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: 142
185
<< 139  140  141    143  144  145 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by alevar
Okay fine, so howabout this:...

For instance, not a SINGLE person who provided any of the photos we've seen has come forward to be directly identified, interviewed, or anything.


How hard would it be for a government agency who wanted this strangled to track these people down?




1) The photos could easily be CGI. Don't understand how? Fair enough. Luckily, pretty much every expert agrees (including MUFON). Still don't like it? That's your call, so read on:

How experienced are the most expert of them when it comes to photos of something that is claimed capable of invisibility? How would that function operate, always on, always off? Anything in between? Any claims by witnesses that the vehicles seemed to optically "track"? You see what I'm driving at?



2) The witnesses exist ONLY via email, which means there's not a single shred of proof that they aren't all controlled by a single group, or perhaps even individual. Not one person has talked by phone to anyone on or off the record, even according to LMH.


Maybe out of sensible fear or outright disappearance?



3) Isaac's stuff is nice, admittedly, but again, it's strangely convenient. Nothing he's told us about himself can be corroborated, because he's been so vague. The same goes for the content of the report itself. Again, it looks nice on the surface, but there's ZERO evidence of any real, verifiable value. And again, you don't need to be a CGI expert to understand how suspicious that is.


He's protecting himself in a perfectly sane way. As to the content being "provable" as valid, how much evidence do you want? He's handed over a veritable gold-mine which happens to correspond perfectly with the photos that have been submitted. Soon, there will be film of one on CNN and you'll say "it's a fraud". I look at the CARET documents and my impression is: this is beyond human intelligence- despite the claims of the nay-sayers, no human could've put all of this together.



4) My personal favorite is the fact that this whole thing has played out exactly like a hoax/story would. It starts simple, then gets progressively more complicated, then has a big finish. That's it! The "drone" craft appears on film for the first time EVER, in HISTORY, in May or June of 2007 or whatever. And that just happens to be the same month in which like a billion other progressively more complex photos surface of the same thing. And it ALSO just so happens that within a month or two of all this the mastermind himself steps forward with the blueprints as well? I mean Jesus, even for a movie script that's pretty contrived.



The combination of random and ordered elements makes life unexpected, even if that makes some things seem contrived.



5) Check out Saladfinger's work on proving the document is 99% likely to be the product of Adobe Illustrator as well. As I've said, this a lot easier to grasp, even for a layman, than the CGI argument. It's all right there, point for point, for anyone to see. We've been looking for a smoking gun and the more I think about it, the more I think this might be it.


Mimicking something is *nothing* like creating it. Saladfinger is welcome to attempt The CARET Challenge. I've seen what he's done so far and I doubt that he could even make a crude version of the attempt.

Look, you're welcome to think whatever you want about this. If you can study the CARET documents without getting goose-bumps, more power to you. I'm not out to convince anybody, I'm just pointing out that an awful lot is being dismissed out of hand and that we've passed the human limitations of "clever" a long while ago. You saw the hi-res photo that bokinsmowl pointed out, right? Who would have the depth of mind to place these elaborate diagrams in a place that would require them to be pulled out by technical means? I keep saying this:deeper you dig,better it gets.




posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:11 AM
link   
Bunch, it does sound strange. But I was just reading in another thread how NASA is "losing" millions of dollars of stuff every year. And it wasn't long ago when the news was all about laptops with secret information going missing from some high security place in New Mexico.

Anything can and does happen. Every few days something comes to light in the news right here on these forums that leave me shaking my head over how stupid the government is.

Right now, as I write this, our nation is all worried about an attack happening soon here in the states. Yet, our borders are almost totally open. There has likely been three Mexican illegals cross them while I was typing. It doesn't make sense, but it does happen.

So with that in mind, it's hard to be sure.



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:17 AM
link   
Thanks I checked saladfingers on youtube his work is nice but that leave me with questions.
Chad picture where first then saldfinger cgi movie came latter, then more picture, then Isaac report.
I was looking at the Blair Witch Project (BWP) and how they first made documentary for the Sci-Fi Channel and then the movie.
What if this was supposed to be like BWP only that is a sci-fi movie and it is first of its kind.
Think about it, the first picture where shown in C2C the number one show in UFOlogist then project where given to LMH the top paranormal investigator in US.
Then I ask the 2nd question if you going to make a film about aliens like Independence Day/BWP don’t you think you want some thing to back you up.?
My 3rd questions why not make a better drone I’m guessing they ask the top expert and they said a circle flying machine.
I always thought a disk flying machine that is shinny and have cool lights would be my choice.
My 4th question looking at how they made Star Trek Next Generation they had real scientist grads working on the set, so that means they must have scientist experts, UFOlogist experts, and paranormal experts. Oh I forgot with Isaac report linguistic experts, text image experts (whatever) and PARC experts, hum that is a lot I give up ask the expert.



