[HOAX] Isaac CARET - Drones [HOAX]

reply to post by onthefence55


I hope you take a little more time to proof read, as I only stated a couple of problems. This is why I did not want to help at all, I really don't want to further your agenda. I also hope you realize that just fixing gross errors is not going to convince anyone that what your saying is correct. Your entire paper is contradictory and illogical. No amount of editing can fix that. Seriously anyone over the age of 10 should be able to see right through this.

I hate to sound rude, but like I said, if you want people to take you seriously, you have to do it right. What ever book you all learned from, needs to be put back on the shelf. And why in gods name would you not make sure it is proof-read before you release it? Sorry I just can't get over that. I make documents for a living and I just can't imagine putting something out without reading it over first. That is elementary.

I know realistically, that you wont put this in the preface OFT, but you cannot Ignore He said it, and neither will we. Whats become the issue, is how trustworthy is the report, given the following statements by a DRT member aka Numbers. The first statement is the most important, the second is more of what to expect at critiques. But that first is reckless, inexcusable, as anything put foward is doomed from the start were we so inclined. Springer is correct, on all counts, we cannot redo the work for which you are all getting paid for. share is one thing, if they shared info with us, which they do not. You will have to dig as we dug. We do not need 100 percent, just a reasonable amount as any can be expected to reasonably argue. This is your report. I say that the below person has chilled free discussion, a lot worse than you view Shad. To have him on such a quest hurts not helps. No matter what we say, eventually, statements like that will sink the ship before it even leaves port.



lets look at his objectivity again. Latitude is 1035 of the partners in the DRT
color=Orange][quote author=Latitude link=board=isaac&num=1193353772&start=94#6 date=1199750313]Dr Dill is actually pretty level headed about his skeptism and does not come off like a debunker as many in these forums do.

It is true that so many do want so badly to be the one to expose a hoax. It seems that is the only reason they hang around. I don't understand that mentality. I had evidence that basically killed the Staggs drone video and I was hesitant to say anything. I felt bad.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would have felt bad also, but the withholding concerns me, little bit too 1035 now the piece de Resistance
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

/ Re: #6 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr on: 03/04/08 at 11:23am Started by Merlin | Post by Latitude on 03/01/08 at 07:46am,
In response to a question from another member

Well, we could judge people for forming their own opinions based on the available evidence, or (if found to be false) we could think the same as we would of those who fervently defended it at every opportunity, that everyone makes mistakes.


Of those who continually scream fake before all the info is in, I am making a list. You can bank on it that I will be the first to make light of them for being wrong. I will never let them forget it. They have in my opinion committed the worst offense against ufology. What we have are two types. The first is simply someone who can't resist the temptation to debunk. The second is those that hold a grudge against a case for not being everything they had hoped for.

They won't be given a free pass from me. They rolled the dice. If they come up snake eyes payment must be made
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The case is onging, slowed only by LMH recalcitrance. but never forget :

I had evidence that basically killed the Staggs drone video and I was hesitant to say anything. I felt bad.

I had evidence that basically killed the Staggs drone video and I was hesitant to say anything. I felt bad.

I had evidence that basically killed the Staggs drone video and I was hesitant to say anything. I felt bad.

I had evidence that basically killed the Staggs drone video and I was hesitant to say anything. I felt bad.

But if I ever encounter proof or even circimstance, to the contrary and real, I would not hesitate one second to give it to you. The others, thats different.

[edit on 9-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 9-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 10-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

reply to post by onthefence55


I liked it, OTF!

Write it like this and the world will be convinced! I will add the older versions and compare this. And - of course - I am working on a new song. I asked for assistance in this.

You did not understand the gag with the time? Mhm... Now it is 2:13 here. And I should be in bed.

You did not proof-read did you!! Haha, you only fixed what I pointed out. But even then you did not fix the entire mistake. Please tell me right now that English is not the first, second, third, or fourth language of your author. Do the work man, this is not that hard. In the time of 10 minutes I could make your paper look spectacular. Send money and maybe I will consider it. How can you hope to be taken seriously when you cannot even take the time to read your own document?

No more freebies though sorry. Actually if you put me on the front page as editor I will unlock it, fix it, pdf it back up and send it to you. Call it version 1.steve.

*edit for grammar

[edit on 4/9/2008 by sputniksteve]

[edit on 4/9/2008 by sputniksteve]

@springer .. thank you for your encouragement, and I will add your "lighting" opinion to the FAQ.

