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: 113
185
<< 110  111  112    114  115  116 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 01:04 PM
link   
ISaw, et al... yes. lots of previous pics (and a whole lot more) are available to you...

Please do yourselves a favor and type "C2C Drone" or anything similar (add your own interest buzz words if you wish) into the search field at the top of the page. Then grab a cup of coffee and settle in for some reading.

There is so much redundancy in the drone threads now that lots of us that were on board from the beginning are losing interest. Why? Well, simply because new folks decide to jump in midstream and don't do any research right here at ATS to see that many of their questions have already been answered, topics covered. leads explored and debated.

The last couple of weeks have been frustrating, but it makes it more so, when someone posts, "I do CGI, I think this is CGI, because...", "Hey, look - I found a "T", watermark!", "Check out this "new" picture"or "I think this might be a Japanese font (or from Transformers, or Taken, or Halo, ets., etc.)."

I mean all due respect to all posters, and heartily welcome the newly inquisitive as well. But, please, please - if you jump into a river that is already 100 pages+ long and is just one of a 1/2 dozen or so on the exact same topic on the same forum, just do a little preliminary poking around to see if something you're about to post hasn't already been thoroughly dealt with. Got something new? Great! We'd love to hear it! Have a revelation or interesting perspective on a previous post? Wonderful! Please share it with us.

It's just hard enough following all these redundant threads without having to go through the exact same arguments every dozen pages. It's kind of like showing up at the starting line for a foot race that started weeks ago and wondering where everybody else is. Tip: we're half-way (hopefully) or more downrange already - you've got a little catching-up to do...

OK, OK - sorry - I'll step away from the microphone now...

[edit on 7/17/2007 by Outrageo]




posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by carot
This drone is CG work i found this on youtube, you can flag this like HOAX!!!!!!

www.youtube.com...


Sigh..



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 01:11 PM
link   
That picture with the tripod was posted back at about page 60 - 61. Seems I was the only one to comment. Maybe a hoax on a hoax?

My understanding is that reasonably fine grain film, like most people be probably have in their camera, has much more resolution than a digital picture. Something like 20 to 25 megapixel equivalent. If that is the case the old picture could be quite good as a source. Later reproduction methods could then degrade the copies of the images I suppose.

Anyone well versed in the film to digital resolution issue?



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 01:16 PM
link   
roadgravel: More or less yes you're right. The quality of film far outstrips a digital camera providing everything is done well (taking the pic, lighting, processing, etc).

------

in general: However, don't forget that he said "documents" which to me implies that he took pre-printed items from work and not negatives (although thats my assumption and a guess at the best).

If you try shoving paper down your belt under clothes and walk around for a few minutes, up and down stairs (I know they probably have elevators but in a worst case scenario) and then get to a car and sit the paper comes out exceptionally badly. How did he get this stuff out without it doing that?

My only thought is these are NOT the originals if this is not a hoax - he retyped things when he put them onto the 'net because the originals were in such a bad shape. This could also account for the photo of the generator - he got it from a colleague years afterwards when the technology was better.

I'm not saying I believe, but I want to present a reasonable suggestion for why some things definitely don't add up in his version of the events.

Still, I believe this to be a hoax, or at least some sort of disinformation which is jading us on the REAL UFO disclosure when it does happen. Like all the TV programs that make aliens out to be benevolent (Stargate for one).

[edit on 17-7-2007 by ejsaunders]



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
The originals haven't gone trough mac. It was c2c webmaster that made them smaller if I remember correctly.



Ok, just trying to get my ducks in a row
The original Chad picks from C2C are tagged “Creation Software Adobe Photoshop Elements 2.0”
And the Rajman 1977 pics I have that are named “ChadRajman15May16.jpg” are Tagged “Creation Software Adobe Photoshop CS2 Macintosh”
Just asking for the sake of a hair brain line of thinking

can't seemed to edited the fisrt time anyway ,were the rajman1977 pics hoasted on C2C,thought they came from his fickr account
second edit, thought I remembered that the rajman1977 were originals labled "scanned img"?


