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: 148
185
<< 145  146  147    149  150  151 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
Has anyone noticed the "new emails" are dated JUNE 27, 2007? LMH sat on them for a MONTH?!


Am I missing something here?

Springer...


May be he borrowed John Titor TT machine.


In all seriousness his story is getting worst by the minute, is like a dam about to explode for better or worst.

I did got the feeling that he addresses all the issues that have been brought up here, but with no solid proof and very weak arguements and analogies.

Why you go to the trouble of trying to refute people if you know that what you saying is TRUTH? If I'm giving you info that I know is real and you dont want to believe it, then don't, me personally could care less. He said that he want it to get this thing of his chest before meeting he's maker, then I dont see what would motivate him to start refuting people to prove his story right and please lets not forget that he said he has a significant amount of documents and photos, why bother refuting people, just put more info out and stop with analogies or don't even bother to respond.

I just laugh when he mentions the "frisking", I just have a mental picture of all the PACL employees standing in line waiting to be "frisk".

And ISAAC pass trough the line with his VIP pass thinking: "What a bunch of loosers"

Thats some high tech security procedure right there, the best our tax payer money could buy at the time.


[edit on 28-7-2007 by Bunch]

[edit on 28-7-2007 by Bunch]




posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 03:31 PM
link   
my sentiments exactly friend, very well put. *nods and applauds*



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 03:32 PM
link   
I think that unless something new, and major, comes to light, this puppy wears the brand from here on.

I'll keep watching for the reason it ever happened, but I think there can be no doubt now for most people that this is a hoax.



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 03:41 PM
link   
just because new evidence hasn't come forward yet, doesn't necessarily make it a hoax.
If you think its a hoax, then let's both (and anyone else) try and prove it.



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 03:57 PM
link   
its interesting to me she would hold onto this email response for a month, when this topic was so HOT. I also find it interesting that Issac responded to many topic we have covered here the next day of his "whistle blowing".

something is not adding up.



Edit: for spelling errors

[edit on 28-7-2007 by sheila947]



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 04:07 PM
link   
The email dating is a bit weird. How could it be June based on the flow of the forums and posts that were addressed. Must be some pretty sloppy HTML work if it is really from July. Earthfiles has been putting July dates on the pages all month but slips back to June? Maybe the email text was prepared weeks ago, near the start of all of this.

The dates placed on the email should mean nothing as for as authenticity. We are seeing what was placed in an HTML page. We are not looking at the headers from the SMTP servers or the original messages. Some of that data can be bogus anyway. Take a look at any unsolicited bulk emails received. They are full of half truths.

This seems to be an interesting situation.

edit: spelling and

I have to agree with those who wonder why he addresses the critic by posters versus posting new info. He's taking another chance with his identity. Tougher crowd then he thought, maybe?

[edit on 7/28/2007 by roadgravel]



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 04:11 PM
link   
ill still watch for similar reasons but this whole thing was a very ill advised move on whomever started this thing, i just dont like how he tried to crush critics when if he knows the information he has IS real, why would he care what one stupid comment was? this is supposedly GROUND BREAKING technology and i didnt see anything that leads me to believe hell produce any more controversially fascinating evidence to support his claims. there is always the possibility that there is someone faking a response but i doubt that.



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
Has anyone noticed the "new emails" are dated JUNE 27, 2007? LMH sat on them for a MONTH?!


Am I missing something here?

Springer...

Two things I’ll say about that
1: you can throw out the intentional use of the word “albeit”
2: that alarm bell didn’t go off in my head for no reason (www.abovetopsecret.com...)
I wonder if she was in some way waiting to flush him out somehow by delaying emails and hi-res scans


[edit on 28-7-2007 by moonking]



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 04:15 PM
link   
anyone who is seriously interested in this whole Isaac thing i found a link with some info that goes back to 1970 until current
deals with XPARC and tells the location of XPARC in the same general time period as PACL.

this is the address:www.parc.xerox.com...
my suggestion is to START AT THE BOTTOM of the page and work your way up, there is a mentioning of "...which uses PARC's DataGlyph technology..."

