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: 128
185
<< 125  126  127    129  130  131 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arlington AcidBut the truth is that the CARET documents, every one of them, are brilliant. This is genius level stuff, well beyond an idiot with a bit of money.


If the CARET Report had anything of significant scientific value, we should be able to do something that that we could not do before, we should have information that can be confirmed as being substantive. A genuine “leaked” scientific classified document would result in new technology based on the information within it. The vacuous nature of the report and the unmerited praise being heaped upon it are baseless in light of its complete and total lack of any solid testable information. The only genius I see exhibited here is the authors’ ability to deceive a number of the advocates wishing to legitimize it. The CARET report is a transparent hoax and this becomes amply evident by its lack of technical information that can be evaluated in a laboratory environment. We are given absolutely nothing that can be used to produce significant results, either technological or intellectual. I challenge anyone to point out anything new of a scientific nature that has been obtained from the data within the report.




posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 10:37 PM
link   
Tough crowd... a guy goes to work for a few hours and when he comes home he finds out he pulled off one of the most convincing hoaxes in history! Seriously folks, I just wanted to put my two cents in. The problem is that I saved up my cents for three days, compiling them into one “report” which could only fit into three posts. If I had slowly trickled my input over the same three days, no one would have thought twice about it.
Just to clarify, I never said I had come to the conclusion this was not a hoax. What I said was that I wanted to see the missing chapters. Based on the format of the material presented so far, those missing chapters would present the scientific findings that were summarized in chapter one (standard format). Yes, I just deliberately put that in parentheses. Man, you guys are conspiracy junkies!
By the way, I want to thank Arlington Acid for getting me off my butt. I had actually composed my post the day prior, but had talked myself out of posting it. Seeing Arlington’s like mind, I thought I’d throw it out there.
For the record, I’m not Isaac. I’m also not a practicing engineer, just to be clear. I have a degree in engineering, but my government work has been a little more operational. I’ve wrestled with the idea of getting involved in this whole thing because if this is indeed a violation of national security, it feels a little “unpatriotic” to contribute to it. But Isaac’s documents don’t have any security markings on them, so I’m really just participating in a discussion about little green men from Mars.
I will say it’s a little unsettling how you all try to research members of ATS (yes, I mean you, Springer). What if someone with dangerous information wanted to come forward but decided not to because you all are too risky? A true conspiracy guy might think this site is being run by the CIA!
Oh well, good luck with your investigation. I would closely monitor the scientists and engineers over the next few weeks and see what they come up with. Again, if the missing chapters are released and stand up to scientific scrutiny, your community may be looking at the first confirmed evidence of what you’ve sought all along.
Cheers,
ET (Darn, I didn’t find a way to work in “albeit”)



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by EngineeringType
I will say it’s a little unsettling how you all try to research members of ATS (yes, I mean you, Springer). What if someone with dangerous information wanted to come forward but decided not to because you all are too risky? A true conspiracy guy might think this site is being run by the CIA!


In fairness, all Springer did was tell us that your IP doesn't match any other posters, as a way to weed out the possibility that you aren't pretending to be someone you're not. Seems pretty fair and reasonable to me.



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 10:51 PM
link   
EngineeringType

To clarify, my analysis and questioning is in the spirit of discovering as much information as we can. We've been following every lead we can possibly think of and you presented another one. I still think the writing styles are similar, but I was obviously looking for connections and adopting the mindset that you may be Isaac. I'm also interested to see what others think about the subject, as different perspectives help to observe the whole.

If you are Isaac, I think I speak for us all when I say we'd like more information and are more than willing to hear you out. If you are not him then I apologize if I made you feel unwelcome, and don't worry, we don't snoop every member like that. I'm sure you can see how the situation lent itself to further inquiry.



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by EngineeringType
Tough crowd... a guy goes to work for a few hours and when he comes home he finds out he pulled off one of the most convincing hoaxes in history! Seriously folks, I just wanted to put my two cents in. The problem is that I saved up my cents for three days, compiling them into one “report” which could only fit into three posts. If I had slowly trickled my input over the same three days, no one would have thought twice about it.

