It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

[HOAX] Isaac CARET - Drones [HOAX]

page: 103
185
<< 100  101  102    104  105  106 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 09:40 AM
link   
Sorry about the link, I went to bed right after I posted. I usually try my links to make sure they work, but it was after one AM here and I fell down on the job. Please don't make me turn in my tinfoil hat.


Let's try this one, it's a long read, but the basic info is there.

www.netvalley.com...




posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 09:50 AM
link   
A couple of items that I read before I posted caught my interest in the Terman bio. It appears that V.Bush was a Professor at Stanford and that he was the one who helped Terman get his Ph.D. of course, but the other biggie is that later on Terman was the guy who got William Hewlett and David Packard together.

And then right down the road from the location that "Isaac" led us to, is the whole HW complex. HMMMMM??????

So we have Vannavar Bush, thought to be part of MJ12 in the background, and then HW in the area. Add to that in the first bio I read, that doesn't come up anymore, it said that Terman was the one who started the industrial park in the first place.

Curiouser and curiouser.

[edit on 13-7-2007 by NGC2736]



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 10:13 AM
link   
I just went back to Isaac's documents and noticed something that I completely failed to read into:

"On this site you will find some of these. They are available as high resolution scans that I am giving away free, PROVIDED THEY ARE NOT MODIFIED IN ANY WAY AND ARE KEPT TOGETHER ALONG WITH THIS WRITTEN MATERIAL."

Why say that? I know some people, myself included probably at some point, put a copyright disclaimer on something we've worked on, but technically they aren't his documents, so how is he going to make that threat come true? Perhaps he'll take the site down, or make it PPV or something if he notices his documents have been edited or used singularly. Someone should really send C2C the link for the mugs and T-shirts to get his reaction...

That's almost admitting he made the documents and wants sole copyright/financial rights to them and any modification or non-permitted use will result in him taking you to court. I'd LOVE to see that (although I'd feel a bit sorry for the other person involved).



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by chunder
Stanford Research Park in 1985

List of companies that occupied grounds there over the years - you have to scroll down a bit.

[edit on 13-7-2007 by chunder]


Excellent you found the site the only issue is with the picture itself. I lloed at it last night. For perspective its shows Page Mill Road heading East. The road on the bottom is El Camino Real. However, it does not show either location for PARC as we know them in that shot. (None of them did) for that matter.



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Outrageo
Fred - I see the array on the roof; are you sure it's not the same size, simply scaled down from your perspective? Also the units are presently pointing away from the sun (see evening (19:15) shadow of light pole). Perhaps they have simply rotated and reset themselves for the morning?


It is actually sorry I did not mention it. It appears to be about 1/4 scale of the big array



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by RING0
There seems to be something odd with these two images, I rotated picture orb.jpg 180 degrees and then blinked the two images back and forth. They appear to be identical, the drone is unchanged in its relation to the cloud behind it, and this would indicate a short time elapse between the pictures being taken. The camera was moved slightly (Or the zoom was changed.), and two of the anomalies, (The word Orb is a new age, UFO enthusiast term.) are out of frame. If the anomalies were on the lens they should not be moving around.


So what you are saying is that these objects are not on the lens? I find it interesting that they appear in both of these photos.



In the second picture I have put a box around an odd artifact that appears very pixelated.


Originally posted by pjslug

Please don't leave this forum. The problem user has been addressed. I am very excited to hear your results and I would love to hear more of them. At the very least please U2U me with them, and if you would like I would love to continue this conversation with you in Instant Message on Yahoo or such. Excellent work, omikron, and thank you for the confirmation of my beliefs.


I second this and ask that you stay, I am interested to hear the results of your RV experiments.



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 11:57 AM
link   

by NGC...

Let's try this one, it's a long read, but the basic info is there.

www.netvalley.com...



Hey Fred - I know it's a long shot (just trying to deny some ignorance here), but you're not the same "Fred T" as the "Fred T." in the bio NGC provided by any chance, are you?

Didn't think so - just making sure...

[edit on 7/13/2007 by Outrageo]



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Outrageobut you're not the same "Fred T" as the "Fred T." in the bio NGC provided by any chance, are you?


Hmmmm well err........ No Im not


Cheers



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by ExquisitExamplE

So what you are saying is that these objects are not on the lens? I find it interesting that they appear in both of these photos.


