skeptical, as this shot would be the easiest to fabricate, if one was so inclined.
It would have helped if he had panned across to show buildings and clouds and people, something else in the view.
He does very well at keeping something else's out of his video (in focus something else's at any rate).
I've explained this is... in detail... please go back to Page 7
 
Done with "warp" tool in Photoshop Elements. I may have introduced some lateral compression or stretching in some areas to get them to "look" straightened out. This is fast and dirty, I see a few places now that I might tweak if it becomes important (or let somebody else with a more mathematical warping tool give it a try...)

I don't see anything immediately striking, other than if you think it was something that was originally straight, curved by camera or video qualities/setting at some point, it now looks more like a straight thing. But maybe somebody will see something I'm missing...


View attachment 70360View attachment 70361
View attachment 70359View attachment 70358

Edit to add -- I DO see more clearly that the 6/8/2008 and May 17, 2009 "objects" really look like the same thing -- whether the same bracelet or the same gate in a wall or something else I don't feel confident in specifying, but they look very much like they are the same thing.

I disagree. Grouping screenshots from the videos we can see that the 6 8 2008 is from the object on the following dates.
  • 4 June 2007
  • 1 August 2007
  • 12 August 2007
The May 17 2009 is from the object on the following dates.
  • 24 Augugust 2008
  • 29 May 2008
  • 11 June 2008
I tried to group the varied objects/scenes in the following collage.
1721502679662.png
 
There are two different bracelets.

Those two are also positioned differently on the T-Bar dowel at different times. Including being flipped, the way a vinyl record is flipped.
 
I disagree. Grouping screenshots from the videos we can see that the 6 8 2008 is from the object on the following dates.
I guess I'll disagree with your disagreement! ^_^

But at this level of uncertainty as to how it was done, I'm not sure it is critical to nail that down yet (unless the grouping favors one theory over another!). If it is ever conclusively demonstrated what was in the various images, I guess we'll know...

For now, the key thing is that there have been several proposals put forward that come up with a reasonably good way to create these videos without an alien spaceship, though none yet provable. The videos look like what you'd get using those techniques. Given we're not omniscient, if there are several techniques we thought of, there are probably some more that we have not. With multiple ways to get images like this that are all more likely than "space aliens hovered offshore in Turkey where one guy videoed them several times over a couple of years, but never seem to have shown up anywhere else in the world or been noticed by anybody else in Turkey," I'd say it's at the point where a UFO believer needs to debunk the various methods suggested so far (as they and we did with the cruise ship hypothesis) -- and to do so extremely conclusively, before "aliens" belongs back in the discussion.

That's where I think the case stands at the moment -- it is a very interesting one to think about, hopefully someday Mr. Yalman will come clean and show how it was done. He convinced a lot of people for a long time, he deserves to take a bow for his ingenuity if nothing else.
 
I don't see anything immediately striking

To me it makes it more obvious that the objects ( cars, ships, whatever ) in the photo have lights that are shining onto a surface ( road, water, etc ). In other words this is not a bracelet or some such thing but the lights are genuinely out there...coming from objects and shining onto nearby surfaces. This is a particularly good example....


turk 3 straight.png
 
To me it makes it more obvious that the objects ( cars, ships, whatever ) in the photo have lights that are shining onto a surface ( road, water, etc ). In other words this is not a bracelet or some such thing but the lights are genuinely out there...coming from objects and shining onto nearby surfaces.
Yes, IF the "object" being videoed is really a straight "object" not actually curved and the curve is an artifact of how it was photographed, then it looks a lot like a surface or some other flat/linear thing illuminated by lights, and not at all like a bangle. On the other hand, if it is really curved as it appears in the video, it looks nothing like a flat surface and very much like a bangle or other curved thing!

The issue, I think, is that I don't see anything that strongly indicates which is a better representation of whatever the underlying reality was. Each version (curved as presented by Yalman, flat as shown above modified through PhotoShop) looks a lot like one set of hypotheses and would tend to rule out some of the others -- but which reflects reality? Heckifiknow.
 