A great deal of info on this site, relates I believe directly to Isaac and some of his claims.

[edit on 7/28/2007 by agent violet]



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 04:19 PM
link   
More good points. The more I read the new Earthfiles stuff, the more I agree that Isaac is suddenly a bit out of character. He's gone from being Mr. Laid-Back-Informant to sounding like one of us, bickering on a message board.
It makes the whole thing seem more "human" and less enigmatic, which tells me that we've got some hoaxers out there somewhere that don't want to see their baby fall apart.

My prediction for the future is that rather than see more material in the form of photos and documents, we'll see more "correspondence" from "Isaac", probably all through LMH or maybe C2C as well, refuting the claims of the skeptics. I think at this point, they're going to focus on trying to talk their way out of the holes in the story, which, based on my opinion of the believability of all this, is going to be a full-time job in and of itself.


Kinda lame, to go from admittedly interesting photos and stuff to a bunch of lame arguments back and forth. And I also agree with everyone that even when he's responding to a direct question, there's still just something so empty and almost pointless about his arguments. It's as if he's trying to prove a point without actually saying anything.

But yeah, that's my prediction for the next "phase" of all this. Maybe once they feel they've adequately answered all the criticisms (good luck with that, btw), maybe we'll see more actual material, like documents, photos, etc. Which, by the way, would be rather suspicious as well.



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by agent violet
just because new evidence hasn't come forward yet, doesn't necessarily make it a hoax.
If you think its a hoax, then let's both (and anyone else) try and prove it.


What do you think we have been doing all this time?

Look go back read the thousands of post that have been put up (If you have not done that), research a couple of other sites, look at his story and you will have form some sort of opinion on the issue.

Me at the beggining of the thread : "WOW this is the REAL DEAL"

Me at 2/4 of the thread : " I hate CGI people, they dont know what they talking about" at this point since I realize that I didn't knew much about the issue I started directing my attention to what I'm familiar that is the military/security aspect of his story.

Me at 3/4 of the thread: " This CGI guys make some sense", and is because they did what ISAAC did, put pictures to point out the flaws on ISAAC pics. ISAAC puts out some pictures and documents the quality of which are still being debated which probably means that they are of good quality with a not so good story. We somehow got wowed by the pics, but forgot the most important thing, the source. Which brought us back as who is ISAAC and starting to come with flaws in his story.

Me at the present: With all the analysis that has been put in this thread, I have a personal informed opinion that is a hoax. Open to change, of course.

If this is a hoax, he is diluting the "quality" of it with his story, if I was him I would just show up and claim the baby, because by the time is done people are going to think or realize that it was not that good to begin with.



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
Has anyone noticed the "new emails" are dated JUNE 27, 2007? LMH sat on them for a MONTH?!


Am I missing something here?

Springer...


Hmmm.... I wonder...


LMH made a mistake here:


Return to: previous Isaac and CARET Document Earthfiles reports:

• 06/26/2007 — Part 1: Explanation of the Recent "Strange Craft" Sightings

• 06/26/2007 — Part 2: Documentation, Palo Alto Caret Laboratory Q4-86 Research Report


but then she put this:



July 27, 2007 Albuquerque, New Mexico - After the Isaac letter and CARET document were released on June 26, 2007, one of the criticisms was expressed this way:


oh, but then there's this:



From: Isaac
Subject: Re: "Drones"
Date: June 27, 2007 Received 1:34 PM, Albuquerque, New Mexico
To: earthfiles@earthfiles.com


Who knows??? Could she possibly get that letter back from Isaac that quickly, only a day after releasing the initial report?? Could someone have made criticisms that quickly? Of course not. She obviously retyped his e-mail for the website. So is this just a typo or is it a genuine screw up? Now I don't know what to think. Oh brudder. Good grief, Charlie Brown.
I must keep investigating.

