[HOAX] Isaac CARET - Drones [HOAX]

Originally posted by pjslug

Just because some of the elements may be hoaxes, it does not mean the whole story is a hoax, and until proven that Isaac's documents are verifiable hoaxes, the "Hoax" label on this thread is premature and akin to disinfo.

Here is where I disagree with you. All the elements of this story are so interlinked, that either all of it is true (which it isn't), or the whole thing collapses like a house of cards into a big pile of BS.

reply to post by fortwynt


well we are half way thru June, I would have expected some more cropcircles by now. But one circle whitley mentioned said something about Pi or the constant used in determining area with circumference etc of yes..a circle..pure junior high math.
The holographic greys, almost on par with the Angels ans saints are telling us, C=pi x D or A= pi x radius squared.
I am totally baffled, perplexed, shocked even, as to why our government has not destroyed that field yet to prvent release of this classified data!
Its too late now, now everyone can calculate circumferences and areas to do their own crop circles on paper.

And now Whitley has set up a school I understand, and Linda, no amateur or lightweight herself in this area, will be interviewing him on this very new development

But the school has been opened, and our teachers are ready to go to work." HE INCLUDES A SKETCH OF THE CROP CIRCLE HE "SAW" IN HIS MIND! A group of our subscribers are meditating on the circles along with Whitley. Won't you join us?

from whitleys Journal..I will be ordering a plaque with that engraved to adorn our war room.

Something is definitely up in the "Air" lads, and probably like the drones, made up of it.

In America we call it "Pi in the Sky"
Who wants the first slice?









[edit on 15-6-2008 by Sys_Config]

reply to post by Sys_Config


I'll take it, sys.

Can ya make sure and put as much fluff on it as possible?

As a side note, I am particularly interested in the apparent eastern direction of drone appearences...almost like a tour?

Vermont is looking like a nice new place to spot one, lots of trees and all.

Hey don't they make ice cream in Vermont, I'll have a couple scoop of that with my pie.

[edit on 15-6-2008 by fortwynt]

Honestly I just can't wait for thet next round to begin, since they (the likely suspects) have a high degree of anticipation to respond to, one can almost guarantee some amazing cards are about to be pulled.

[edit on 15-6-2008 by fortwynt]

I just went to get you a slice, it seems the DRT ate it all up. Of course I can understand given the endless hard work they are doing to prove their case would give anyone a voracious appetite for more

At the same time I too had a dream that was verified by a good friend who I wont disclose at the moment. Reports are pouring in tens of thousands are having this same dream. Something is afoot.
In it..I imagined..

Dreams do come true sometimes don't they





[edit on 15-6-2008 by Sys_Config]

So then... pie really are square? Dang.

'Nother scoop, there, Sys, if ya don't mind. Ah'm a growin' boy.

I guess it is possible, that between the lines on stories like the Secret UN Meeting, Serpo, MJ12, Roswell, Philip Corso and Drones, that there could be some truth to parts of the story.

However unlikely, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that these photos are faked to set up the primer....perhaps this is what PS refers to?

I dunno.

Looking back on the releases, it was way too convenient the way it played out.

If one looks for truth in this, I don't see how you can see it in the photos or anonymous photo witness testimony.

The Isaac story also is, conveniently Johnny on the spot.

Disclosure will not come from lies, but some are so heavily invested in Disclosure becoming reality that they see and believe what can fit into their preconceived framed world view.

My view that this disinfo from the abc groups is just my opinion.

Disinfo from these groups has happened before, and will happen again.

Rick Doty would be proud

It is quite curious to me how enamored certain parties are with crop circles, that now the LAP design and the circles are directly being referenced as an OBVIOUS clue as to the nature and design of the drone technology.

Definitely spooky the way it smells of an emerging psuedo-techno religious movement.

reply to post by fortwynt


Well LMH did make a living on crop circles..Perhaps business is starting to boom once again..

Sys..I'll take a third of a quarter of that PI..mmm Smells like ozone..Or is it apple?

hmm Triads..en.wikipedia.org...
Could be also be where that T watermark comes from...

