[HOAX] Isaac CARET - Drones [HOAX]

Well its only opposite in that the object is black, and the images I posted are white..but you can see no similarity in the feel, and the image quality? I seriously give up on you people..extremely gullable...*shrugs*

Originally posted by isitmagic
I never said you would feel bad, I just said you jumped the gun and yelled hoax, and i dont think thats fair.. but thats my opinion.

and the lighting/reflections on that thing look almost opposite to what they should be (note i said almost, so dont fire on me) as opposed to the Isaac ones

Originally posted by wildone106
Well well well..look what I found..


img182.imageshack.us...

Well well, "what you found" is actually what you made my friend. If anyone looks at this picture, notice that Palo Alto Caret Laboratory background is different from rest of the picture, it look's as it was copied and pasted onto the picture.

Another thing is the title of the jpeg file that was uploaded on imageshack. Notice it says "untitled".. which clearly shows this was quickly put together in some software (photoshop?) and uploaded to imageshack, just to spread "ITS HOAX" theory on this thread. Nice try, quite lame.

p.s.
Your post made me register here, so I can reply to this (was just regular reader), congarts :-) Also, excuse my poor english, it's my second language.



[edit on 27-6-2007 by unixoid]

NO WAY, REALLY!???!!??!

The images I posted are from a CG book, and I was stunned at how exactly they match the isaac image in terms of rendering quality & feel, almost exactly. If you seriously cant see this then you have absolutely no aestetic judgement and are completely willing to be taken by the real hoaxers (Isaac & chad) due to your extreme ignorance about the methods they are using to fool you. I wish all of it was real but my inner sense, experience and judgment with over 10 years experience in this field tell me otherwise. Thats all I can say..

And yes I cut & paste the isaac graphics onto it to further match the look, but aside from that the rendering techniques where probably copied from the book exactly. EXACTLY.

Originally posted by unixoid

Originally posted by wildone106
Well well well..look what I found..


img182.imageshack.us...

Well well, "what you found" is actually what you made my friend. If anyone looks at this picture, notice that Palo Alto Caret Laboratory background is different from rest of the picture, it look's as it was copied and pasted onto the picture.

Another thing is the title of the jpeg file that was uploaded on imageshack. Notice it says "untitled".. which clearly shows this was quickly put together in some software (photoshop?) and uploaded to imageshack, just to spread "ITS HOAX" theory on this thread. Nice try, quite lame.

p.s.
Your post made me register here, so I can reply to this (was just regular reader), congarts :-)

[edit on 27-6-2007 by wildone106]

Please some one tell me if I am being way to conspiracy crazy with this theory but follow me if you will.


1. The original Chad photos were sent to coast to coast.

2. The only person to talk directly to 'witnesses' of these drones is supposedly Linda Multon Howe who does exclusive reports for Coast to Coast and dreamland.

3. The Isaac story and documents were sent to coast to coast. Isaac claims to be a listener.
What are the odds of all of this being directly connected back to coast to coast?

4. Directly under the drone explanation story on the Coast to Coast website is an announcement for Coast to Coast doing a live show at Roswell for the 60th anniversary.
www.coasttocoastam.com...


I am not saying coast to coast is in on a hoax but I am also not saying they aren't I am just trying to point out that all of this seems to go back to Coast to Coast am.

Now a little background, I have been a listener for a long time and I really don't think Art or any of the other hosts would take part in a hoax but are the suits behind c2c am above such a thing? If it means more ratings? I don't know.


Take this theory for what it's worth (not much, ha) it is just me noticing how it all sort of reverts back to coast to coast.....

Lets step into the mind of 'Isaac'. Read this part of the website:

isaaccaret.fortunecity.com...

And in the future, just to cover all the bases, anyone claiming to be me who's selling a DVD or book is most certainly not going to be me.

Isn't it kind of odd that Isaac Botkin, a well known CG artist, just so happens to be selling a book?

Originally posted by wildone106
NO WAY, REALLY!???!!??!

The images I posted are from a CG book, and I was stunned at how exactly they match the isaac image in terms of rendering quality & feel, almost exactly.
.....
And yes I cut & paste the isaac graphics onto it to further match the look, but aside from that the rendering techniques where probably copied from the book exactly. EXACTLY.
[edit on 27-6-2007 by wildone106]

Your original post didn't mentioned any of this, and I am willing to bet that quite few people here got the wrong impression about what you found. As I said earlier, nice try, but it is quite lame to do something like this.

Originally posted by 11 11
Lets step into the mind of 'Isaac'. Read this part of the website:

isaaccaret.fortunecity.com...

And in the future, just to cover all the bases, anyone claiming to be me who's selling a DVD or book is most certainly not going to be me.

Isn't it kind of odd that Isaac Botkin, a well known CG artist, just so happens to be selling a book?

While I commend you for searching for connections to the two of them....that is sort of pushing it. More proof is needed really. I would like to read some of Isaac Botkin's stuff and see if it is similar in writing styles.

Originally posted by blowfishdl
Don't you think that CGI Render is EXTREMELY CLOSE to the ""Real Photos""

No, not even close....

CGI:



PHOTO 1:



PHOTO 2:



Not close at all, I'm still waiting to see a duplicate done in CGI that can compare to the details in these photo's.... that CGI is no where near it.

Originally posted by SaucyRossy
I am not saying coast to coast is in on a hoax but I am also not saying they aren't I am just trying to point out that all of this seems to go back to Coast to Coast am.

That's pretty much what I was saying a few pages ago, but no one seemed to pick up on it.