To me it makes it more obvious that the objects ( cars, ships, whatever ) in the photo have lights that are shining onto a surface ( road, water, etc ). In other words this is not a bracelet or some such thing but the lights are genuinely out there...coming from objects and shining onto nearby surfaces. This is a particularly good example....


View attachment 70370
Draw a sketch of what you see.
 
That's where I think the case stands at the moment -- it is a very interesting one to think about, hopefully someday Mr. Yalman will come clean and show how it was done. He convinced a lot of people for a long time, he deserves to take a bow for his ingenuity if nothing else.
I love how in the same thread people ridiculed Yacin for being a bumbling security guard who doesn't know how to hold a camera to now being a mastermind in special effects . I'm starting to think this is the real deal...until someone can fully debunk this 100% which is highly unlikely at this point....
 
I love how in the same thread people ridiculed Yacin for being a bumbling security guard who doesn't know how to hold a camera to now being a mastermind in special effects . I'm starting to think this is the real deal...until someone can fully debunk this 100% which is highly unlikely at this point....
Pretty forced. I've seen this argument, in various forms, in YT video comment sections lots of times.

He fidgets with the camera because he's fidgety. Also, 99.8% of the human race is horrible at operating cameras.

People have no "eye", they don't frame subjects correctly, they don't understand light, they fool around with the focus, they don't hold the camera steady, they don't hold the camera level...

Yalcin was ahead in that he usually kept the camera level.

The "special effects" are fun, but not the work of a mastermind. As a teenager I, and my friend, did in-camera trick photography that people couldn't figure out.

And his execution was poor.

In the end what he produced was motionless images that he zoomed in and out on. No movement. Just an object hanging there. For a change, to fake movement in that video I just described above, he tilted the camera.

Last, did he do all this by himself?

One thing of note: He had expensive equipment. The camcorder alone was over $2,000 U.S. - not adjusted for inflation. The Turkish Lira has also had a long history of being one of the least valued currencies in the world - which means bad exchange rates. (The "New Lira" was phased in, starting in 2005. They adjusted the value of the New Lira by knocking 6 zeros off of the old Turkish Lira. To be fair, that stabilized the domestic inflation rate to single digits for a long time.)

But imports were expensive. So in real terms his equipment was even more expensive than it would seem.

He could have used up his life savings, he could have been well off in the first place and was working a retirement job... Or did someone give him this stuff?

Did he also have help with the technical stuff? That's something that's been asked before. There's no evidence for it.

Personally, I don't think he necessarily needed help. No one's calling him an idiot.
 
Last edited:
I love how in the same thread people ridiculed Yacin for being a bumbling security guard who doesn't know how to hold a camera to now being a mastermind in special effects . I'm starting to think this is the real deal...until someone can fully debunk this 100% which is highly unlikely at this point....

By "real deal", I'm not sure what you mean. Unexplained, as in no one is sure what we're seeing on the screen? Ok, fair enough. Unexplained because it's an alien spaceship as claimed by Yacin, is a different story. Not fully debunking something and then claiming it's the "real deal (alien spaceship)" is known as the Argument from Ignorance fallacy.

External Quote:

The argument from ignorance (or argumentum ad ignorantiam and negative proof) is a logical fallacy that claims the truth of a premise is based on the fact that it has not (yet) been proven false or that a premise is false because it has not (yet) been proven true. This is often phrased as "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

Not knowing exactly what Yacin managed to record, does make it an alien spaceship. Several people have worked on various solutions on this thread. It's just the nature of the public forum that we can see ideas being tossed around, thought about, analyzed and worked over in real time. Maybe the solution is out there, maybe someone already has hit upon it or maybe we'll never quite know exactly what we're seeing.

"Until someone can debunk this 100%" is not the standard. Yacin is claiming that over several years on multiple occasions a large alien spacecraft hovered out over the sea of Marmara that he, and he alone, managed to capture on camera.

This is a densely populated area and a heavily traveled waterway. It seems a bit strange that NOT ONE other person has ever been able to capture this craft floating in the air in all these years. One would think Yacin would just invite others to hang out with him and take their own videos when the craft shows up. He seems to have claimed in one of the videos above that the aliens communicate with him, so he knows when to set up his camera. Pretty easy to bring some friends, or better yet some skeptics along and show them. Why has this never happened?

