[HOAX] Isaac CARET - Drones [HOAX]

One thing that I don't see is EngiType's writing style being the same as Isaac's. Isaac had a tendency to digress which EngiType did not do at all. Isaac also had misspelled words and typos while EngiType's writing was very precise. My conclusion is that EngiType is a much better writer and more careful than Isaac. I also get the impression he is younger, still in the game and not retired like Isaac claims to be.

Unfortunately the knee jerk responses here may have turned EngiType completely off and I don't blame him. He spent a lot of time on his post. His post had some real energy to it and I think gave us a valuable perspective on this entire perplexing drone/CARET situation. I think if you are suspicious, why not encourage the guy and give him room to say more. If he is not sincere, give him enough rope and you get the idea. This way we get more, not less. That should be a general rule on a site like this. Let's encourage people to give us their contributions instead of writing them off so quickly based on an unsubstantiated accusation.

Originally posted by Averysmallfoxx
first of all there is enough information to gather what the technology is and does, so it is not crap like you want to label it.
second, the primer and the geometrical designs are like said previously by others, very intricate and to bounce back to the documents themselves, they are very revealing in how it functions, im sure there is other evidence, if we are to believe our dear friend isaac that would further the understanding to be had by us over these documents which hasnt released yet and maybe never will.
say whatever you want but if you want to prove its crap so bad, emulate it and show us how hoaxy it is friend

There is no scientifically based information about “what the technology is and does”. And I would never use the language you have ascribed to me. There is nothing revealed in them, (The CARET papers), to indicate new ideas or knowledge. How can they divulge how “it” functions when we do not even know what “it” is? If there is “other evidence” it has not been disclosed. It is not any ones responsibility to prove that it is not real; it is the proponents’ job to prove to us that it is real, this is basic scientific methodology. The underlying hypothesis presented in the CARET report is that they had alien artifacts and that the artifacts had anti gravity capabilities, this portion of the presentation is shaky to say the least. How does the anti gravity work? I believe the US Government may have this technology in a highly classified and compartmentalized form, but no one has exposed the underlying concepts publicly. This gets to the heart of the CARET reports weakness, even in a dumbed down “for the generals”, form, we should see a basic description of how anti gravity is accomplished, but we do not get even a vague hint on the theory of its operation. I am left to ponder, “where’s the Beef?”

Edited small error.



[edit on 25-7-2007 by RING0]

Originally posted by RING0
It is not any ones responsibility to prove that it is not real; it is the proponents’ job to prove to us that it is real, this is basic scientific methodology.
[edit on 25-7-2007 by RING0]

What proof would you accept ?

Originally posted by SuicideVirus
Now here's somebody who really knows how to put some effort into a project like this! Nice level of detail.

No kidding! These are all a bunch of model pieces that I wouldn't mind having.


[edit on 25-7-2007 by Cydonian Priest]

That is a very provacative question..."What proof would you accept?"
This is something we should all ask ourselves. Would you need to see a flying drone with your own eyes? Would you even believe it THEN?? Obviously the testimony of others doesn't get it at all in Ufology and I suppose mostly it shouldn't. But what if the witness is an expert observer? An inscrutible individual? Someone who has everything to lose and nothing to gain, for example, a commercial airline pilot?

I would be ineterested in hearing responses on these few questions:

1. Does the drone appear to you to be a human design?
2. Does the "linguistic primer" fonts strike you as being of human origin?
3. Do you think all the UFO reports are explainable as simple earthly phemonena?
4. Do you think there is any life off the Earth?

1. Does the drone appear to you to be a human design?

No way, perhaps the first drone but not later in it's "Evolution" so to speak.

2. Does the "linguistic primer" fonts strike you as being of human origin?

No, i don't believe they are of human Origin but I think the linguistic primer diagrams were re created by the employees from another source, perhaps to make it look tidier and easier to understand, Salad Fingers re-created one of the diagrams that are a close match in Adobe Illustrator with apparent ease

3. Do you think all the UFO reports are explainable as simple earthly phemonena?

I think the majority of sightings can be explained away. One of the things that make me believe there is definately something is Pilot testimony whether it be commercial or military, those guys are intelligent and don't make stuff up.

4. Do you think there is any life off the Earth?

Oh yes

Edit:This is only my opinion so please don't shoot me down k?

Thank you October! I appreciate your replies. I am also in agreement with you on all the main points.

One thing though; I didn't think Saladfinger's diagrams were as aesthetically pleasing, as refined or as detailed as the ones seen in the CARET documents. The CARET diagrams and fonts go down to finer and finer levels while still maintaining a strikingly consistant quality. Here I think Saladfinger was left in the dust by several magnitudes.

Here is a question completely off point; What do those numbers to the left of our posts mean?