Didn’t mean to chase you away , I’d like to hear how someone with your background went from having no reason to believe that E.T. or his technology was here to how Isaac’s story captivated you in just 3 days, in more dept
Actually you got off it easy compared to some LOL!



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Parabol
6. Both use hyphens within sentences. Pacing feels similar preceding the hyphens.

ISAAC: So in other words, civilians like myself who had at--at most--some decent experience working for the DoD but no actual military training or involvement, were suddenly finding ourselves in the same room as highly classified extra-terrestrial technology.

ET: My guess would be that--if this is not a hoax--the math was developed/refined to help explain the self-repeating patterns described.


Great analysis parabol, you bring up some very interesting similarities. I really appreciate the time you took to break things down so thoroughly. Being a writer myself, I think anyone versed in linguistics can see the pertinence of the points you brought up.

What especially caught my attention was both writers use of a double hyphen followed by a short interjection and then another double hyphen. I mean why use a double hyphen? This seems to me to be a very individualized idiosyncrasy; we all have them in one form or another.

I think Engitypes reply will also be very suitable for analysis. If he is indeed Isaac, he may make a conscious effort to alter his writing style in his rebuttal.

I think parabol has presented us with some very strong analysis and I think he may be on to something. Seriously, who uses a double hyphen combo like that?

A star for you parabol, great work.

[edit on 7/24/2007 by ExquisitExamplE]

[edit on 7-24-2007 by Springer]



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 11:33 PM
link   
my take on this is that after fabricating one of the more elaborate hoaxes (if it is a hoax) in recent history, i would be hard pressed to believe the author would show up here and drop the ball. whomever is behind this is a little to smart to trip over their language giving themselves away. i would assume they'd be more than happy to lurk and stroke their ego rather than join the conversation and risk giving it all away. members at ats are so conditioned to call each other out (and rightfully so) that i can hardly be surprised that ET has come under this type of attack. i dont think i could even be mad at the hoaxing party if this is a hoax because real or not this is awesome, but i dont think it is ET. if i am wrong about ET and he is indeed the author then we all owe him the respect he deserves anyway because he got us all bigger and better than anyone has before!

i will reiterate: if those involved in this do not actually work for a government black ops project, maybe they should be.

[edit on 7/24/2007 by bokinsmowl]



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 11:36 PM
link   
I have a small theory about Isaac I think he work or worked at PARC. It is clearly that almost every idea that Isaac say come from PARC research. The theory of computer network that is universal is what PARC is working right now. This people have knowledge on engineer and physics in computer, in other word they study of how a program software would work. I'm just a dumb but I could tell you that for most people this could be ALIEN. I still searching on other stuff I will post new website that I want to check out.



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by bokinsmowl
my take on this is that after fabricating one of the more elaborate hoaxes (if it is a hoax) in recent history, i would be hard pressed to believe the author would show up here and drop the ball. whomever is behind this is a little to smart to trip over their language giving themselves away. i would assume they'd be more than happy to lurk and stroke their ego rather than join the conversation and risk giving it all away. members at ats are so conditioned to call each other out (and rightfully so) that i can hardly be surprised that ET has come under this type of attack.


(this is not aimed at EngineeringType)

Why would you be hard pressed to believe he could drop the ball? If this is the case he's already waited 126 pages and 2500 replies, and that's just on this board. Never underestimate the ego or level of confidence for someone who creates a hoax like this, which I'm not saying it is, but assuming for the argument. Beyond the interest of the story, creating a hoax is a power play. They feel that they have tricked people and controlled their thoughts to an extent. With all the scrutiny placed on the pictures and documents, and without a definite answer, it could preclude the hoaxer to waltz in without much worry. Over confidence can be a staggering weakness.

Also IF EngineeringType or someone else turns out to be Isaac, it does not mean it is a hoax. Let's assume Isaac is speaking the truth. Maybe he sees all the attempts to disprove it and wants to support his information without revealing his identity or new material. I think we have to be open to anything, including a new member possibly being Isaac.

EDIT: My post comparing and analyzing Isaac and EngineeringType was meant to get other ATS members opinions. I am well aware of the inherent bias of thinking ET could be Isaac and then searching for information to back my premises. The great thing about ATS is that I can dive in and explore knowing others can help me keep perspective or point out what I missed.