Maybe the aliens only reveal themselves to Yacin, or maybe Yacin knows how to create these videos and doesn't want anyone around when he does.
 
Yes, you're right. He could have got it second hand. The first videos were taken in 2007.

I've gone to the recent interview. The interview is hard to follow. The translator is not a professional, for one thing.

I used GPT to translate Yalcin's Turkish - as generated in the YT transcript. There's abundant room for error and garbled meanings, but it's a lot easier to follow than the halting words of the translator; and very different in places.

This is the first part of the interview. I've eliminated all but one of the questions, and all of the translator's words.
I am 66 years old, and I've always been in contact with them. They were always the same beings. I also know about other races and places. The reptilian ones have always protected me. In other words, the Orion Zetas protected me from them.

After my military service ended, for almost 10 years, they neither contacted me nor did I reach out to them. I feel like they were using me like a robot. Then I started a street life; I have a wife, a family, and cars, but something separated me. For 6 to 7 years, I lived a street life.

After that, I traveled to several provinces in Turkey, including Manisa, İzmir, Aydın, Söke, Kars, and Tatvan. In the end, the people who directed me saw me, but there was no camera, no evidence. I said, 'I can see from here, when the clouds open, they follow me.' Finally, someone told me, 'In 2006 or 2007, they said, "Go home; we will contact you."

Yes, let me also say this: during the years I stayed in Kumburgaz, my late father told my sister that I was the site guard, but I wasn't. That was my own house, and I was just living there. Then, while I was there, someone I didn't know turned their back on me and said 'old camera' to me.

Yes, in those situations, I was in need and unable to meet my needs due to lack of resources. The voice came again, and the person I saw disappeared when I turned around. I realized that someone was trying to communicate with me telepathically. By the way, I forgot to mention that I have a chip in my foot.

Yes, yes, the chip—I'm sorry, I forgot to mention it when I was 14. It was placed then, shaped like a dollar sign. Anyway, let's get back to the topic. Now, I was wondering what I should do to get a camera. The voices kept ringing in my ears, and they appeared in my dreams. I eventually got the camera, and on the first night, hundreds of people followed me. They asked, 'What are you doing? Are you filming an airplane?' I showed the footage to someone in 2007, and he was a retired pilot. He said, 'Keep going; you've become an expert in this.'

"Yes, after that, let me say this: regarding the camera, there was the PM (Prime Meridian) issue. People would ask if the night and day were mixed up. I'd like to remind you that this happened around the PM. I'm still not sure what it actually means. I worked as a night guard, and every night from 3 to 6 AM, I watched over the sea. These beings told me, 'We are here.
' It's said that when a ship is on the horizon, there's a light, but there was no such event. [DenTÜBİTAK (Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey) and scientists came in 2009 to investigate this. [He's denying that his flying saucer videos are actually cruise ships.]

Exactly when he got the camera and how remains unclear. Best guess is 2007.


It's unclear whether he was a "security guard" at the Yeni Kent Apts. Which is something that has always bothered me. It's a small complex. Would there be the money or the need to employ a night security guard?
Yes, let me also say this: during the years I stayed in Kumburgaz, my late father told my sister that I was the site guard, but I wasn't. That was my own house, and I was just living there.
He seems to deny that he was employed by the Yeni Kent Apts. He was just living in Yeni Kent.


But later...
I worked as a night guard, and every night from 3 to 6 AM, I watched over the sea.

Watched over the sea? Is that what a security guard does?

I'm still not sure what it actually means. I worked as a night guard, and every night from 3 to 6 AM, I watched over the sea. These beings told me, 'We are here."

My feeling is that what he's always meant is that he was appointed by the Aliens to be a lookout. To be on watch for the appearance of the Alien ships. And people have misunderstood that.
 
Last edited:
Yes, you're right. He could have got it second hand. The first videos were taken in 2007.

I've gone to the recent interview. The interview is hard to follow. The translator is not a professional, for one thing.

I used GPT to translate Yalcin's Turkish - as generated in the YT transcript. There's abundant room for error and garbled meanings, but it's a lot easier to follow than the halting words of the translator; and very different in places.