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bunch
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]


Original photographs have been provided here .

As for the rest what if Isaac was responsible for the internal security of documents.

The fact that someone can't think of plausible alternatives is laughable.



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by NGC2736
Bunch, it does sound strange. But I was just reading in another thread how NASA is "losing" millions of dollars of stuff every year. And it wasn't long ago when the news was all about laptops with secret information going missing from some high security place in New Mexico.

Anything can and does happen. Every few days something comes to light in the news right here on these forums that leave me shaking my head over how stupid the government is.


Im not saying that it can not happen, I know it does. thats why their are procedures in place to account for that type of information, and sooner or later people take notice. There are people that thats their job, to account for this type of material, they give it to you and you take it back to them, thats it, if you dont bring it back, you get question about it. Simple.

If he has them let see them, thats all I'm saying.

[edit on 27-7-2007 by Bunch]

[edit on 27-7-2007 by Bunch]



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:24 AM
link   
Arlington Acid:

Your points aren't bad. I don't agree with them, for the most part at least, but I consider them valid enough to entertain.

The problem is, you're trying to paint me out to be a debunker and I'm not. Just because we're disagree doesn't mean I "refuse" to see your viewpoint. I could say the same about you by that criteria, but I wouldn't, because I don't think you're a "bunker" anymore than I'm a "debunker".


As for your comment about the film, that isn't fair. Debating is great, but you have to draw the line at telling people what they "would" do in a hypothetical situation. If a supposedly real video surfaced, I'd treat it like anything else. If it looked good, I'd give it credit and explore it. If it looked really fake, I wouldn't. Furthermore, I'd take the input of experts seriously, whether I agreed with it or not, and use it as a part of my final conclusion.

I don't want to keep going back and forth on each bullet point. We both seem to have reasonable interpretations of them, and while I disagree with yours, I'm not going to chase you to the ends of the earth to dissuade you. All I ask is that you don't take my disagreement as a free license to accuse me of rampant debunkery. It's not true.



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by chunder
Original photographs have been provided here .

As for the rest what if Isaac was responsible for the internal security of documents.

The fact that someone can't think of plausible alternatives is laughable.


Sorry if I came accross wrong there, from my perspective is laughable, thats just my opinion.

If he was in charge of the documents, he will still have a boss, and periodic inspections to see if hes doing hes job.

I can think of plausible alternatives dont get me wrong, I will hope this is true, but the burden of proof is on him not me.

BTW for some reason I could not accesss you link, but thanks for put it out there.

[edit on 27-7-2007 by Bunch]



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:33 AM
link   
If this is a hoax, it’s exploring new territory. We had the John Titor and SERPO incidents, both initially tantalizing in their plotlines, but ultimately transparent due to their lack of repetitive evidence from other sources to back the story up. Those stories were made up of whole cloth and no credible person stepped into the breach. Yeah, we got some written hearsay from people we’d never heard of, or of dubious backgrounds, but this saga of the drone dangled the – um hum – CARET before us.

With this incredible tale, someone manufactured visual, pseudo-historic and scientific clues worthy of the best whodunit novel and illustrated it as well.

In the end, I’m not convinced of its veracity because no one else is piping up to say: “Yeah, I worked there too. Awesome time, man.





posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bunch

If he was in charge of the documents, he will still have a boss, and periodic inspections to see if hes doing hes job.


BTW for some reason I could not accesss you link, but thanks for put it out there.


What if his boss was the military, and being in charge of internal security the only way his boss will know they are gone is if he tells them.

Link works for me but cut and paste -
isaaccaret.fortunecity.com...



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bunch
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.


He never said he had the originals. You need to actually read Isaac's story before saying something like that. He made copies and walked out with copies of the originals.



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by AmbientNoise
In the end, I’m not convinced of its veracity because no one else is piping up to say: “Yeah, I worked there too. Awesome time, man.


Seriously, if answering that convinces you of it's veracity then send me an email, I have some rocking horse poo to sell.



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:41 AM
link   
Chunder:

Thanks for the heads up, I was wrong, but if those pictures are the ones that almost all the CGI guys here are calling as renders, then this is a hoax IMO.

Is just my opinion so I dont want to get lambasted about it, you guys keep going I will keep watching, when I have something worth contributing I will be back.



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by pjslug
He never said he had the originals. You need to actually read Isaac's story before saying something like that. He made copies and walked out with copies of the originals.


I will urge you to re read the story, Chunder just posted the link of the original pics, and he does claim to have original documents and pictures.

Like I said he was right, I was wrong.

[edit on 27-7-2007 by Bunch]



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bunch
Chunder:

Thanks for the heads up, I was wrong, but if those pictures are the ones that almost all the CGI guys here are calling as renders, then this is a hoax IMO.

Is just my opinion so I dont want to get lambasted about it, you guys keep going I will keep watching, when I have something worth contributing I will be back.