@sputniksteve ... Thank you also for your encouragement. We will go over the document again right away. We are hoping for 11 yr olds to read it, so we'll surely do a bit more work to get it up to that level. Don't worry about sounding rude. I will let you know when it has been proof ready at the 11 yr old level, in the meantime, please ignore it. Wow, you're a document writer, can you spare some time to help write the ATS undeniable hoax summary, that would be cool!

Thanks for your graciously kind offer to fix the entire document for 10 minutes pay. How about you just copy the text (Crtrl-C) and make your own ATS FAQ of undeniable proof of HOAX. It's not copyrighted. Maybe there's too many mistake in there though, so I don't mind if you just start a fresh new one on your own. Englich, watts thet?

@Uncle SYSCO ... I don't understand about the list being out of context, siddreader said it was fine. Anyway, I'll keep watching to see what you can both agree upon. So, 10538 said that damning bit! I'll check with him immediately so that he is not quoted out of context before putting that in the FAQ as undeniable proof of hoax.

@all ... I am very impressed at the expertise and confidence level at ATS, and sorry that I hadn't spent more time here in the past gathering hoax facts and impressive opinions. This is starting to look like my new home, you are the welcoming caring Internet family that I never had.

reply to post by Sys_Config


Every time you post that Sys I cringe a little, not because of the content but because you don’t say where my quote ends and Lat’s begins.

To the uninitiated it looks like it’s all my dialogue.

So, purely for the sake of clarity……


"You May Say I'm a Dreamer But I'm Not the Only One"

Edited to remove images and (hopefully) pre-empt any further dissension.

[edit on 10-4-2008 by DrDil]

@DrDil & Sysco ... I'm a little confused about sysco's claims. What exactly did latitude say that is undeniable proof of the drones being a hoax.

PS. I am starting to read through the thread here, All I can say is Wow! 250 pages of amazing fact-filled confident postings, I'm sure that I can compile all of this goldmine into a gigantic section for our FAQ. I appreciate all the help you can provide, but I understand that work and time limits might prevent that.

Also, just one clarification Sysco, I'm not getting paid for this, nor have I paid anything. I cannot even afford to pay sputniksteve for his 10 minutes of professional work to the gross errors in the FAQ, so instead I'll struggle with my 'English as a sixth language' and eventually I hope to produce something more acceptable.

Originally posted by onthefence55
@DrDil & Sysco ... I'm a little confused about sysco's claims. What exactly did latitude say that is undeniable proof of the drones being a hoax.

PS. I am starting to read through the thread here, All I can say is Wow! 250 pages of amazing fact-filled confident postings, I'm sure that I can compile all of this goldmine into a gigantic section for our FAQ. I appreciate all the help you can provide, but I understand that work and time limits might prevent that.

Also, just one clarification Sysco, I'm not getting paid for this, nor have I paid anything. I cannot even afford to pay sputniksteve for his 10 minutes of professional work to the gross errors in the FAQ, so instead I'll struggle with my 'English as a sixth language' and eventually I hope to produce something more acceptable.

Peace be unto all of you

OTf, first the latitude is not proof of hoax, it was to point out that a key member of the DRT, is sufficiently biased to one postion, that he would withold evidence of Hoax . This is no minor thing. To think it one thing, but to say and with such feeling, will make anyone less than receptive to its contest. They would say, what did they leave out.
I apologize Dr.Dil, I had no Idea it would be read any other way.

I have a serious problem with putting information such as this, in an either or category.
to make it serious, and balanced, there must be a third category. Unexplained anomalies. That by themselves mean little, but as accumulate, gives one pause for thought.

Dopefish in the LAP colorized by WOY at OM, does not belong there. The game Twister does not belong there. I confirmed woy, and found dopefish later in photoshop. This does not mean Tom Hall did it. But it does mean someone exposed to his work dd it.
Other Characters from other literature appeared also. Little Prince, and turkish astronomer.

Remember, this I believe . The Lap combines several levels. Literature, science and astronomy, physics, and Humor as well.

I found connections to numbers corresponding to stars and constellations , like caniis, vega, orion etc. see page 172 up this thread for that

WE believe we had Isaac here in the form of engineering type, who described these very intricate levels. IE a puzzle, not a space control system. ssee page 126 engineering type.

