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: 141
185
<< 138  139  140    142  143  144 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 10:13 PM
link   
What about this pic that was posted on 7/22 www.fileden.com...
has all the marking and looks of the basin pic.




posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 10:22 PM
link   
alevar, you know that I have said that I feel like this is a hoax, I just lack the evidence to be completely sure, and so until such time as there can be no reasonable doubt, I will remain open minded enough to listen to other ideas.

Still, have you read my updated signature? When you start preaching the Gospel of Alevar, I start seeing holes in your argument.

I give you two points out of the five you listed, with one that could go either way. The two points you win are numbers one and five, with number four as a maybe.

Here's my reasoning, and if you can understand this, then maybe you can understand why soe people still look at this as a possibility, even if you don't.

Your number two argument is really a rant that other people, with lives that are not as tightly bound to the whole UFO thing as ours, are not cooperating in the manner that you say you would. Well, they're not you, so why would they have to be anything other than normal people that don't want to get involved in something that could take over there lives to some extent?

Remember the kid from Gulf Breeze? He once said that he was drove to distraction by all the media crap. Can you not see how someone looking into UFOs for the first time and finding his story might not want to ever put themselves in a position to be raked over the coals? I see posters here done the same way, accused of being hoaxers and people asking for a ban on them, even while our own photo experts are still evaluating their picture.

And just as sure as Hell, if they did come out and answer questions, someone would start wondering about the motive for doing so. Were they being a shill for LMH or whomever? Were they trying to jump start their career as a model, blah, blah, blah?

The number three point in your post is just a way to say that you see yourself as such a genius that if you can't understand what's going on with the documents, then it must be gibberish. You claim to want more information, but you do everything in your power to taint any that you do have with rabid comments that "prove", in your own eyes, that it's too convenient, whatever such an open ended statement as that can mean.

Point four I almost give you, except that life is sometimes a strange critter, and the damnedest things happen at the oddest times, and in the oddest ways. Life imitates art and art imitates life. Just because you can whistle the tune doesn't mean that you have all the words to the song. There's only a limited number of ways that this could have unfolded, and every one of those ways has been used by someone pulling a hoax. It's like saying that some real life murderer couldn't set a fire in a house to cover up a murder because that idea has been used on TV too many times.

Your arguments sound good, until someone looks at them closely, and then they fall apart faster than a cardboard suitcase in a rainstorm.

Just like the true believer, you refuse to wait and follow the evidence and be patient until enough has been established to be sure. I haven't heard of ATS awarding bonus points for the first through twenty-sixth person to first proclaim this a hoax. but maybe you have some inside information that I do not. Being a debunker means that the odds are on your side.

I really enjoy ATS, but I was very disappointed in the behavior of some over a recent hoax. There were bragging parties on some of the threads, complete with people wanting the world to know that they called hoax on page such and such. What a childish and immature reaction, not to mention a backhanded jab at your brothers and sisters here on this site who were not so ready to be quick to deny hope for contact.

Such reactions, and such lack of control as these posts that DEMAND that others accept your Godlike pronouncements on the truth of these matters, is exactly the ego driven behavior that is central to the very hoaxers you seek to expose. And you deny a desire to learn, and instead promote a mob mentality, complete with the childish behavior, every time you talk down to those who chose not to agree with you.

Now let me add that while I have used you as an example, you are by no means the worst of the lot. And please trust me when I say that I mean no ill feeling towards you. I simply want this to be the place I expected it to be. A place where give and take is civil, where preaching is confined to the religion section, and where we can all express our ideas free of ridicule and condescending attitudes.

I would like to think that we all want that, even in the midst of our passionate defense of what we believe.



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 10:24 PM
link   
Alevar:

Thats a great post!


When I first started with this I got infuriated at the CGI people, partly because some of them dont know how to approach the part of the community that do not posses or understand the topic and like you said I don't have the time to start picking up books about the stuff.

But the more the debate progressed, the more I became convinced that not all this guys could be making stuff up, or conspiring for some reason.

The burden of proof is on the people that started the ball rolling,the ISAAC's, Chad's, Ty's of the world and all the multiple eyewitnesses, all we can do is analyze it and come to conclusions with the information provided, it should NEVER be the other way around, if we start going down that path just imagine the countless hours we are going to be debating every worthless stuff that is put out there.

For the people that take their wrath at the CGI people, man, you are directing your frustration at the wrong people.

Just use a common sense approach to it. They are making some big claims, like human race history changing claims, should we take that as truth because they say so? With no corroboration, no people willing to come out public about it. Sorry, I rather trust the people that actually have put the time and the effort to analyze it, not the ones that just hit and run making uncorroborable claims.



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by newkid
What about this pic that was posted on 7/22 www.fileden.com...
has all the marking and looks of the basin pic.


That is one of Saladfingers recreations and has been discussed many times. Please go back and read this thread carefully so that we don't have to take time to discuss duplicate issues, especially those with regards to CGI recreations.



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bunch
For the people that take their wrath at the CGI people, man, you are directing your frustration at the wrong people.