[edit on 17-7-2007 by moonking]

[edit on 17-7-2007 by moonking]

[edit on 17-7-2007 by moonking]

[edit on 17-7-2007 by moonking]



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 02:02 PM
link   
@moonking

The original Rajman pix were named PICT0013.JPG to PICT0018.JPG
This is the standard name the camera used gives its pix.
Here is Exif of PICT0013.JPG:


[Image]
Compression = JPEG Compressed (Thumbnail)
Image Description = MINOLTA DIGITAL CAMERA
Make = MINOLTA CO.,LTD
Model = DiMAGE X
Orientation = top/left
X Resolution = 72
Y Resolution = 72
Resolution Unit = inch
Software = V100-02
Date Time = 2007-05-16 17:41:11
YCbCr Positioning = co-sited
Exif IFD Pointer = Offset: 250

[Camera]
Exposure Program = Normal program
ISO Speed Ratings = 100
Exif Version = Version 2.2
Date Time Original = 2007-05-16 17:41:11
Date Time Digitized = 2007-05-16 17:41:11
Components Configuration = YCbcr
Compressed Bits Per Pixel = 4
Metering Mode = Pattern
Light Source = unknown
Flash = Off
Flashpix Version = Version 1.0
Color Space = sRGB
Exif Image Width = 1600
Exif Image Height = 1200
File Source = DSC
Scene Type = A directly photographed image

[Thumbnail Info]
Compression = JPEG Compressed (Thumbnail)
X Resolution = 72
Y Resolution = 72
JPEG Interchange Format = Offset: 578
JPEG Interchange Format Length = Length: 3473

[Thumbnail]
Thumbnail = 160 x 120


The original Chad pix were called ScannedImage.jpg to ScannedImage-5.jpg and were roughly 1150x750 pixels (they didnt all have exactly the same size which is perfectly normal when you work with a scanner you usually cant select always EXACTLY the same size). Since they were scanned non-digital pix they obviously have no Exif.

The Big Basin Sighting pix were named bigbasin1.jpg to bigbasin3.jpg and i have no idea which camera was used. they have no Exif and i reckon they are hoaxed.
Chad and rajman I am not sure, i tend to think they are real.



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 02:20 PM
link   
Greetings EJ

I was looking at your observation about the paper possibly being rewritten.. I have old bill and term papers ,diplomas from 36, and pix from 60 years ago: all scannable.If it was good enough to retype..then it was good enough to scan. It actually would have looked better with yellowing crinkling and everything even faded fonts and tones If he had to rewite then it is unreliable or untrustworthy, because he could have added /or deleted anything. So why create an excuse for him, to make it platatable. you have aa good heart,I think thats too generous an allowance to give him, given all the other things happening around this "disclosure" If he rewrote, then he should have been upfront, considering the "magnitude" of what he wants us to believe. I like the train of thought you have in the sense that if you examine the behaviour, some of it does not make sense.

Like Sandy berger, who stuffed the documents in his sock, and he was seen..(of course it was a classified area) and then left. we will never know what self incriminating papers he took. He took a piece of history from a US national archive :that will never be replaced. He should have gone to jail..If I steal a library book..i go to jail..he shorted the country the truth and history. I am glad he was forced to give up his license for law.

We should be no less rigorous in demanding more than questionable fotos and documents, even if he doesnt give his name...heck he can setup a dummyemail and answer questions if he is so scared. thats why you use pseudonyms , but he doesn't seem to have been that really was was he, to have done it in the first place?