I think your post above is very interesting - where do you get the impression that all the CGI guys are calling these renders from and who do you mean by all the CGI guys ?



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by chunder
What if his boss was the military, and being in charge of internal security the only way his boss will know they are gone is if he tells them.


Ok I going to say this and take for what is worth because I dont want to start an arguement over this, like the CGI/ NOT CGI debate.

In the Federal Goverment any agency but specially in the military, you are not you own boss, that not the way DOD works, you have a boss all the way to the President and even the President has a boss. ( it supposed to be the people), if anybody have work with the Federal Goverment knows what I'm talking about, layers upon layers of beraucracy, procedures, forms, bosses, the hole nine yards.

You also have internal and external controls that inspect you, sometimes you know when, sometimes you don't.

Now he posted pictures, CGI guys say they are hoax, that leads me to believe that it is. I'm still open for it to be real, but the evidence points towards hoax in my opinion.



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 12:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bunch
I will urge you to re read the story, Chunder just posted the link of the original pics, and he does claim to have original documents and pictures.

Like I said he was right, I was wrong.

[edit on 27-7-2007 by Bunch]


Ok, duly noted. As far as the photographs, I think those were originals, I meant the documents. But if he took the original documents then I missed that part. I can't imagine, like you said, ANYONE would take the original documents. It seems highly unlikely that he wouldn't have gotten caught if he took the originals. Are we completely sure he didn't take copies of the originals? Are we completely sure he didn't take duplicate photos (as I'm sure they would have made several from the negatives)? But I thought we have discussed this here already, that he made copies inside the facility -- people claiming that this is a hoax have said this is unlikely to have happened with MPs with machine guns standing around. If he is claiming in the story to have taken the originals, this seems like a major flaw in what I consider a disclosure/disinfo campaign, and should be looked at more carefully by all of us.

[edit on 7/27/2007 by pjslug]



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 01:11 AM
link   
Fake 90% Real 10%
Hoax 50% Other 50%

Is it possible to summarise a complex personal opinion and then include it at the top of each post to help any new readers ?



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by chunder
I think your post above is very interesting - where do you get the impression that all the CGI guys are calling these renders from and who do you mean by all the CGI guys ?


Im sorry Chunder, I have been on this thread since the beggining and I think you too, I dont have the specifics posts, but if you remember when the CGI/NOT CGI was on going is was brought up that Mr.JRitzman and Mr. Biedny (both guys come with very good credentials) came to the conclusion that this was a hoax.

In addition you can say what you want about 11 11, but he does put some holes in regards to the pics and some others have done as well. Also if you go to others sites where they have CGI guys they majority has come to this conclusion, so IMO having that and with my personal experience, I'm leaning towards hoax.

Like I said I'm still open to any other evidence that can surface.

[edit on 27-7-2007 by Bunch]



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 01:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by pjslug

Ok, duly noted. As far as the photographs, I think those were originals, I meant the documents. But if he took the original documents then I missed that part. I can't imagine, like you said, ANYONE would take the original documents. It seems highly unlikely that he wouldn't have gotten caught if he took the originals. Are we completely sure he didn't take copies of the originals? Are we completely sure he didn't take duplicate photos (as I'm sure they would have made several from the negatives)? But I thought we have discussed this here already, that he made copies inside the facility -- people claiming that this is a hoax have said this unlikely to have happened with MPs with machine guns standing around. If he is claiming in the story to have taken the originals, this seems like a major flaw in what I consider a disclosure/disinfo campaign, and should be looked at more carefully by all of us.

[edit on 7/27/2007 by pjslug]


ISAAC wrote this:

As long as I walked carefully they wouldn't make a crinkling noise. In fact, the more papers I took, the less noise they made, since they weren't as flimsy that way. I'd often take upwards of 10-20 pages at once. By the time I was done, I'd made out with hundreds of photocopies, as well as a few originals and a large collection of original photographs.


Those are his words, now I interpret this as he is talking about documents and pictures that he manage to take out from the facility.



posted on Jul, 27 2007 @ 01:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bunch
ISAAC wrote this:

As long as I walked carefully they wouldn't make a crinkling noise. In fact, the more papers I took, the less noise they made, since they weren't as flimsy that way. I'd often take upwards of 10-20 pages at once. By the time I was done, I'd made out with hundreds of photocopies, as well as a few originals and a large collection of original photographs.


Those are his words, now I interpret this as he is talking about documents and pictures that he manage to take out from the facility.


You just showed it yourself!!! By the time I was done, I'd made out with hundreds of photocopies, as well as a few originals and a large collection of original photographs. A FEW ORIGINALS, HUNDREDS OF PHOTOCOPIES. I was right. And so were you.

[edit on 7/27/2007 by pjslug]



new topics

top topics



 
185
<< 139  140  141    143  144  145 >>

log in

join