When you have people like 11 11 belittling every member of this thread who doesn't share his views (of which he had no consistant ones), how can you not get upset at people like that?



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 10:35 PM
link   
NGC2736:

No worries, you make a lot of good points. I do agree that people get way too dogmatic about their views way too quickly, but don't forgot that not so long ago, I was wide open about this subject, which means I've been (almost) on both sides. I was never a 100% believer, but I haven't always felt the way I feel now. My beliefs and opinions are simply a product of the evidence at hand and my analysis of it. It's really only been the last couple of weeks that the final nails have gone into the coffin for me. In any case, I certainly don't want to seem like a debunker.

If I've come across as being unwilling to listen to the opposing side, then believe me that it wasn't intentional. I'm perfectly open to any possibility here, provided decent evidence comes with it. And hell, I really do want this to be true!
I just want to make sure that I put my belief and trust into something that deserves it.

And don't get me wrong, even though I'm posting against this subject lately, I still agree that there are plenty of interesting reasons to believe in it, at least partially. My point is not that there's literally ZERO evidence that it could be true, but rather, that the evidence is mostly circumstantial and very hard to verify and substantiate. That doesn't make it worthless, it just makes it dubious enough for people like me to finally give up on it.

But the right argument will convince me of anything. I'm just waiting for that argument to come along. In the meantime, I'm rather comfortable with my view that this is a hoax, but don't expect anyone to join me unless they're as comfortable as I am.

[edit on 26-7-2007 by alevar]



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 10:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by pjslug
When you have people like 11 11 belittling every member of this thread who doesn't share his views (of which he had no consistant ones), how can you not get upset at people like that?


I completely agree with you in regards to his attitude, put that aside and I think you will agree that he has been one of the big contributors to this thread. Talking about passion,time, effort and dedication he gets the award IMO. I'm not saying that I agree with all his conclusions and treatment of people involved in this, but you have to give credit to the guy.



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 10:49 PM
link   
So assuming that Isaac does release more information, regarding this 'case' what do you think it will be?

photos, more documents, more primers, a picture of S1 etc...

Any ideas on this, if you don't have a guess on what he/she will release, then what do you think Isaac won't release?

any thoughts?



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 10:50 PM
link   
I was looking to see if Steorn had actually yet made good on their promise or if they were still a fraud. They're still a fraud. But in my searching I came across this video on YouTube. Watch it at 2:32 (2 minutes and 32 seconds into it). I guess there is this interesting plasma table device that reacts and makes noise when certain blocks are placed on it that have illustrations or writing on it. I don't think that this is similar to the drone technology and the writing on it, but I thought it was somewhat relevant so check it out!



[edit on 7/26/2007 by pjslug]



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bunch
I completely agree with you in regards to his attitude, put that aside and I think you will agree that he has been one of the big contributors to this thread. Talking about passion,time, effort and dedication he gets the award IMO. I'm not saying that I agree with all his conclusions and treatment of people involved in this, but you have to give credit to the guy.



I give credit to the effort of analysis, absolutely. However he kept trying to find new things to latch on to when one of his ideas was challenged or shown to be null and void. For so many people that claim to be graphics professionals in here, I can't believe they didn't see the flaw in his claims. For the people that aren't graphics pros, I completely understand why they would gravitate towards his ideas.



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by agent violet
So assuming that Isaac does release more information, regarding this 'case' what do you think it will be?

photos, more documents, more primers, a picture of S1 etc...

Any ideas on this, if you don't have a guess on what he/she will release, then what do you think Isaac won't release?

any thoughts?


If this is some talented team of hoaxers, then they've had ample time to prepare more pictures, provided it is as easy as we're told to do. As a matter of fact, one would think that if this were an outright hoax, then more pictures would have already shown up. I find it odd that none have.

Isaac could give more printed material, but unless there's some engineering data that science can access, then it wouldn't mean much. However, if he could release something that could be verified in regards to time, people, places, or documents that could be related from some government source through FOIA, then his credibility would go way up.

Just like hunting in the deep woods, we have to wait for developments, and keep trying to find fresh ways to see what we already have.



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 11:07 PM
link   
I also think that Isaac with release more photos, possibly of the Linguistic Primer device itself.
I don't think that he will release the actual blueprints/details/pictures of S1.
Although I wish he would, of course.

I do think that he/she will include some more engineering information but I doubt that he/she will release the entire 'key' so to speak.