[edit on 25-7-2007 by Parabol]



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by moonking
I’m going to go with my gut feeling here (this is a conspiracy forum)
I’m convinced that you are Isaac
You are aren’t you?


I was thinking the same thing. Especially since the name is a play on words of "ET"
Well, if it is, break out the rest of the goods. If not, it's nice to have you here. Welcome!

[edit on 7/25/2007 by pjslug]



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 12:19 AM
link   
Here is a quote from Isaac "Like a rock or a hunk of metal. But upon [much] closer inspection, we began to learn that it was actually one big holographic computational substrate - each "computational element" (essentially individual particles) can function independently, but are designed to function together in tremendously large clusters."
here is a website that deal whith that matter.
silver.neep.wisc.edu...
as you can see anybody who is in this kind "geek world" could easly find out this type of theory and studies, just like a musician would find many sound that most of us haven't heard.



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by RING0

If the CARET Report had anything of significant scientific value, we should be able to do something that that we could not do before, we should have information that can be confirmed as being substantive.


Well.....you clearly have an opinion about this. Unfortunately, we're talking about something that might be, seems to be, beyond our technical understanding at this point. If this is real and has been studied by our government/military, how would we know how many practical applications have seeped into our society? You're perfectly welcome to reject it on those grounds but I, for one, won't be rejecting it out of hand. If this was a human creation, it is an example of the brightest creative mind/minds I've ever come across and can be appreciated for whatever it is. If the fantastic should become reality and this be an example of "alien" technology, it's a bellweather day and we should be over the top with excitement.

Given how strongly you seem to feel about this, I'm a little surprised that you're bothering to post here. What's that about?



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 12:23 AM
link   
Greetings! I'm not Isaac!!! I was fascinated reading these highly intelligent posts and then was really blown away by the contribution from the Engineer Type. I've been on the fence with this thing as most of us are, but the Engineer Type's thoughts really brought a breath of fresh air to this crazy thing.

You guys are a tough crowd though! Someone offers their sincere thoughts and you think he's part of the hoax!!! I couldn't believe that! I thought it was a joke at first, but it persists. I don't agree and frankly it seems simplistic to the max to try to diss such a well thought out contribution in one nasty swipe. Sounds to me like someone might be a little bit jealous. That is how the accusation struck me anyways.

I have one thing to add. I agree that there is something highly elegant to the "linguistic primer". The refinement in the symbols, their form, the whole organic feel of those diagrams...that is the hardest thing for me to dismiss. Also, the "copy" just doesn't have the same buzz to it at all. It isn't in the same magnitude of refinement or contain the many levels of very small and yet still perfect symbols.

People have also said the drones would be easy to model. I don't agree with that either. There is so much detail and a lot of it is downright strange. In the "high res" picture recently seen at UFO casebook, there are some very unusual features evident. That odd "plumbline" that hangs down, it goes through the lower cage too. I'm sorry but who would make that up? It is so unusual and, well, alien I think. Also, those panels mirroring the primer, if someone is hoaxing all of this it is amazing to say the least. Whoever did this if it is hoaxed has got the attention of so many people.

Tell me: Who isn't checking several different web sites every single day to see what is new on this? I'll bet nearly everyone is checking them several times every day and looking forward to checking again first thing the next day.

Someone, or some group are clearly brilliant or this is what we hope it is. I have to say at this point I'm about 65% convinced. If I'm made to be a fool in the end, well then shame on the fakers. But even then it's been a hell of a ride.



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by EngineeringType
Oh well, good luck with your investigation. I would closely monitor the scientists and engineers over the next few weeks and see what they come up with. Again, if the missing chapters are released and stand up to scientific scrutiny, your community may be looking at the first confirmed evidence of what you’ve sought all along.

Sorry ET (and AA) but I’m an “engineering type” and I would have said something sooner but I was having too much fun watching the “photographs” being slowly (but surely) ripped apart.


