耶路撒冷UFO结案

今年的一月份，一系列的视频引起了轰动，这些视频好像是一个UFO正在耶路撒冷的圆顶清真寺上盘旋。随后探索频道空间的制作人伊恩·奥尼尔写到，“从镜头可以看出亮点在下降，好像在圣殿盘旋。几分钟以后，一个简短的闪光灯频闪，然后起飞，消失在夜空中。视频在YouTube一经公开以后就像病毒一样传播。”
Based upon my experience investigating images of UFOs and other "unexplained" phenomena, O'Neill asked for my analysis. I researched both the video and the circumstances surrounding it, and provided a list of reasons why I concluded that the videos were "almost certainly a hoax."
基于我对UFO图片的调查经验和其他一些不能解释的现象，奥尼尔征求了我的意见。我研究了视频和它周围的环境，提出了一些为什么我推论这段视频几乎可以确定是一次恶作剧的原因。
The reaction among UFO believers was both swift and dismissive. O'Neill's column on the topic generated more reader comments than any other at the time, and remains one of the most-commented pieces to date. The post soon made it to CBS News.com, where it generated even more controversy, with nearly 100 posters there commenting on my analysis of the video. Some expressed reservations about the authenticity of the video, but the vast majority dismissed my analysis and claimed that the video was authentic.
相信UFO的人的反应即迅速又蔑视。奥尼尔专栏中谈到的这个话题吸引了比以前任何时候更多的读者。这个帖子迅速被CBS新闻网站上使用，这个网站也产生了更多的辩论，接近100个帖子对我关于视频分析的评论。一些人对视频真实性持保留的态度，但是大部分人是反对我的分析和声称视频是真的。
My skeptical explanations were ridiculed as biased and uninformed. Typical comments included: "Multiple witnesses, different video angles from different nationalities. If it is a hoax, then it would be the best of all hoaxes. I believe it is real..."; "that was the most lame explanation for these videos being a hoax..."; "I am really growing tired of you idiots attempting to debunk UFOs with your casual investigations..."; and "This is a PROPAGANDA article. People realize the truth! I wish this was a hoax. This is the unknown."
我所怀疑的解释被嘲笑为有偏见和无知。典型的讨论包括：“多次UFO现象，来自不同国籍的不同的视频角度。假如它是一个恶作剧，它将是所有恶作剧中最好的一个。我相信这是真的...”；“我正在厌倦你这个尝试通过你随意的调查来揭穿UFO的白痴...”；以及“这是一篇宣传的文章。人们意识这是事实！我希望这是一次恶作剧。这是未知数。”
Others called my analysis "classic uninformed debunking," and stated, "Mr. Radford, if you're going to make assertions without doing your homework, then you show nothing but your ignorance." Several posters requested a follow-up: “If Ian O'Neill would comment with some follow-up research and/or analysis, then it would help restore any faith some people may have lost in his journalistic ability."
其他人称我的分析“经典的无知揭穿，”以及说，“雷德福先生，假如你在没有做完你的家庭作业的时候做出断言，那么你将除了你的愚昧无知以外再也证明不了什么的。”几个帖子请求随帖：“如果伊恩·奥尼尔为一些随后的研究和（或）分析做评论的话，那么这样将帮助恢复一些人的信仰，这些人可能已经失去了他们的新闻工作的能力。”
I'm not even remotely concerned about O'Neill’s journalistic ability, but I am happy to present the conclusion of an independent follow-up analysis: It's a hoax.
我并不是很担心奥尼尔的新闻工作能力，但是我很高兴提出一个独立的通过后续研究所得出的结论：这是一个恶作剧。