Reyes was a suspect for me because of interview, knowledge, skills, own dream logs, and his closeness to whitley strieber who signed contract deal on June 15, 2 weeks before the Isaac. for a movie, and then Arthurs interview or email to linda of Earthfiles. a week or so later.. and has promoted the drone since its appearance. (see copyright office whitley strieber)

But that is suspicion not proof just a suspect.

The material in Lap, which remains the only thing available to study, uses designs borrowed from many sources, matrix, see my comments, okudas designs, frank sternbachs designs.
brushes used were available on internet see Ihea designs in my comments sections. That is fact or very probative.

The other designs were from china, a seanoal observatory, an armory it is called, from over 1000 years ago, I foound that on wiki. but see my comments in profile by clicking on my profile. that is fact or very probative www.abovetopsecret.com...

These are things that did not belong there and are NOT of alien origin, just very creative computer desiign.

when isaac in Narrative says it all came from non human sources..he plays with us, all of us..he means meant that..computers not aliens.

TTHESE things led me to say hoax,apart from the the pictures everyone had was impossible to tell because of tampering in exif, plus they are digital, the hardest to define even for forensic analysts. I am not going there.

But still, to me, it was beautiful. so I continued.

So it was many things not one thing alone OTF That is why you may put mine in category of anomalies that dont belong there. let reade be judge.
and confirm themselves, but should be treated as needing looking into.

The LMH retention of very high REZ pictures is also, no small thing but critical, as they are the only hi res pictures, entrusted for the public benefit. So, please, dont just say linda holding 11 pictures hostage, she is holding the MOST important pictures and the whole ufo community hostage.

I will provide more as I think and look

SyS
Allahu Akbar





















[edit on 9-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 9-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 9-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

reply to post by Sys_Config


Wow, that list is so impressive. Here's what we have so far, corrections are welcome:

Q. What is the definite proof that ATS members have of the drone hoax:

A. Someone who has seen the work of Tom Hall created the hoax
A. Someone who has seen the works "Little Prince" and "Turkish Astronomer" created the hoax
A. Because the LAP apparently combines; Literature, science and astronomy, physics, and Humor, it is a hoax
A. Connections to numbers corresponding to stars and constellations, like caniis, vega, orion, proves this to be a hoax
A. Isaac is a hoaxer going by the ATS alias name "engineeringtype", he described very intricate puzzles, therefore he is the hoaxer.
A. Arthur Reyes is highly suspected of hoaxing the drones because of his knowledge, skills, dreams, interest in the drones, as well as his business relationshop with Whitley Strieber
A. LAP is a hoax because it has similar designs to many sources such as, The Matrix, okudas, and Frank Sternbach's Ihea brushes, also designs from china including the seanoal observatory armory
A. Despite CARET defining ET sources, ATS member sysconfig claims Isaac said non-human sources was mentioned which means computers, not aliens
A. Syd Mead liked the design of CARET.
A. The word "AH" can be found in the noise of the highly enlarged photocopy from CARET.
A. Witnesses remain anonymous from the ATS forum and the general public.
A. Chad lied about his sighting location.
A. Someone in Australia likes to write Sci-Fi
A. The drones are so 2007
A. It smells like crap
A. It's a viral ad for something soon to be determined
A. The CARET documents do not have TOP SECRET stamped on them
A. LMH hired a crop circle maker to boost her sales
A. C2CAM hired a professional hoaxster to boost their ratings
A. Banned ATS user 11 11 claims they are CGI
A. The letters are Klingon, mixed with Katakana, and some Matrix

Reasons why only ATS can solve this case of Hoax:
A. LMH holds the most important pictures (11 Ty photos) and the whole UFO community hostage.
A. DRT has not posted their real names.
A. Members of the DRT are biased.

ATS states that instead the search for any possibility of real drones, all such investigation should be immediately stopped in favour of hoax hunting.

reply to post by onthefence55



Hi OTF!

I respect what you are trying to do as it relates to your drone research, I believe that your intentions are true, and that for the most part, so are the rest of the DRT.

Your last few comments, I will give you a pass on.

But in these comments, your are not really bringing anything to the table, except a lack of respect for this board and the members who have done the research, whether you agree with the findings or not.

I apologized for my comments regarding the DRT FAQ, if they offended you and DRT.....they were not meant to be mean spirited, and I don't believe they were.

I was trying to call to your attention, my observations that the FAQ was slanted, biased and misleading.....assumption of facts not in evidence.