The is the first part of the interview. I've eliminated all but one of the questions, and all of the translator's words.

Exactly when he got the camera and how remains unclear. Best guess is 2007.

It's unclear whether he was a "security guard" at the Yeni Kent Apts. Which is something that has always bothered me. It's a small complex. Would there be the money or the need to employ a night security guard?

He seems to deny that he was employed by the Yeni Kent Apts. He was just living in Yeni Kent.

But later...

Watched over the sea? Is that what a security guard does?

My feeling is that what he's always meant is that he was appointed by the Aliens to be a lookout. To be on watch for the appearance of the Alien ships. And people have misunderstood that.
I think there's some things lost in translation there. He says he was a "night guard", which I would call a nightwatchman. When he says that he 'watched over the sea' I'd take that to mean he kept a lookout in that direction, but not necessarily as part of his job.
 
How do you explain this?

Yes, let me also say this: during the years I stayed in Kumburgaz, my late father told my sister that I was the site guard, but I wasn't. That was my own house, and I was just living there.
 
I've tried the YT transcript to GPT translation thing again and got this slightly different version:

"Yes, let me also say this: During the years I stayed in Kumburgaz, my late father and my sister were there. In that site, he referred to me as a site guardian, but I wasn't actually a site guardian. It was my own house, and I was on duty there.


This is what the translator in the video says:
He's... actually... Commonly, people known that he was a guard in Kumburgaz, at the... uh... the incident area. But he is saying that his father was a [unintelligible - the YT transcript says colon. It sounds like ko-low-nell to me.] on that time, and that house was belong to him. And on his free time... actually he was spending his... uh... summer time and free time over there... to the... in his father's house. And he suddenly came up... across with a person... uh... which he didn't know, and he said... he told him suddenly... uh... take and buy a camera.

This is how I understand this:
People commonly believe he was a security guard in the Yeni Kent Apts. But he was actually just staying in his father's apartment (or timeshare?) during the summer(s). It was during this time - the summer of 2007?- that an Alien voice told him to buy a camera.


It seems to me that I remember that the flying saucer videos are all dated during the summer months of 2007, 2008, 2009. We'll have to check.


 
Last edited:
I've also wondered if Yeni Kent is an apartment complex... or is it a timeshare resort. It's on the beach after all.

If Yalcin's father owned time in a unit there during the summer, that may explain why Yalcin was only living there during the summer.

So far I can't find any flying saucer video outside of the summer months... no matter what year.
 
According to the YT transcript Yalcin said: "Her gece her saat 3'ten 6'ya kadar deniz üzerinde bekçilik yaptım."

GPT translates this as:
"I performed nightly watch duties from 3 to 6 AM over the sea."

What do "watch duties" and "over the sea" mean? Or what might they mean?

This is what GPT says
The Turkish words "bekçilik yaptım" are being translated as "nightly watch duties."

"Bekçilik" means "guarding" or "watch duty."
"Yaptım" means "I did" or "I performed."

The phrase "bekçilik yaptım" can also be translated as "I kept a lookout" or "I kept watch." It conveys the act of being vigilant or observing, which aligns with keeping a lookout.

The phrase "deniz üzerinde" in Turkish translates to "on the sea" or "over the sea" in English. It refers to something occurring on the surface of the sea or in the airspace above the sea.

This is tentative because of the problems inherent in this translation:

Yalcin may have been saying that he was performing nightly lookout duties, on watch for things on the surface of the sea, or in the airspace above the surface of the sea.

(At the behest of the Aliens.)

Google Translate version of: "Her gece her saat 3'ten 6'ya kadar deniz üzerinde bekçilik yaptım."
I worked as a watchman on the sea every night from 3 to 6 o'clock.
In other words, "I was at sea, and worked as a watchman."

Because "deniz üzerinde" means "on the surface of the sea."


According to GPT, the normal way of saying "I was working as a night security guard" would be:
"Gece güvenlik görevlisi olarak çalışıyordum."

"Gece" means "night."
"Güvenlik görevlisi" means "security guard."
"Olarak" means "as."
"Çalışıyordum" means "I was working."
 
Last edited:
I'm inclined to agree Yalcin is not saying that he was employed as a night security guard.