[edit on 15-6-2008 by CFandM]

That was an interesting link and it rekindled memories of the rise of the triads an old game by apogee. by the way good news! The PIs R back on the case, after a dreadful hiatus sorting out some personal problems, (perhaps maybe figuring out how to tap moneybags for an extension? or unload those T shirts at a flea market sale?) are returning according to DRT sources, in "FULL FORCE!" as per Major Tom of the PIs . As we say here in the states Jump back Judy! We are happy to hear that, and I hope they have purchased or read some of the crop circles materials available thru Lucy Pringles and LMH, just read the PDF! hoovnis-usa.com...
Under MOTK, The mystery Guru of Whitley, anything oes.
Anyone who looks at the link Sidd graciously and most thoughtfully put up previously will note, that aside to the comparison to our Caret node and the PI glyph, (hmm PI and PI is there hidden activating code here?) Whitley is redefining CC aesthetics, with the shapes to include parallel lines and linear striations,
which in my minds eye, and therfore just as real, bear a striking resemblance to the hair cut and shave patterns we find on cosmetology and barber shop floors across the globe. Perhaps that is the true message coming up for all of us. Yes, an overdue "hair cut and a shave" .I see a definite connection, however I am not waiting, and am getting one tomorrow.


I would be not to happy if the barber however usesone of these

No telling, what can happen with a Cam sighting model type of scissors while you are helpless and under complete control of a barber snipping away.




Good Night



[edit on 16-6-2008 by Sys_Config]

Originally posted by klatunictobarata
You wrote, somewhat profoundly:

"Just because some of the elements may be hoaxes, it does not mean the whole story is a hoax."

I am not quite sure what you mean, pj . . . could you give us some examples where this occurred in the past and where you believe the drones/isaac/caret scenarios show a positive case for non-hoax?

After all of this time and drone/isaac/caret analysis I do wonder what elements you think are a hoax and what is still a viable area of truthfulness and reality. Perhaps I (we) have missed something that you keyed in on.

It's just always been a gut feeling. I don't always go with my instinct, because I find evidence that swings me towards logic. But nothing presented in this case thusfar has convinced me that Isaac's documents or story are fake, nor the photocopy of the drone pieces sitting on a hangar floor, nor the very complex vector diagrams.

I do believe some or even all of the drone photographs could be fakes, most probably are. As a graphic artist and someone who weighs both sides of an argument equally, I must concede that. It's Isaac's story and documents that I have a gut feeling for.

If all we had to go on are gut feelings and beliefs to prove certain realities exist, then this would make for a healthy fantasy world for us all. In my small opinion, this is exactly what Whitley is doing now - more that ever. And he does have a profit motive as does LMH, correct?

Thanks, pj.

You're absolutely right about healthy fantasy. But who are we to presume we understand how alien technology works, or what form it would appear to us in, or why we don't see physical alien beings more often? I think it's precisely because humans think they know everything about the universe that we rule out these unplausible scenarios. We are conditioned from birth to accept the world at face value, to learn about life from the masses and through social interaction.

I keep seeing this ad in my Popular Science magazines for this doctrine created by a Richard B. Weatherell, who believes in the "Law of Absolute Right"... it's difficult to explain without quoting the entire ad, but I'm sure you can find it on the internet. Their website is www.alphapub.com. I'm not sure if it's a religious thing or not, it doesn't sound like it is, but it does take some sort of creationist position. From their verbage:

People need to be sensitive to the wrong results occurring in their lives. Until they take ownership of those results, they will be plagued with chaos. The effective way to eliminate chaos from your life is to make a
meaningful commitment to nature's law of absolute right: think, say and do what is logical, appropriate and moral to the best of your ability. In addition, you must withdraw support from wrong thoughts, words or actions.

In our society, people tend to shy away from commitments. That word often evokes bitter memories as people recall their past commitments. The truth is that committing to the law of absolute right is as safe as committing to the law of gravitation. When properly conformed with, nature's laws never let you down. Committing to laws of physics might seem strange, but toddlers instinctively learn to commit to the law of gravitation to keep their balance. Nobody violates a natural law. When someone tries, he/she gets a wrong result for the mere attempt, varying from slight injury to sudden death.

Society's political and behavioral scenes are not pretty. After centuries of human endeavors performed in total ignorance of the behavioral law, society needs to change its commitments. For millennia, people's commitments to their self-interests have unknowingly put their thoughts, words and actions into contradiction with nature's law of right behavior.

On the horizon is a magnificent scene of societal harmony, productivity and peace. Those who commit to nature's behavioral law make their best effort to think, say, and do what is right — what is logical, appropriate and moral. There is a microcosm of rational people who are financing a campaign to inform the public of the behavioral law.

and more here: Nature's Social Law

My point being that there is more than one way to skin a cat, and more than one way to look at the way the universe functions. Perhaps we have the entirely wrong idea about the universe... Perhaps we will find holes in physics and require a new way to see the deeper meanings behind the cosmos. Perhaps it is more than just finding the proper equation or a theory for everything. Perhaps seeking for tangible evidence all the time is why we never seem to find answers to our most sought after questions. Perhaps modern society has engrained within us the "Law of Absolute Wrong". Maybe we knew the right way to live life a few millenia ago, the right way to seek answers, the right way to evolve. And then perhaps somehow, something corrupted us.

