Originally posted by Mekanic

For a long time, I was sitting on the fence on this, looking at both sides. But After reading up on this one, again somebody won't give a name. For this many people to claim they've seen the drone, somebody should have been willing to give their name. I can tell you for a fact that I would have if I'd seen it. But for all these people to refuse to submit names? Again, I really want to believe in this, but the lack of tangible evidence, pictures that look entirely too perfect, and the fact that not one witness will provide a real name.....

I think I've tilted heavily to the hoax side of the fence. So unless "Ted Conners" can provide real evidence of the drone from these Infrared Cameras he's monitoring, I feel that this case is better left alone.

Didn't tha Raj guy give his name? As far as I can remember he did, and then there was the mothership pictures (the 1st set) where the guy said something to the effect 'he had nothing to hide' and was willing to respond to emails.

Originally posted by PsykoOps


Didn't tha Raj guy give his name? As far as I can remember he did, and then there was the mothership pictures (the 1st set) where the guy said something to the effect 'he had nothing to hide' and was willing to respond to emails.

True on both counts Rajinda did give his full name and even posted twice on another chat forum discussing this. However he answered very few questions and left without giving any reason. Same as the other "witness" Steve (if I remember correctly) Stating he would be happy to come forward but never actually did...So while some "witnesses" have given their real names they have all been less than forthcoming with any real background stories. Exluding those of course interviewed by LMH but then none of those witnesses have come up with any photo's (Birningham phot really doesn't count)either...

One thing that comes to mind is that if you're average joe and haven't seen these kinds of boards and then you photograph something extraordinary and post it somewhere, the reaction might be abit hard to swallow. If they dont really care for the subject there's more than enough of flamatory comments to unease the nervous kinds so they'd cut their losses and just stay away. A possibility, but on the other hand if you'd really see something like that it should be a pretty life changing event... I'm babbling here again

Bad robot seems to have been so far involved in tv-productions only, this could be a start of a campaign for new sci-fi piece. There's 2 development credits on bad robots site in imdbpro.com but you need to have registration to that site to access so cant really check.

Not allowed to link directly to that site from here so the link won't work. But since the pic you are reffering to was posted as a bit of a joke I don't think it really adds anything to the story one way or the other..

Welcome aboard DragonK...

Interesting theory. My own opinion is that although this idea might have some merit, without further in-depth analysis it would be difficult to confirm a positive correlation.

We definitely appreciate your bringing this, conceptually, to our attention. For the time being, we'll have to add it to the pile of other, equally intriguing postulation regarding these enigmatic drones.

I seem to recall one (or more) of the other drone threads having a post or two comparing fractal images to the drones - as partially explained in your post. Since we are up to 4 digits in posts on this subject over 1/2 dozen or more threads, you'll have to do a search or better yet, start reading through some to ferret them out if you're interested.

Good job!

Thanks for the welcome!

I agree that it would take some serious analysis to prove a correlation, by folks far more science-minded than I. I'm not advancing a theory so much as I'm fascinated by the possibility of this concept, along with all the others. Regardless of the eventual determination of the truth or hoaxing of the drones, we certainly have benefited from the broad sharing of concepts the debate has facilitated.

I think I remember seeing those posts about fractals you mentioned...somewhere...it's all a blur at this point.

Yes, in the other section about CARET I also posted this, about new witness, in fact it's Earthfiles link.

This gonna be the year of the drone.

But let me put few more thoughts to the direction of possitive version of the strange craft reality.

1. Witnesses with recorded interviews. If to be taken without prejudice, it's lot of data already. And call me naive, but much of it sounds convincing.
Anyway, Earthfiles with Linda did a great job.

2.Isaac material and images is really strong stuff and made exciting read even for those who took it as a hoax from the first line. I think it's so normal to read it with mixed emotions and maybe some healthy sceptical look is also good.
But if focus only on schemes, language signs and pictures, it so impressive anyway. The resemblance with all kinds of sacred geometry patterns is obvious (including some crop circles formations). Hope some more studies of language also will come out.

Well, there's a contraversy about the pictures, uncorrect perspectives lighting and shadows in many cases. But could it be now taken in mind, if the object is multidimentional and can make tricks of invisibility, is it possible that the pespective and lighting related with it is distorted.

Well, just thought how in late 1940's people felt about stangeness of "flying sourcer" form which later became so common in popular culture along with grey alien. Who knows, maybe there will be time with now strange drones pictured all around,in films or toy shops

Just started playing a new game, and the first thing i picked up on was the alien species' font.




Some of those symbols look familiar?

fooffstarr:

What game is that? Have you had a chance to genuinely compare the fonts? I would LOVE to see a side by side comparison of that game font to what we have in the "drone" images.

Springer...

That game is x3 - reunion and the comparison is in the works as we speak




Some of the symbols you have to zoom in and/or rotate to spot the similarities, and due to the bad quality of the drone images when zoomed in in photoshop, this is the best i can come up with in a hurry.



[edit on 17-7-2007 by fooffstarr]

nice fakes...these are pretty good in terms of scale, etc...but fairly easy to achieve....most notably the ole trick of aperture and distance for scale in the photo itself. My opinion is that these are scale models being shot at convincing angles and then subsequently re-touched to some degree.

Movie magic has done this and better even in the age of orson wells' time.

good job, pursue a career in movies whomever did these.

dont waste your time trying to fool people like us...make it a career, thats the real mystery

[edit on 18-7-2007 by blueyedevil666]

Originally posted by rocksolidbrain

Edit: Well...I tried to replicate the effect by taking a picture of monitor with the cursor. I couldn't , it produces a sharp picture of the cursor even after blurring and compressing it at 100% loss.
Perhaps my camera is too good or we need lcd monitor and I get those bands in the pic. Or perhaps its not a cursor and only a gap in the trees.

How many megapixels is your camera? The original Chad photo is pretty lossy, with very poor detail and washed out black levels, and can't be more than 2 megapixels at the very, very most. I'm guessing a 1.2, at 320x240, which would be the equivalent of a low-end webcam, or a 1st gen camera phone.