Originally posted by yuefo

Any future releases from me will come from the email address I've used to contact Coast to Coast AM, and will be sent to them only.

So far the there's only a couple people who I'm sure have profitted from this. I've got a strong suspicion who's responsible for the whole thing.

It's pretty obvious--follow the money people.

Yeah it seems obvious that the only people really benefiting from any of this is Coast to Coast....but the real question is would they stoop this low?

I hope not.

Originally posted by unixoid
Well well, "what you found" is actually what you made my friend. If anyone looks at this picture, notice that Palo Alto Caret Laboratory background is different from rest of the picture, it look's as it was copied and pasted onto the picture. ]

Good find. As a life long resident of Palo Alto, the 'Palo Alto caret laboratory" is a bit of a mystery. Tommorow I will go to City hall to see if I can find any registration of that lab.

Originally posted by SaucyRossy
Yeah it seems obvious that the only people really benefiting from any of this is Coast to Coast....but the real question is would they stoop this low?

I hope not.

The way I look at it, if they're making money off it and it's a hoax and they do nothing to dispel the hoax, then it makes not a bit of difference whether they were in on it in the beginning or not--they're in on it now. That goes for Linda Howe too.

Don't you all think C2C is doing good enough to not need this? I mean really, they should know that this could blow up in their face.

And surely they have already seen, days and days back, that we had found enough flaws in it to make it a hard story to stand by without hurting their reputation.

Nobody over there is that stupid, are they?

[

Originally posted by wildone106
NO WAY, REALLY!???!!??!

And yes I cut & paste the isaac graphics onto it to further match the look, but aside from that the rendering techniques where probably copied from the book exactly.

Woah Level II Sarcasm. So forgive my ignorance here, but what exactly are you on about? You posted up modified images (Which you say you cut and pasted to "match the look" ) and are getting upset because nobody is buying them?

[edit on 6/28/07 by FredT]

Originally posted by NGC2736
Don't you all think C2C is doing good enough to not need this? I mean really, they should know that this could blow up in their face.

Never underestimate people's greed.

And surely they have already seen, days and days back, that we had found enough flaws in it to make it a hard story to stand by without hurting their reputation.

Are they doing their part to cast doubt on it? I don't know. I don't go to that website. I don't like it. Are they? Anyone know?

uhm no, the only thing I did was apply the alien logo, but the look is entirely real from the cg book, which matches the look of the Isaac thing, thats the only point Im trying to make. And I guess you people are too dumb to realise that. its ok, Im laughing at you along with Chad/Isaac.

Originally posted by FredT

Originally posted by wildone106
NO WAY, REALLY!???!!??!

And yes I cut & paste the isaac graphics onto it to further match the look, but aside from that the rendering techniques where probably copied from the book exactly.

Woah Level II Sarcasm. So forgive my ignorance here, but what exactly are you on about? You posted up modified images (Which you say you cut and pasted to "match the look" ) and are getting upset because nobody is buying them?

Originally posted by NGC2736
Don't you all think C2C is doing good enough to not need this? I mean really, they should know that this could blow up in their face.

And surely they have already seen, days and days back, that we had found enough flaws in it to make it a hard story to stand by without hurting their reputation.

Nobody over there is that stupid, are they?

In short they are not doing that good...well I don't want to get to detailed but basically George Noory's book was a commercial failure, his television pilot seems to of not been picked up by the Sci Fi channel, and he has become increasingly aware of the amount of people who don't like his hosting style and threatened to sue the Fantastic Forum for some comments made about him.

Do I personally think that George Noory would take part in a hoax like this? NO. I don't think he would, he is a good person and would never do that in my opinion.

Are the other people who work under and above him willing to take part in a hoax? I don't know, I would surely hope not.

But like I and others have said the only real thing benefiting from any of this is Coast to Coast am and the amount of traffic I am sure they are getting from all of this....and like I said right below the Drone Explanation article is a article about the Roswell 60th anniversary broadcast George is doing.

Check out the article at the daily grail about this story.
www.dailygrail.com...

Note from Greg: I would like to make clear that in my opinion, this whole 'drone' business is a complete and obvious hoax. I make this point now, so that TDG is not included with all the other websites and 'personalities' who are going to be part of a collective 'takedown' at some point.

Originally posted by wildone106
Well well well..look what I found..


img182.imageshack.us...

I strongly suspect you did those yourself.

The "Issac" pics are all scans of prints/photos.
Yours is a straight render.
The type face is off.
The bolts are poorly textured.

And you didn't even read the documents... atleast not very closely.
One of the points that the "papers" bring up is that due to the nature of this technology, all parts of these craft are held together by "Ridged Spatial Relationship" (RSR), meaning the anti-gravity field holds the whole craft together.

In other words, no bolts.

I'm not saying I swallow this story (people tend to call me a skeptic), but the attention to detail shown in the rest of this urban myth is very tight. There's no way that our "Issac" would have forgotten that his craft don't need bolts.

My point is, either you've found some dis-info or you are generating it.
If you are making it, you need to be removed from this site as a hoaxer.

Originally posted by SaucyRossy
Check out the article at the daily grail about this story.
www.dailygrail.com...

See, that's what I'm asking--is C2C taking any kind of critical position or is it all sensationalism? Greg of the Daily Grail has done a smart thing--he's not cashing in for the short term. He's keeping his reputation in tact for the long term. That's someone I can respect. I've had it with the Art Bells and Linda Moulten Howes and Stephen Greers of the world frankly.