Routinely, I have been dismissed as a debunker.

The defensive behavior of the DRT, mimics its supposed hero, LMH.

I would recommend that the DRT, chooses another to emulate.

The truth that you seek will not be built on excuses, and the more excuses that are represented as fact, the weaker and more desperate to prove the drones real the DRT appears.

I have no problem with your beliefs, and DRT's. You are free to believe what you want.

But if you are going to come here, at least try to pretend that you respect us.

We respect you, even though we don't believe as you do.

We respect you, even though this case has hurt the serious study of the phenomena by concluding that flimsy evidence is good enough for belief.


Please stop the venom...we are not the enemy.

The DRT's desire to prove the skeptics of the drones wrong has clouded your judgment...imo.

Do what you think is right, but for sanity's sake, and for all the serious researchers that you do respect, make sure it is for the right reason and not for revenge.

Originally posted by onthefence55
reply to post by Sys_Config

 

Wow, that list is so impressive. Here's what we have so far, corrections are welcome:

Q. What is the definite proof that ATS members have of the drone hoax:

A. Someone who has seen the work of Tom Hall created the hoax
A. Someone who has seen the works "Little Prince" and "Turkish Astronomer" created the hoax
A. Because the LAP apparently combines; Literature, science and astronomy, physics, and Humor, it is a hoax
A. Connections to numbers corresponding to stars and constellations, like caniis, vega, orion, proves this to be a hoax
A. Isaac is a hoaxer going by the ATS alias name "engineeringtype", he described very intricate puzzles, therefore he is the hoaxer.
A. Arthur Reyes is highly suspected of hoaxing the drones because of his knowledge, skills, dreams, interest in the drones, as well as his business relationshop with Whitley Strieber
A. LAP is a hoax because it has similar designs to many sources such as, The Matrix, okudas, and Frank Sternbach's Ihea brushes, also designs from china including the seanoal observatory armory
A. Despite CARET defining ET sources, ATS member sysconfig claims Isaac said non-human sources was mentioned which means computers, not aliens
A. Syd Mead liked the design of CARET.
A. The word "AH" can be found in the noise of the highly enlarged photocopy from CARET.
A. Witnesses remain anonymous from the ATS forum and the general public.
A. Chad lied about his sighting location.
A. Someone in Australia likes to write Sci-Fi
A. The drones are so 2007
A. It smells like crap
A. It's a viral ad for something soon to be determined
A. The CARET documents do not have TOP SECRET stamped on them
A. LMH hired a crop circle maker to boost her sales
A. C2CAM hired a professional hoaxster to boost their ratings
A. Banned ATS user 11 11 claims they are CGI
A. The letters are Klingon, mixed with Katakana, and some Matrix

Reasons why only ATS can solve this case of Hoax:
A. LMH holds the most important pictures (11 Ty photos) and the whole UFO community hostage.
A. DRT has not posted their real names.
A. Members of the DRT are biased.

ATS states that instead the search for any possibility of real drones, all such investigation should be immediately stopped in favour of hoax hunting.

are you being serious OTF? it seems words are being twisted , is this intentional or language problem as I only speak to languages and English is my second. I am making suggestions for the middle ground, Things that dont belong that would LEND themselves to opine Hoax.
The crap thing is unnecessary. or because someone in australia likes SC FI.
You must extract the emotional from what is. what is just is.
the term for these is sometimes circumstantial or collateral.
No one either side as people have labeled themselves can say Prima Facie.
A full report is not complete unless those details are included for furhter study. But to include and Say ATS says its hoax because of what I say is unacceptable. Someone like Bieder can say that because of his experience in the paramnormal, as well as insurp[assable experience in the Technical areas.
For me individually, yes. does that mean the other 400 sightings per month are hoax. I cannot say that.

You say black and white, yet want to exclude the grey. You must create a place for things that need attention. as I described.

But your putting just black and white solves nothing. we go nowhere.
Do you understand me.
I am speaking to you candidadly honestly, not to prove a point but to see that things are not missing that are worthy of study when more people ae better equipped than you or I to study.

I cannot accept that list in the manner you have it, yes or no, while especially LMH has the evidence holding the case up. This is not a done deal.
I mentioned arthur as a suspect of interest, there are others, its called consider all options, leave no stone unturned.we must look at the people surrounding the evemts., to either include them as witnesses, hoaxters, or whatever. The people, not the pictures, are whats important here.