Without going into many details, becuse like Springer said this might be a data mining operation,.
I going to comment from experience.

The only way I see Isaac walking out with CI is if he works in a department that publish reports But from my experience is highly unlikely, given the type of material he's talking about, from my experience I don't see that happening.

Some people here are underestimating the lenghts that the goverment goes to protect info.

Has anyone seen anything about whether Ty is willing to share one of his 12 negatives from the pictures sent to earthfiles? Even if the guy is paranoid and wants to stay anonymous, I would think he would let one negative be open to analysis. This assumes no one has determined that the photo were actually digital prints. If he is refusing then that states much about it's authenticity.

If earthfiles has no way to contact him then I say to TY, why not add to your evidence and send one.

Originally posted by deefree
One thing though; I didn't think Saladfinger's diagrams were as aesthetically pleasing, as refined or as detailed as the ones seen in the CARET documents. The CARET diagrams and fonts go down to finer and finer levels while still maintaining a strikingly consistant quality. Here I think Saladfinger was left in the dust by several magnitudes.

deefree....a good example of the same sort of aesthetically pleasing designs, which are done often by the network of cropmaker artists around the globe are shown at the link below. You would be surprised at the artistic ability and talent displayed by such artists:

circlemakers.org

-Ry

I attempted to see if the following link had already been posted. It was an analysis done by a video production company Breazeal about 2 weeks ago. As I have not found breazeal term in the forums I will post this. He is an aircraft photographer ...his pro specs are on his site.

Breazeal video production Company Analysis



You decide and enjoy the journey

SyS

I didn't mean to say that the CARET stuff wasn't beyond human ability. I just said Saladfinger's imitation wasn't really in the same league. The finer you go with both, the more the difference becomes.

About the rest of it...WOW! Some of those man-made crop designs are stupendious.

But that doesn't make them all man-made. In some circles the plants have exploded nodes that appear to have been cooked by microwave radiation. There are also bits of metal on the ground and the crops sometimes show swirling in several directions. There are clear differences in the damage to plants in some circles and plants pushed down by wood planks.

Some crop anomalies still unexplained? I think so.

I'm new here. What are ATS and BTS points?

Originally posted by deefree
I'm new here. What are ATS and BTS points?

There are two or threee forums in the general forum area where this type of question can be handled. Why not try there?

Just my two cents, this was done in about 2 hours:

s5.photobucket.com...

Originally posted by ExquisitExamplE

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?

I would once again like to draw attention to this as I feel it is of pertinence. Writing is a subconscious activity on many levels. It can often times give you great insight into the character or personality of a person. In the preceding sentence, Isaac might have used "character/personality" in place of or, such is his writing style.

Now the reason I focused on the double hyphen is because it seems like a rather obscure piece of punctuation. I would consider myself a very well-read individual and I have never encountered this particular punctuation mark.

Perhaps it is something commonly used by those in the engineering field? Perhaps, but I see nothing referencing engineering in the wiki entry for double hyphen. So again I must state my opinion that this is a piece of punctuation that has been adopted by this individual. He uses it improperly, and yet both of the quotes apply the same usage.

My apologies to Engineering Type and other fellow ATS members

I’m really sorry for way I acted by jumping the gun, let me be the first to tell you that I’m way too wrapped up in this. When it comes to picking apart the case at hand, I feel its fare game, but I draw the line when it comes to picking apart a fellow member of ATS, a line that I feel I’ve crossed
I’m was in such a mind set trying to find that loose thread to tug on so this whole thing would come unraveled
Engineering Type brings up some very valid places we should look into, we should study the principle and theories of what Isaac and his documents say. Whether we’re leaning one way or another or on the fence, the truth is you never know where your next lead will come from. It’s easier to just pick them apart, but I’ll admit its going nowhere fast
Engineering Type didn’t ever say this was the real deal and many times insinuated it could be a hoax
I really feel bad about this and I’m really sorry for it and I’ll always do my best from now on to be considerate of everyone here
And for the record, I don’t think Engineering Type is Isaac; it was a brain fart on behalf

Originally posted by deefree
I just said Saladfinger's imitation wasn't really in the same league. The finer you go with both, the more the difference becomes.

I think the opposite is true, after all Saladfinger is recreating someone else's work with his style added to it, can't get any better than that.

Exquisite Example..you might find your answer here that discusses this aside from the grammar angle.

hyphens and comma
I hope it helps

Sys

Originally posted by moonking
Engineering Type didn’t ever say this was the real deal and many times insinuated it could be a hoax

It just appears he may think that, but with a statement like, then he spent years making it.... you shouldn't feel to bad. I mean come on, lets get real now. His statement is just as far out there as your accusation is lol.