Regards

SyS
^i^

[edit on 17-7-2007 by Sys_Config]



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 02:25 PM
link   
THE C2C DRONE IS A HOAX, DID YOU SEE THE LINK I GIVE YOU?
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
DONT BE SO NAIVE YOU CANT TELL THE DIFERENCE FROM ORIGINAL AND CGI, AT LEST NOT ON THE BASE OF SOE PICS ON INTERNET IN LOW RESOLUTION; COMPRESED, COPY OF COPY OF ORIGINAL, ETC...




posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by carot
THE C2C DRONE IS A HOAX, DID YOU SEE THE LINK I GIVE YOU?
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
DONT BE SO NAIVE YOU CANT TELL THE DIFERENCE FROM ORIGINAL AND CGI, AT LEST NOT ON THE BASE OF SOE PICS ON INTERNET IN LOW RESOLUTION; COMPRESED, COPY OF COPY OF ORIGINAL, ETC...



We've all seen these you tube videos by Saladfingers several times. Please go back and read the threads and you will know that Saladfingers is even a member of ATS and did these videos to show what they MIGHT look like.

If you read the you tube descriptions he even clearly states that.

thanks!



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by carot
THE C2C DRONE IS A HOAX, DID YOU SEE THE LINK I GIVE YOU?



Did you not get the hint from the big sigh your last post got?
Saladfingers is just a CGI and UFO buff who is trying to work out for himself whether this is hoax or real. So far he is still not 100% either way so please do not assume his work is responsible for this spate of reports.
I know there are a hella lot of posts on this topic but at least brush up on the basics before jumping in with a cry of proof this is a hoax.
READ THIS FOR THE BASICS ON THE C2C DRONE Including comments on the original Saladfingers "Flying Cross" video ...

[edit on 17/7/07 by CthulhuRising]



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by casketizer
@moonking

The original Rajman pix were named PICT0013.JPG to PICT0018.JPG
This is the standard name the camera used gives its pix.
The original Chad pix were called ScannedImage.jpg to ScannedImage-5.jpg and were roughly 1150x750 pixels (they didnt all have exactly the same size which is perfectly normal when you work with a scanner you usually cant select always EXACTLY the same size). Since they were scanned non-digital pix they obviously have no Exif.
The Big Basin Sighting pix were named bigbasin1.jpg to bigbasin3.jpg and i have no idea which camera was used. they have no Exif and i reckon they are hoaxed.
Chad and rajman I am not sure, i tend to think they are real.


Thanks casketizer,
first off can anyone post the original pics from "Chad" and "Rajman1977"or link were it might already be posted?. I have at least the original pics from "Stephen"big basin (which I always thought didn't fit with the chad or raj pics, which made me wonder why Isaac seemed to emphasized the big basin more that the other ones :ie Recognizing the language that I could "NOT" see on the Stephen pics), I Dont have the original "Chad" if they are "ScannedImage 1-5.jpg's" and are 1150x750 pixels or the rajman1977 labled PICT0013.JPG to PICT0018.JPG.
Sorry, I should have been on top of my game and had those images !



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 03:18 PM
link   
moonking i send you a pm with a helpful link.



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 03:30 PM
link   
Thanks casketizer now I can reboot my hair brain LOL!



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 03:31 PM
link   
It seems the biggest debate on these drones is the real or fake issue... If they are fakes, well good for the person or persons responsible for blowing up the minds of wondering souls... Now if they are real, and the info on them being controlled by a 5 mile long craft above the Earth is true, what are WE going to do? It's going to be like the best Sci-fi movie we've ever wanted to be true. It's also been stated not be under the craft when activated bc they will permit a "worm-hole" like portal to another universe and time.... WOW. With todays trials and tribs.. what could be worse.. LOL... I jus want this thing to start already.. I'm ready for this to be real..



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Isaw1B4u
It seems the biggest debate on these drones is the real or fake issue... If they are fakes, well good for the person or persons responsible for blowing up the minds of wondering souls... Now if they are real, and the info on them being controlled by a 5 mile long craft above the Earth is true, what are WE going to do? It's going to be like the best Sci-fi movie we've ever wanted to be true. It's also been stated not be under the craft when activated bc they will permit a "worm-hole" like portal to another universe and time.... WOW. With todays trials and tribs.. what could be worse.. LOL... I jus want this thing to start already.. I'm ready for this to be real..