[edit on 7/28/2007 by pjslug]



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 04:35 PM
link   
ok so if PACL existed we will now know where it was/is at

as quoted by the 'professional' on LMH's website: "...Given that CARET was next door to XPARC I see nothing unusual in the quality or layout of the documents and any skepticism raised on that account should be declared completely invalid..."

and here is where XPARC was in the late 70-80's
as quoted from the website link i posted above:
"...PARC's current site at 3333 Coyote Hill Road in Palo Alto, California is completed in February at a size of 100,000 square feet..."

therefore PACL must have been located within the vicinity of coyote hill road in palo alto, so instead of giving up lets get to the bottom of this.

[edit on 7/28/2007 by agent violet]



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 04:41 PM
link   
good find pjslug i knew something was up if you review some of my previous posts you'll see what i meant by that being the wrong date on the emails, simply because as i listed above, the deliberate injection of many albeit's spelled correctly, which of course i contend means little to nothing



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
I know it's not a typo, email programs date emails automatically, the servers that route emails date stamp them as well, this email was definitely received by LMH one month ago yesterday.

Have you ever typed in the date on an email header? Neither have I.


What I don't understand is why Linda would hold them back from everyone interested in this for a month?

Springer...


But like I said in the previous post, it was probably re-typed. How many e-mail programs do you know of that say where you are from, such as Albuquerque, New Mexico?



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by newtothis
From Earthfiles: "I emailed these issues to Isaac and on June 27, 2007, I received his replies in two separate emails indicated by receipt times, which Isaac gave me permission to share in an Earthfiles follow-up. My delay in reporting these emails is that I had an indication from Isaac that I might be able to interview him by phone. So, I waited, hoping the interview would occur. But to date, that has not happened."


Yeah...
I guess Springer and I like to post before we read everything carefully first.
Good catch, newtothis.

[edit on 7/28/2007 by pjslug]



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 04:49 PM
link   
The URL

isaaccaret.fortunecity.com...

returns a 404.

The Wayback Machine finds no archived versions of it either.

Maybe MJ12 is up to something -- this, plus the alleged censure on C2C last night?!?!?!?!

[edit on 28-7-2007 by srb2001]

[edit on 28-7-2007 by srb2001]



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by agent violet
July 26th(thursday)> Isaac calls into st.louis NPR Crypto show


I wouldn't be holding such faith in that Crypto show. I haven't listened to it, but I highly doubt that is Isaac. For him to say he met up with someone 2600 times is a bit crazy when he is trying to keep himself anonymous. What was the conversation about?



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lexion
Archived material that has already been "censored" for viewing
by "outside parties" would have a security classification
attached.

This hoaxer is a horrible liar.

Regards,
Lex


I agree Lex, it is odd. There are definately holes in the story. It could be perhaps that the items were archived in a room that was meant for outside viewing purposes, but they weren't stamped with a classified marking until they were about to actually leave the facility. Depending on where the document was to go to could determine the type of stamp placed on the document. Keep in mind, I'm sure PACL was not the only supposed "civilian" company working on this at the time. I'm sure they shared information and knowledge between other labs that were working on other parts of the alien craft. He did say that noone ever was allowed to see too much and they had to work with what they had. He said that the company would buy them as much civilian equipment as necessary to make their jobs easier, but he never said they gave the employees unlimited access to parts of the alien craft.



posted on Jul, 28 2007 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Another part of the story that dont make sense to me, why you will put this kind of material out of a military installation?

Of all the conspiracies related to UFO, this would be the first one I see that references to the military placing ET tech outside a military installation which makes me question ISAAC story even harder.

He mentions the fact that they want it to be close to Sillicon Valley, if that was the case. Why they did not place CARET, at Moffett Air Field?. The distance between MAF and the area of Sillicon Valley ISAAC is refering too is no more than 20 miles, and someone can correct me if I'm wrong. Do they really need it to be door to door close or just close enough with out compromising security?

BTW MAF has been used in the past for groundbreaking propulsion systems testing, and based the AF Sallelite Test Center until it was recently moved, so you know that security in that place will be top notch.

It just doesn't make sense to me. It will be totally out of character for military to allow this if you campare it to what the military does with ET tech by the other conspiracy stories that have been told over the years.



new topics

top topics



 
185
<< 145  146  147    149  150  151 >>

log in

join