I don't know the answers to all the questions, but I will never presume that there is only one way to ask the questions and only one way to acquire the answers. Knowledge is sacred.

[edit on 6/16/2008 by pjslug]

Hi PJ what you posted above is quite in sync with what Whitleys MOTK thinks about the nature of reality, similar to Jane Roberts, creating your reality, and some videos even Mark Cater had about cashing in in with the power of thinking and intent. Howver the greater reality is what you and all of us experienced together on those fateful days in July, and it was the essence of a universal truth. With or without the help of Disinfo artists, the icons were taking us for a ride. Some deny that, some are shocked at it, and some know, that even now its business as usual.
Irrespective of what they did is not changing any of our own experiences, nor should we use our experiences to validate the Icons fabrications, or we set ourselves up for another fall. Some even create an artifice why they lied. When one gets to that point. One is truly lost.
We are here to catch them in another lie , and hopefully, once and for all pinpoint the true source of this abomination

Update on Raj analysis. A Talented Non DRT person Torvald analysed some RAJ pics. The conclusion was Fake. Which we know already. But his analysis on perspective was quite fascinating and I posted it in my summary in my profile along with the picutre comparison. It is very pofessional educational clear and convincing
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Quick summary, unless multiple cameras were used, certain perspectives did not change which should have, ie physical impossibility, a composite is what we have.
i281.photobucket.com...

the craft is actually the only thing that moves in the scene. the rest is illusion. this behind what i mean when i say photographs are impossible. so what this mean? it is my conclusion that the photographs submitted by raj are fakes. the two images 16 and 17 fail perspective analysis. the pole was used as a backplate and the craft was composited into scene. this what i believe to be true and have included evidence above to substantiate my claims.

[edit on 16-6-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 16-6-2008 by Sys_Config]

reply to post by pjslug


Thank you for your reply pj. You state your position and potentially add a new insight in our approach the drones and the Isaac/caret documents.


Lets take first your drone photographic findings, that you made crystal clear when you stated:

"I do believe some or even all of the drone photographs could be fakes, most probably are. As a graphic artist and someone who weighs both sides of an argument equally, I must concede that."

Good to see you made a final determination after listening to your graphic artistic background and logic system over this past year. I think you will find more researchers agree with your evaluation than disagree.


Next, thank you for going on the record stating you believe that the Isaac/caret documents - photos and text - are completely factual. It took guts to admit that and I respect you enormously.

However, the references to Wetherill and his "Law of Absolute Right" left me more than a bit confused and obliged me examine the topic further. I couldn't get a copy of his Wetherill's book or writings, but apparently his daughter - E. Marie Bothe - still carries on his work (Wetherill Associates) at

findarticles.com...

The website says this:

"Some people claim that Wetherill Associates is a cult, says Bothe, because of its adherence to a philosophy developed by her father. According to E. Marie Bothe, president of Wetherill Associates Inc., a full-line industrial supplier to the auto-electric rebuilding industry . . . "

...auto-electric rebuilding industry? And then the link you gave said this:

"Wetherill called it the "Law of Absolute Right": Right Action gets Right Results. He taught his students the following steps to learning:
1. Receive information,
2. Look at the reality that it represents,
3. Study the implications of that reality,
4. Take the action that reality calls for."

Well, that sounds like an interesting philosophy, pj, and more than a tad "New-Age." But, I believe it's missing a hugely significant step between numbers 1 and 2; that step would be

1.5 Determine whether the information is ‘true' or ‘false.'

It just seems like the drone believers follow your man Wetherill's steps in believing all the 'information' they receive is true, genuine, and authentic. Even ths shabbiest statistician would say, there was only a 50% chance the drones were real - AT BEST.

I don't mean to be mean or mocking pj - not at all - but did I miss something here? Not much is written about this man, so where did you find this individual and his philosophy? You can't hinge all of your unknowns on 'we just didn't ask the right questions' or 'only the right action gets right results,' can you?

And finally, you said something I also agree with: "Knowledge is sacred."

But one thing I have found to be more important, pj:

"Truth is the most sacred of all."




[edit on 16-6-2008 by klatunictobarata]

It is a curious thing, the debate over drone truth and drone fiction.