Those are definately dirt on ccd or lens, I've seen that a million times since it's the no.1 enemy of digital photographers
If the patter would match then you could match camera and time to 2 different photos, but since they dont they're just dirt.



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 12:46 PM
link   
I'm speculating here just for fun and in the spirit of moving this thread towards a more investigative mood (if we want to crack this, we need to start coming up with something , it's ok if it leads nowhere)

Isaac said
“From the street, all you could see was what appeared to be a normal parking lot with a gate and a guard booth”

Then said
“I'd then put the papers under my shirt around my lower back, tucked enough into my belt to ensure they wouldn't fall out. I could do this in any one of a few short, windowless hallways on some of the lower floors, which were among the few places that didn't have an armed guard watching my every move. I'd walk in one end with a stack of papers large enough that when I came out the other end with some of them in my shirt, there wouldn't be a visible difference in what I was holding. You absolutely cannot be too careful if you're going to pull a stunt like this”

Amazing that he did this without at the very least sitting down in his car (or office) and crinkling the papers
(Got to think with that much security that they had a parking lot monitor, brave of him to pull out the documents before he sat down in his car)
But I see no crinkling on the scans

What did he say?
“I could do this in any one of a few short, windowless hallways on some of the lower floors”
Seems to me that being under ground, that there would be no windows at all


I think there’s a Texas connection here
Has to do with custom engineering pipeline pigs from a Texas company’s (Isaac internship?) along with this engineer (Arthur A. Reyes, PhD, Who to seems to recognize the theory from a book (The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology) (see here www.earthfiles.com...) and teaches in Texas and is also into AVL (autonomous vehicle system) (is a pipeline pig an autonomous vehicle system?)
This hoax-ster may have been a student of Arthur A. Reyes, PhD
Links
Engineer: ranger.uta.edu...
Book: www.amazon.com...=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-0164711-7732951?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1184187745&sr=1- 1
Pipeline pigs: www.pipelineengineering.com...



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by pjslug
[Hey FredT,
How far can you go with this? Can you get some info of some places that existed in the mid 80s that had a parking lot, a gate, a guard booth and a 1-story building? I'm sure there are many but maybe we could narrow it down a bit. Thank you.


Well, alot has changed since the 80's as companies have gone and new ones taken thier place. Based on my experience, HP, Lockheed Martin, Space Systems Loral all have guard houses but are out in the open and clearly identified. Most do not and never had. It would be like putting a "look at me" sign on the research area.

All three of those companies have a big enough property footprint to house an underground facility. And have gated access to thier facilities.



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Well, alot has changed since the 80's as companies have gone and new ones taken thier place. Based on my experience, HP, Lockheed Martin, Space Systems Loral all have guard houses but are out in the open and clearly identified. Most do not and never had. It would be like putting a "look at me" sign on the research area.

All three of those companies have a big enough property footprint to house an underground facility. And have gated access to thier facilities.


I have a great idea. At least I think it's a great idea if we can find someone to do it. There are research helicopters and airplanes that have ground penetrating radar. What if we asked one of these research facilities to fly over parts of Palo Alto and turn on the ground penetrating radar? We could find out what facilities have an underground area that descends at least 50 feet (5 stories). Now can we have someone do this that wouldn't charge us?



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 05:18 PM
link   
GP radar you might find to rent would at best go what 12 feet? That may not be enough to penatrate the first sub level. Even where I work at the University medical center less than a mile from hwere we are talking about we have at least a 20 foot sub basement for steam generators, boilers etc.

The cost would be horrendus as well.

Far easier way to find out and im working on it. Just need someone to call me back



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps

Originally posted by ExquisitExamplE

So what you are saying is that these objects are not on the lens? I find it interesting that they appear in both of these photos.


Those are definately dirt on ccd or lens, I've seen that a million times since it's the no.1 enemy of digital photographers
If the patter would match then you could match camera and time to 2 different photos, but since they dont they're just dirt.


The pattern is different on pictures titled orb,jpg and orb2.jpg, the anomalies are locked into position relative to the drone but not the frame. Two of the "dust" particles are missing on Orb2.jpg that are still visible on Orb.jpg. As stated in an earlier post referring to this post:

www.abovetopsecret.com... and my observation is on pg100

It could still be dust, because changing the amount of zoom may change the amount of frame area seen. It would be a good idea for someone to study the original Chad photos to see if the anomalies are similar in all of them or not.