When I was first made aware of this I took a quick a look at the first couple of the pages of the “documents” and that was enough for me to realize it was a waste of my time. Honestly, I didn’t even finish reading the first paragraph. That coupled with the fact that “Isaac” only released part of what he claimed to have is always a big red flag. In my book the burden of proof is on the claimant to provide sufficient evidence to verify their claims up front and in this case it simply wasn’t there (not even close) in my opinion.

I know many prefer to take the “wait and see” approach and try to rationalize or make excuses for the claimant’s initial shortcomings but I’ve never seen that approach lead to bigger and better things. If anything it just delays the inevitable, sometimes indefinitely, and I for one have better things to do with my time.

To each his own I suppose.

Too much time has passed now and there’s nothing to prevent the claimant(s) from altering the evidence to account for any discrepancies noted in the “initial” release so why bother? We all saw how well the dangling carrot technique worked with Serpo…

Once bitten, twice shy you would think.

[shrug]



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by RING0
If the CARET Report had anything of significant scientific value, we should be able to do something that that we could not do before, we should have information that can be confirmed as being substantive. A genuine “leaked” scientific classified document would result in new technology based on the information within it. The vacuous nature of the report and the unmerited praise being heaped upon it are baseless in light of its complete and total lack of any solid testable information. The only genius I see exhibited here is the authors’ ability to deceive a number of the advocates wishing to legitimize it. The CARET report is a transparent hoax and this becomes amply evident by its lack of technical information that can be evaluated in a laboratory environment. We are given absolutely nothing that can be used to produce significant results, either technological or intellectual. I challenge anyone to point out anything new of a scientific nature that has been obtained from the data within the report.


We've discussed this many times in the past. He was given a report that was tailored towards management positions. He wasn't being given a technical lab report with equations and scientific notation. How many typical citizens could understand it if that were the case?



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 01:01 AM
link   
The deeper I get into this the more it scares me to think that all are technology is based on ET and nobody wants to say anything about this, check out this website www.cs.dartmouth.edu... I can't find interval corp, this a secret corp. check out what Isaac say here is a quote "I've heard from a lot of friends that there are multiple sites like PACL in Sunnyvale and Mountain View, also disguised to look like unremarkable office space. But this is all second-hand information so you can make of it what you will." could this be right about Palo Altos Research Center is base on Alien Technology????? Help me out guys.



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 01:54 AM
link   
Newkid,

interval Corp is history: wikipedia

EngineeringType:

stay here, or move to another forum but at least keep providing your insights. I, for one, enjoyed your initial post. Your use of double hyphens is quite common to me and i use 'albeit' all the time


ciao
J



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 02:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by deefree
Greetings! I'm not Isaac!!!


Lol


Parabol, you left out that they used human letter and compined those into human words which in turn created sentences

All kidding aside, maybe that kind of technical background encourages that kind of writing. From the language point of view though, is it 'official correct' form of english? I dont even know when you're supposed to use ";".



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 02:22 AM
link   
one thing that does bother me about Eng.Type's posts (and this isn't a personal attack albeit based on what you mentioned more than once): you havent seen any classified markings on these documents and therefore you reason that you're --as a DoD employee-- in the clear when discussing these documents. Fine. But doesnt it seem the least bit odd that this kind of info, if real, is not (recognizably) classified?

Even in those days it was quite simple to have such documents be assembled on 'copy-protected' paper, which at first glance has nothing out of the ordinary but when copied produce heavy distortion. These days its all software driven so you can't copy (for instance) bank notes. but back then it was down to paper contrasts and thickness. very odd, if you ask me.



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 02:36 AM
link   
LoL to just about all posts since E.T's summary. I must admit when I first read his posts that I also had the thought that he may be an "insider" kick starting the discussion again. But then so far just about every person that has given an in depth and lucid review of any aspect of this story has been accused of being "Isaac" or "Chad" ie spf33 and saladfingers
As for E'T's writing style;( BTW ; is used to indicate a slightly longer pause than a , ) as an electrical engineer myself (Albeit no longer in the field) I would have to say it just shows a similar way of writing an thinking..

Just MY 2cents



new topics

top topics



 
185
<< 125  126  127    129  130  131 >>

log in

join