Originally posted by murnut
Please stop the venom...we are not the enemy.

Wow! I am working with the members here in a co-operative way to create a section in the DRT FAQ devoted to the combined ATS mindset.

I have received such a warm welcome from everyone here so far, and I want to extend that same courtesy.

You are more than welcome to help edit the answers I posted above. It's a bit hard for me to take requests from so many bosses, so I try to combine all ATS comments into a cohesive conclusion. Was there something in specific that didn't sit right with you?

Originally posted by Sys_Config
I cannot accept that list in the manner you have it,

Ya, lots of work is still required for sure.

I agree, I didn't like the crap comment too much either, I hope it's OK with springer that I removed it.

As you suggested, I created a new section for the grey area.

Let's all try to be patient, we'll get through this. I really think it would be nice to have a concise summary of ideas presented by the ATS community. It would make it so easy for new members to grasp all the concepts, then later they can leisurely comb through the site for more details.

Anyway, here is the revisions that I think you suggested, corrections are welcome:

Q. What is the definite proof that ATS members have of the drone hoax:
A. David Beidney, CGI expert says so

Reasons why it might be a hoax:
A. The drones only happened in 2007
A. Someone who has seen the work of Tom Hall created the hoax
A. Someone who has seen the works "Little Prince" and "Turkish Astronomer" created the hoax
A. Because the LAP apparently combines; Literature, science and astronomy, physics, and Humor, it is a hoax
A. Connections to numbers corresponding to stars and constellations, like caniis, vega, orion, proves this to be a hoax
A. Isaac is a hoaxer going by the ATS alias name "engineeringtype", he described very intricate puzzles, therefore he is the hoaxer.
A. Arthur Reyes is highly suspected of hoaxing the drones because of his knowledge, skills, dreams, interest in the drones, as well as his business relationshop with Whitley Strieber
A. LAP is a hoax because it has similar designs to many sources such as, The Matrix, okudas, and Frank Sternbach's Ihea brushes, also designs from china including the seanoal observatory armory
A. Despite CARET defining ET sources, ATS member sysconfig claims Isaac said non-human sources was mentioned which means computers, not aliens
A. Syd Mead liked the design of CARET.
A. The word "AH" can be found in the noise of the highly enlarged photocopy from CARET.
A. Witnesses remain anonymous from the ATS forum and the general public.
A. Chad lied about his sighting location.
A. It's a viral ad for something soon to be determined
A. The CARET documents do not have TOP SECRET stamped on them
A. LMH hired a crop circle maker to boost her sales
A. C2CAM hired a professional hoaxster to boost their ratings
A. Banned ATS user 11 11 claims they are CGI
A. The letters are Klingon, mixed with Katakana, and some Matrix

Reasons why only ATS can solve this case of Hoax:
A. LMH holds the most important pictures (11 Ty photos) and the whole UFO community hostage.
A. DRT has not posted their real names.
A. Members of the DRT are biased.

ATS states that instead the search for any possibility of real drones, all such investigation should be immediately stopped in favour of hoax hunting.

Well. I for one, have nothing against (and everything in me is FOR) a spirit of partnership. Not that my opinion is of any particular interest to anyone...I'm a simple observer here. The point is, belittling (whether overt or subtle) either side is making no progress either way.

One camp is committed to a more skeptical analysis, while the other is commited to a more "believer" oriented approach. Fair enough.

A spirit of vengence on either side is unwarranted...we are all in this together, bad or good, till the very end.

Lighthearted debate and discussion, even heated discussion, is enjoyable, but when one side acts as though the other is less intelligent for their opinion, well we just need to back off those ways of thinking.

Call a spade a spade, sure, but there is still a more civil way of doing this.

Originally posted by Siddharta

Thankfully, the "ovnis-usa.com" website gets less than 2,000 unique visitors a month, so it won't matter at the end of the day anyway.

Springer...

Psst, Springer!

I didn't mention, how good they hide it, because I thought that is a good place.

Thank you Reader for your continued kindness.. however subtle

Originally posted by fortwynt
Well. I for one, have nothing against (and everything in me is FOR) a spirit of partnership. Not that my opinion is of any particular interest to anyone...I'm a simple observer here. The point is, belittling (whether overt or subtle) either side is making no progress either way.

One camp is committed to a more skeptical analysis, while the other is commited to a more "believer" oriented approach. Fair enough.