EDIT: The two pictures in question seem to be the same one, someone early on rotated it to examine the writing from a different angle and one of them may have been cropped slightly causing two of the anomalies to be left out. Has an analysis been done by anyone yet on the dust particle patterns? Are they on all of the Chad photographs?

[edit on 13-7-2007 by RING0]



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 08:46 PM
link   
OK, I have to ask: what's the chances of Vannavar Bush even having a backdoor connection to this story, or someone doing so much research that it's mind boogling?

It's been 16 hours or more, so someone tell me how the guy who is a big wheel on the MJ12 thing has a tie to this story.

Chance? Really?



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 11:27 PM
link   
This may or not pan out, but as several companies have come and gone, doesnt the county require copies of blueprints for buildings and their sublevels. I just helped my father in law do a copy for his project and he had to submit that to the county to review, approve, keep, and there would be copies of fire marshal inspections, OSHA reports etc, that would indicate at least indirectly how many levels. There would for something like that leave a big paper trail, and some would be available for public inspection,the way you can look up platts,owners etc on line online.

Just a thought

SyS



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 12:21 AM
link   

The pattern is different on pictures titled orb,jpg and orb2.jpg, the anomalies are locked into position relative to the drone but not the frame. Two of the "dust" particles are missing on Orb2.jpg that are still visible on Orb.jpg. As stated in an earlier post referring to this post:

EDIT: The two pictures in question seem to be the same one, someone early on rotated it to examine the writing from a different angle and one of them may have been cropped slightly causing two of the anomalies to be left out. Has an analysis been done by anyone yet on the dust particle patterns? Are they on all of the Chad photographs?

[edit on 13-7-2007 by RING0]


We should check to see if any of the "dust" is covering the drone. If it is, it is undoubtedly a real photo (unless someone says it was purposely put there as a cover up) because the dust would be on the lens or CCD and therefore in front of the drone, not behind it.



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by NGC2736
OK, I have to ask: what's the chances of Vannavar Bush even having a backdoor connection to this story, or someone doing so much research that it's mind boogling?

It's been 16 hours or more, so someone tell me how the guy who is a big wheel on the MJ12 thing has a tie to this story.

Chance? Really?


Chance? No. The pieces are fitting in to place because it seems as real as it does now as it did on day 1 (in my opinion) and for a team of remote viewers (Omikron & company) to have confirmed this validates it even more (for me). Unless someone wants to call Omikron and his team a fraud and a hoax, which sounds absurd in all honesty since he would have nothing to gain by lying, and the fact that he came back after a week to report his findings when probably most everyone forgot that he had mentioned that he would (I know I did), and he isn't making any claims to know who made it or why, just the fact that it is a real object that has really been seen in the air. However we need to still keep going and find our own conclusive paper trail for proof. Believing leaves you in awe, but proof leaves you confident.

[edit on 7/14/2007 by pjslug]



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 12:44 AM
link   
pjslug

We need people like you to bring hope to the ufo community. You have an important role just like sceptics have an important role. But sometimes it seems like this place is overflowing with sceptics and laking people on the other end of the argument.

I guess what I am trying to say is that sometimes it is nice too see someone like you root for it to be true even though it even though there are stacks and stacks of evidence that it is not. Its kind of like being a sceptic but in reverse.


[edit on 7/14/07 by housegroove23]



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by pjslug
...for a team of remote viewers (Omikron) to have confirmed this validates it all. Unless someone wants to call Omikron and his team a fraud and a hoax, which sounds absurd. [edit on 7/14/2007 by pjslug]


I'm sorry, I've looked through the thread and Omikron's thin posting history. I have apparently missed Omikron's credentials as a "remote viewer".

Apparently pjslug is aware of such proof of the accuracy of Omikron's RVing. Could you please provide a means of verifying past performance in remote viewing by Omikron and his team?

Because without proof of past performance, nothing is validated by Omikron's claim. And everything is on the table, up to and including a fraud/hoax.

Just sayin'




top topics



 
185
<< 100  101  102    104  105  106 >>

log in

join