It reminds me of my days as moderator of a Christian Debate chat room on mIRC (which I created, and it was wildly popular on there for a bit)...those were my days of being involved with the church of course so I was coming at it from THAT standpoint (things have changed with me overwhelmingly since those days)

in any case...this debate reminds me of some of the debates in there, or really between any religious or non-religious standpoint versus the other...

The one group, let's say the "believers", start from a sort-of default position of "belief", they believe (for instance) that the bible MUSt be true(and perfectly infallable), and that the existence of God (even on a basic level of belief) MUST be agreed upon to have a realistic view of the world....and anyone who debates with that sort of jumping off point will be immediately regarded as closed minded and seeking to destroy the "logic" of the believers from the get go....a PERSONAL vendetta lets say, which (to them) precludes any logical argument from that camp that may have merit....while the FLIPSIDE is that the "non-believer" camp will see the debate in such a way that their opinion is that the "believer" believes, even in the face of what they consider solid logic...to them then, the believer is at the point of total abandon of any critical analysis, nay ANY critical analysis is anathema to the believer...

so you see, the argument really isn't about true logic at all...well it may BE (from the non-believer standpoint) in SOME respects, but the truth is one side sees the other of being devoid of (let's say) imagination that it COULD be real (even if just basic parts of it), and the other side sees the other as ignoring cold hard facts and evidence.

in closing, however much i would "like" for the Issac/LAP stuff (even the photos)to be true, I cannot disregard the pressing evidence that it is all just made up (even possibly purposeful disinfo), even if from an imagination standpoint it still intrigues me to follow it.

[edit on 16-6-2008 by fortwynt]

I always thought that the deviantArt site held more than we know, but take a look at this artist posted there:

"Brian Dunn" a.k.a. "ManipulatedRealmz"

Abstract Artist
Male/United States
Offline for 2d 21h 13m 58s
Deviant since Sep 25, 2003, 6:52 PM"

All of these images below are dated to have been created well before the CA. drones were sighted.

The artwork is so drone and LAP -ish that one has to be blind not to see it.

If you take the time to look at the many other images in his portfolio, you will see shapes that apply to certain popular crop circles just posted these few days ago.

How did this artist know about the drones, or the LAP for that matter long before they were made public? Did Isaac drop off a few copies to his friends or did his housekeeper 'borrow' them for her child's project in art school?


"depthcharge"




"dev id"




"theKILLINGsound"




"subURBANsound"



"Dominator"



Also, on the graphics site "IHEA,"
you see this, posted in 2006




So drones, LAP, certain castle crop circles (latest on LMH and Whitley's site) core features popped into existance only AFTER these peculiar designs were created and not before. How can this be? Are we not asking the right questions?

we are forgetting okudas and frank sternbachs work predating even that. The point being I beieve that there was nothing unique about the drone designs both in craft and LAP. and like the photograph, a composite of pre existing art and themes and even polyglot alphabet, with the intent here it seems of connecting itself to the crop circle "phenomena" and as Sterbach wrote people are always doing that in the design business. Some enforce copyrights like Groening whenever he can, oor like sternbacch, a laid back attitude.
Perhaps if we took a look at who made cerain cropcircles we can get a better handle on this before it gets out of hand
I believe their is a site called cropcircle makers that does this .
I haven't had time to check it as I wanted.

Cyas later.




[edit on 16-6-2008 by Sys_Config]

Hehe,

tomi is rewriting the drone saga over there at their little shelter:

"Whitley had numerous conversations with Isaac before Isaac decided to go underground. During this time, as more images of drones were surfacing Isaac was very surprised. Over the time period that they talked Whitley and LMH became very convinced of Isaac's credibility before he went underground"

I bet, they spent a lot of hours at PizzaHut talking about the good old eighties and the MOTK.

reply to post by fortwynt


I see your point, fortwynt, and I was wondering, if the antigravity device is just a caricature of this dualism.

But different from religious belief, we have a lot of extraordinary assertions placed in our ordinary world - not in the transzendental spheres, where only imagination can be used. The total abscence of drones and witnesses needs again extraordinary explanations.

If you say, both sides are like missioners, than I agree 100%.

reply to post by Siddharta


All Right! A fresh load of... insider information. Whitley had secret conversations with Isaac. The nature of these conversations was so earthshaking that they could only be revealed midway through the next year. I wonder if anyone other than Isaac and Whitley knew about them before this new revelation. I wonder what Tomi's source is. I bet I can guess!