A spirit of vengence on either side is unwarranted...we are all in this together, bad or good, till the very end.

Lighthearted debate and discussion, even heated discussion, is enjoyable, but when one side acts as though the other is less intelligent for their opinion, well we just need to back off those ways of thinking.

Call a spade a spade, sure, but there is still a more civil way of doing this.

I am starting to get that feeling right now when words are twisted. Which is why I alway said its not the Pi its who they give the data to. Thats what matters.
I dont mind responsding to these in the least,I will take a leap of good faith here.

The alignment of questions ias positioned denigrates the statement maker as less than competent.

example ONLY ATS can solve : very perjorative anyone ever say that?
LMH has the
Reasons why only ATS can solve this case of Hoax:
A. LMH holds the most important pictures (11 Ty photos) and the whole UFO community hostage.
@@11 high resolution and witness addresses and knowingly reported since9/2007 incorrect locations! , see marsave post at paracast.@@

David B comment Rationake is simple..
@@ If he were the doctor and your wife needed surgery, would you take her to him or to any of the members on your team, knowing their skills.,
there was more than one opininion on this, mufon, Paracast and others.
So ours is not based on a vauum, whereas, contrast drts is based on high hopes, pis and LMH and whitleys dreams .@@



.A. DRT has not posted their real names.
@@The structure of any grouppurprting skills needs at minimum credentialling of those skills..its called TRANSPARENCY , very lacking at the moment unfortunately..@@

A. Members of the DRT are biased.
@@ Bias is ok! We all have Biases..who does not, but not witholding or ignoring evidence 2 very distinct things!statement quite in context, Numbers certainly spoke for itself@@


ATS states that instead the search for any possibility of real drones, all such investigation should be immediately stopped in favour of hoax hunting.
@@ never said such thing, are not 5000 posts and still going strong proof of search for the truth wherever it leads.?


Syd Mead liked the design of CARET.

@@ Im sorry, that does not prove anything, BUT Syd mead also titled it the cart caper..an anagram for Caret Crap an opinion thats obvious to to him@@
email at om thread syd mead.
A. The letters are Klingon, mixed with Katakana, and some Matrix
@@Lettering could have easily come from any of the languages in my comments section if visited@@

A. Despite CARET defining ET sources, ATS member sysconfig claims Isaac said non-human
@@out of context, in context example of playing word games also used flicker as object behavior, raj photos did sme in out disappeared, at Flickr. coincidence.just one of many. speculation.thats all @@



. LMH hired a crop circle maker to boost her sales
@@I see that no where@@ when people brainstaorm ideas are born show me that one Im curious I need one for my yard.@@
Witnesses remain anonymous from the ATS forum and the general public.
@@ Witnesses are totally gone..save shirley..NOT due to ATS or anybody how can you say tha@@@@
. Arthur Reyes is highly suspected of hoaxing the drones because of his knowledge, skills,

@@Arthur Reuyes WAS a suspect of interest not the Principal, agaiin one of many paths followed, like Tom haall who wont respond to emails. open and on table.Arthur did a draft study found very early on also, YET has remained totally Absent from the scene after LMH cancelled his appearance on c2c. Very strange for the story of the century..@@


. Because the LAP apparently combines; Literature, science and astronomy, physics, and Humor, it is a hoax
@@ Yes, almost like an game or test, Music also, as found by OMF, 45 letters, if all you have are little games, and non working specs for an antigrav device what do you think for a release of whats supposed to be a straightfoward dull classified material and language, (of course every ET should have a jukebox, library, kimode and bar too)..@@


A. It's a viral ad for something soon to be determined
@@ Possible or psych study or movie requiring market penetration much prior to event itself or a disinfo program Example EAs Majestic project @@
ATS states that instead the search for any possibility of real drones, all such investigation should be immediately stopped in favour of hoax hunting.
@@I sure never said that, ATS would never say that,I dont think anyone has either, rather you follow the leads you find where they take you dont they? but if one forum does one, and another does another waay, why not to cover all bases?@@

A. Connections to numbers corresponding to stars and constellations, like caniis, vega, orion, proves this to be a hoax

@@No, not if device was a true navigation device, and chinese device worked quite well . I douibt they power a craft of any kind or anti grav..so why use it. except as science art Design was hardly alien unless you subscribe to esoterica. OMF members also saw a connection There are math problems involved also@@

Nothing can stop you from reviewing everypost, but remember where people are ideating or brainstorming., versus where it leads them, and the weight given and do not then quote them as ATS says s this must be so, or out out of context like the human sources.
language has its limitations, no need to embellish or torture it to give a result you want. as when you torture something it will generally tell you what you want to hear. All I have done is place on the table and why I think..that..you decide. So if you plan to quote me or anyone be accurat and in the context it was given.