I’m laughing with you, but to me the biggest thing of all is who is behind this
Real or not, there’s no confirmation either way, got to get to the source of this, one way or another, there’s not a lot to go on with this case except a real person (witness)
I’m done pouring over the images and the doc’s for clues; it’s time to go after the source!
(Hope this scare’s someone LOL!)



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 04:07 PM
link   
One other bit of info I’m looking for (I did try and find it) there was some talk of ip addresses from Chad and raj .Where they from a web mail client or something more tangible? (I’ll take a gmail on this, LOL!) Anything from the “other forum” suggesting an IP address from the “Rajman1977”When he “LOGGED ON”
I know this has been asked before but anyone here care to weigh in on if this thread might be monitored by the source of this case?
In short, any IP addresses to be had for sake of comparison?



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 04:29 PM
link   
Not that I have seen any no; I've looked in most of the places that are distributing/discussing the drones and Isaac but no-one seems to have offered up any IP addys or such.

I did notice one of them (was it Raj, I think it was, but please correct me if it wasn't) was on another forum, but he seemed to stop posting after a while.

I'm still hoping that the lawyer attached to that .com site will either break down and admit, or let something slip, but we've not had any luck so far trying to trace anything Isaac's given us.

It's getting rather annoying that the source HAS dried up, at least with most hoaxes or people posting information that seems plausible, they tend to stay around, we don't even have Isaac to question.



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 05:06 PM
link   
I've solved the answer to the drones.. THIS JUS IN.. It's come to my attention that Bush and a drone craft are never seen at the same time at the same place.. huh... think about it.. Georgy-Boy's a drone!! LOL.. Jus tryn to put sum fun in this situation b4 it gets sooooo out of hand. I would like to own one of those things to bypass the DFW traffic..... As far as I kno there hasn't been any Texas sightings... Is there a website where you can go an update on a daily basis on seeing these things? I'm talking jus for the C2C Drones.. with maps an markers.... that would be awsum! LMK

Mod Note (This Appears On Every New Thread/Post Reply Page):
Please avoid using "TXT Messaging Shorthand" for words when posting on AboveTopSecret.com and AbovePolitics.com, such as "4" for the word "for" or "u" for the word you. Common "Internet Slang" acronyms such as "LOL" and "ROFLMA" are acceptable, but should still be used sparingly.



[edit on 17/7/2007 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by AmberiteIt's come to my attention that Bush and a drone craft are never seen at the same time at the same place.. huh... think about it..



Thanks for a completely useless post. If you don't feel like putting anything worthwhile in this discussion, then move to another thread. We don't need you trolling in this one.


As someone guilty of posting attempts at humor,(pg.86), I think I must give this person a pass, on topic is always better, but if well done, an injection of humor can be beneficial. Not the funniest post ever seen, but fresh, pertinent information has slowed to a trickle, and unless something new comes to light, this whole affair may never be resolved!



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 08:00 PM
link   
Greetings all Yes the well is dry. Its so cruel with the hunger pangs we are feeling. What I would like to suggest is if ATS pick a top graphics like cal tech or any of them and ask their graphics dept to proof them as a student project. if they agreed we can settle this thing. the Graphics school that agreed would get exposure on ATS and news web links. This will also raise our credibility and break the stereotype that we as a community bite at anything. The same can be done with a Document specialist..same advertisement and increase his exposure. If legit we win if not we still win.

we would then have an inhouse resource all the time and can discourage hoaxters.
A BS Free Zone so to speak

Your comments are appreciated


SyS
^i^

PS the avatar is not from caret its from analog 1978
The Ets I believe have gotten more from Us than we have from them..
Payback..this time its for real... the GEICO man






[edit on 17-7-2007 by Sys_Config]



new topics

top topics



 
185
<< 110  111  112    114  115  116 >>

log in

join