As for time, places, and documents it seems like a semi-possible possibilty as for people I highly doubt it, unfortuneately.

we shall see either way



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 11:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by pjslug
You never responded to my last comment to you about why you are so condescending to others. I strongly suggest you knock it off. Anyone and everyone are allowed to share their opinions here, whether they believe in this or not. Moonking is obviously intrigued by this as he has said before, or he wouldn't be here otherwise. Where do you get off telling someone that he must see the "magic" in order to post here? As far as I've seen, this thread existed long before you started posting here and consisted of many people not believing in the report or the drones. Just because you and I happen to believe in it doesn't mean that people who don't aren't allowed to post here because you don't want them to. Get off your high horse and start acting respectful, please. I appreciate all your contributions so far as they have been very valuable, but please do not act so condescending towards others if their beliefs differ from your own. Thank you.
[edit on 7/26/2007 by pjslug]


Despite the conclusion brought about by your imperfect perception, I have been condescending to no one here. I have repeatedly urged moonking to participate and when he posted a series of messages indicating his unhappiness with this forum, I replied to him in the friendliest way that he should turn away from that which was making him unhappy and search for that which would make him happy (go back and read what I said). I've never even vaguely suggested that anyone needs to "see the magic" to post here and your assertion that I have makes me concerned for your state of mind. If you feel that I've stated anything incorrectly about this, you're welcome to go back and compile a record of my *condescension* towards any and all here.



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by NGC2736
Isaac could give more printed material, but unless there's some engineering data that science can access, then it wouldn't mean much. However, if he could release something that could be verified in regards to time, people, places, or documents that could be related from some government source through FOIA, then his credibility would go way up.

Just like hunting in the deep woods, we have to wait for developments, and keep trying to find fresh ways to see what we already have.


I agree. I think we should contact PARC. I think we should ask someone if they could send us a sample of a report from the mid 80s. If it looks similar to the CARET report (fonts, layout, line spacing, tracking, kerning, leading, etc.) then it would lend credence to the document we have before us.



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by pjslug

I agree. I think we should contact PARC. I think we should ask someone if they could send us a sample of a report from the mid 80s. If it looks similar to the CARET report (fonts, layout, line spacing, tracking, kerning, leading, etc.) then it would lend credence to the document we have before us.


I think this might be a good idea to try. Now I would never suggest being untruthful, but it might be wise to not mention the reason for the request. I'm just saying an e-mail that starts:

"Could you send me a copy of some of your inventory from 1984 so I can check them against a guy claiming to have information on UFOs and using your business as a reference." might not work.

Any reference to the facts of the case would almost surely get the request filed in the trash can.


But by all means, find a way to at least try. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arlington Acid
...makes me concerned for your state of mind.


And you say you're not condescending.


(mods: please feel free to remove this post if you like)

[edit on 7/26/2007 by pjslug]



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by pjslug

Originally posted by Arlington Acid
...makes me concerned for your state of mind.


And you say you're not condescending.


(mods: please feel free to remove this post if you like)

[edit on 7/26/2007 by pjslug]


No need to remove your post PJ, you're RIGHT.

"AA" is on the verge of walking "11 11's" path...

I suggest (s)he COOL IT if (s)he enjoys interacting with others here at ATS.


Springer...

[edit on 7-26-2007 by Springer]



posted on Jul, 26 2007 @ 11:55 PM
link   
The trouble is wouldn't getting hold of a similar document just be the CGI argument again but in reverse ?

It's possible a hoaxer could get the font and format etc etc exactly right for the era.

Not saying it shouldn't be tried or it isn't a good idea but personally I don't give a great deal of credence for the argument that it's CGI because it looks similar to other CGI so vice verca.

I haven't read the saladfingers info on Illustrator yet so I don't know how compulsive that is but I suspect it will be along the same lines. The thing is Illustrator came out of PARC like most other software programs so whose to say it wasn't developed as a result of the issues they had manually copying the LAP, hence it's characteristics lead it to help create similar style drawings.

As I said haven't read it yet so that may not be the general thrust of the argument.

It's a bit the same with most of the other arguments as to this being a hoax - it certainly looks like a dog, walks and talks like a dog, but until we can test it's DNA there should remain an element of doubt. Considering the possible importance of the claims it's only right and proper that some on this thread continue to investigate the evidence and hat's off to those.

PS I also believe 1111 deserves an award, it would be fairly prickly and need to be mounted.



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:01 AM
link   
i was wounding if there has been any new type drone becauce i want to add more to my pic file of them



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:01 AM
link   
You know what I will like ISAAC to show us?

The so called original documents and photos he said he manage to take out from the facility. He dont refer to any of the docs he put out already as originals.

He puts that out there that will be an eye opener. To me thats the biggest flaw on his story because I'm familiar with the process. He said that the military gave them a hard time when asking for CI but then he is able to walk with ORIGINAL docs and photos, out of the facility? If he have those, how security didnt find out that original docs where missing? You dont need to be familiar with the precedures on how to handle CI to know thats bull. And anyone that says that that type of info was not sensitive is just kidding themselves.

ISAAC says that he started doing that 3 month prior to submit his resignation, and he was REALLY OUT 8 months after, so if docs where missing and he was still there, he would have get caught no doubt during inspection or questioning and if he was out he would have been brought up for questioning too. Again you dont need to be an expert to know this, is just common sense for us, so imagine what procedures will be in place.

Thats an 11 month window for security to not figure out that original documents and pictures where missing. That is laughable.

For a guy that sounded scare and tired of working with military people to pull a stunt like this is very out of character and farfetched to say the least.




[edit on 27-7-2007 by Bunch]



new topics

top topics



 
185
<< 138  139  140    142  143  144 >>

log in

join