If I thought this is not a serious discussion and you are just having very high degree of fun.( which I have seen you do first hand) I would be very disappointed..some of the stuff is quite funny actually as you interpret them..but its NOT what we said .
but no way you can digest what several hundred people were thinking in a couple of days. it takes time anyone can come after me and interpret it differently..as I stated its not a done deal..and thats why that 3rd category is needed. by the way has Linda answered your rquests for Pictures, or do you think thats acceptable whats your take on her. We'd like to know. seriously

thats it for tonight.












[edit on 10-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 10-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 10-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 10-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 10-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

Originally posted by Sys_Config

the alignment of questions is positioned to denigrate the statement maker as idiots.

exactly my point sys...nicely put.

I'm quite happy to continue being a bottom dweller, even though there's plenty of bait floating higher up.

In my view one of the most convincing arguments towards CGI was put forward by SPF33 in relation to the lighting on the RAJ pics, one specific part in particular. Due to a close family bereavement causing me to travel shortly I do not have time to reference that particular section of this thread.

I understand that some people have carried out some "back yard testing" of sorts which proved inconclusive, whereas the information provided by SPF33 appeared to me as being conclusive.

I personally also carried out some "back yard testing" at the time, with a broom handle and a cardboard box, the conclusion of those results I will publish here.

The testing carried out served to re-inforce that the opinion offered by SPF33 was correct, that based on the location and date / time information available for the image, there was a demonstrable lighting inconsistency, unexplainable to all practical and rational explanations other than that the image had been manipulated.

I am not sure what frequency would be required for something to enter a FAQ document but I ask the question anyway, has anybody been able to substantially refute the findings of SPF33 ?

In other posts on this thread I have put forward my reasoning why I believe the "straw man" or "house of cards" argument is applicable, again apologies as currently I do not have time to either re-state or reference.

Sp33 is an outstanding bias neutral individual. I love his work, and OFTs too Itrust his judgement.
Just about every enterprise I see at here usee that extensively. I have been posting suggested edits to OTFs list, and he is a jokester, and so quite did not know whether he was pulling my leg, but the way they were would leave no doubt to a reader we are total bufoons, with noo rationale for our observations. I saw many of the best arguments posted near the beginning, I even saw you too, xfiles, yuffo and others.
Great discussions. I came late, when all was essentially quiet. I just tried to concentrate on the behavioral and motive aspects. I do not think we did badly. I was alone on LMH. now my intials beliefs espoused and confirmed. Now there is an small army asking the same thing.
Even if we establish CGI 100 percent, we still have to tackle these people.

The answer is close at the center of this, and who do we have, c2c,LMH, and whitley, the ones unfortunately for them, had the most to gain, from creation of any such meme, using their own membership as experts..and the ones who most pushed the drones at the beginning. Did I say they are Hoaxters? no. but their use as venues by the hoaxters, and their own reticence to cooperate is highly suspect. Thats why something is amiss here with that Its more than Oh I was taken in, which is part of the trade.
This is like hanging on for dear life! inexplicable.

Chunder, we dont have to scour the planet for the answer, its at the center of impact. and thats what has to be broken.
thanx for that thumbs up on Sp33, I hope they heed his findings. If you saw it, others did to.

If they go on this quest, ok, but that should be part of their record too.
Hey I didnt know you were Aussie, we had a KTK here, was helping research Pisces people. Dang, Had I known that we could have put some real heat on them. I need to shave some tongue in cheek off my edits too..for the FAQ


[edit on 10-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

reply to post by onthefence55


Hi OTF, Sys constantly posts that comment and it looks like it’s me talking and me saying all of it, that’s why I posted the image as I said, purely for clarity. I thought it was the most tactful way of doing it. I’m not claiming it as proof of anything, merely correcting what may be perceived as an error by people scanning the thread.

I’m sure you can see by my comment in the image I posted that if anything I was attempting to diffuse the situation, I realised long ago that regardless what I say/do me and Lat will never see eye to eye and that’s okay. I just didn’t want people to assume that the words Sys wrote were mine.