The Turkish phase in the YouTube transcript is "ve ben e her gece hem bekçilik yaptım".

1721937236352.png


"Yaptım" is the first person past-tense form of "yapmak" which simply means "to do". "I worked" would be "çalıştı" from "çalışmak". So "I worked" in the translation is a context-sensitive inference by the tool (Google Translate also offers "I acted" when the "every night" clause is removed).

1721951191449.png
 
I love how in the same thread people ridiculed Yacin for being a bumbling security guard who doesn't know how to hold a camera to now being a mastermind in special effects . I'm starting to think this is the real deal...until someone can fully debunk this 100% which is highly unlikely at this point....
Who has concluded that he's a mastermind of special effects? The most popular opinion is that he positioned something curved and shiny close to the front of the camera, and didn't focus on it. That's not mastermind behaviour.
 
According to this:
1721502679662.png


The earliest date for any given year is May 12, 2008
The latest date for any given year is August 24, 2007

His window seems to be mid-May to late August. That goes for all three years he was active at the Yeni Kent Apts in Kumburgaz - 2007, 2008, 2009.

So far, I can't find any other videos outside this window.
 
Last edited:
I'm inclined to agree Yalcin is not saying that he was employed as a night security guard.

The Turkish phase in the YouTube transcript is "ve ben e her gece hem bekçilik yaptım".
From my understanding of Turkish, "bekçilik" is a general activity descriptor that is not exclusive to professional guard duty.

"bekçilik" -> activity of waiting for something
"bekçi" -> person who waits
"bekle" -> wait
 
night guard gets bored, starts filming wrist watch :p
The similarity is certainly strong, but of course sometimes things look like other things... Now I have to go sit through the footage again and see if there is ever a smooth zoom from a wide shot to the zoomed close-ups (hard to do with a watch) or if there is always a cut/discontinuity. My memory is the later, but memories are not always reliable!
 
Doesn't work for all the scenes he filmed though
Might work for some, though -- and a watch would be a logical addition to using wrist bangles, being in the "stuff that might be on my dresser or even on my wrist" category, for those pursuing the bangle hypothesis.
 
the guy probably filmed the watch at different angles, and the side of the watch without the crown to.

or did you mean something else ?

My theory is covered in TheSneezingMonkey's video as "Theory 1" ... the bright luminance of the object, the 'rectanglar frame' , the changing nature of the 'ufo' across numerous scenes in real-time, but the consistency of the shapes over the years suggests (to me anyway) that he's fiming something that is static, nearby, brightly lit, and that can change appearance in a matter of seconds - fits with him fiming a TV screen. The shapes suggest a wide angle CCTV security camera covering various places nearby to the beach.


Source: https://youtu.be/lm93JuW3zUk?t=637


Unfortunately (and I totally accept this) that for the video to be debunked I'd need to geolocate a number of the alleged scenes that I claim are being fimed, but the poor quality of the video makes that practically impossible. That, along with the fact that this was nearly 20 years ago, means it will never be debunked using my 'Theory'.
 
if you go to 16:00 he shows a clip where the video pans from the object to the moon. Both should be in focus if the "UFO" truley where a distant object.

Indeed it corroborates to the theory that the object must be close up.
 
We're meant to accept that the ETI's are flying open-topped saucers now? Like a sort of interplanetary roadster?

Capture.JPG
 
We're meant to accept that the ETI's are flying open-topped saucers now? Like a sort of interplanetary roadster?

View attachment 73325
Capture.JPG
Snoopy_wwi_ace_lb-1-.jpg
The roadster-like saucers have a long cartoon tradition.
bg,f8f8f8-flat,750x,075,f-pad,750x1000,f8f8f8.jpg

Though I'd really liken them to the old single-seater airplanes.
11659ebdee5c4ef0dd9303eb01317500.jpg

Of course, not being able to look ahead (as in the cited interpretation of Kumburgaz) would defeat the purpose of having the head outside.
 
Last edited:
i was under the impression that it was just drawn on top of a random frame
Maybe so but it often gets posted with this case and it is presented as a simple zoom in on a frame, but I've never seen it sourced. So it could be investigated if we knew where it was supposed to be.
 
Back
Top