[HOAX] Isaac CARET - Drones [HOAX]

Thanks...

That's all I asked from you.

[edit on 30-6-2008 by Siddharta]

reply to post by tomiuk


No I never tire of finding fault where it is so painfully obvious! Such as, researchers who dont have the first clue about documenting interviews and people that believe all photos sent by anon witnesses to be legit......sorry but if you try not to make it so easy for me to find the faults in your teams investigation then perhaps i can take a breather!!

I believe assuming EVERY photo is a lie, is also a lie.

It takes some care and follow through to determine if a photo is real and sometimes the proof comes later but that doesn't mean that we can't know anything.

I think the belief that we can never really know anything is an admission of defeat and submission to the will of unseen others and I refuse to do that.


sarc

Originally posted by sarcastic

I believe assuming EVERY photo is a lie, is also a lie.

It takes some care and follow through to determine if a photo is real and sometimes the proof comes later but that doesn't mean that we can't know anything.

I think the belief that we can never really know anything is an admission of defeat and submission to the will of unseen others and I refuse to do that.


sarc

You are here presenting totally philosophical "hegelian dialecticals" as you like to call them, but say you loathe in your bio,, sweet nothins as my mama used to say.
You are putting words in peoples mouths that were not uttered as you did with Shad.
Go to a chat forum, mirc, irc, anywhere but here , because you really are wasting bandwith. I am not impressed, at all, and really dont think you are even 17 as you claim.
Because in here we do have rules, and where ever you go theres a rule, if it isnt but a green or red light to keep your anarchistic behind safe.
Sound just like another fella went around with a banner
Oppose All Forms Of Law And Authority In The Name Of Chaos
Yeah right.
So,
Thats life , deal with it.
You come here with frivolous claims, and grievance with an admin, and unseen authority, pop in and out without an iota of contribution to the topic, let alone your claims .
Its just about you and the heck with the thread.
Thats not what we are about.
If you don't like our rules, go somewhere else.
Out of sight is out of mind.


home.comcast.net...




[edit on 30-6-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 30-6-2008 by Sys_Config]

Sometimes I put up my Grandma's opinions to test them out.

Sorry you don't like it when I do that.


sarc

reply to post by kthulu


Yep I also noticed this when listening to her podcasts...There was spots where the person being interviewed had been cutoff..Usually part of the last word was cutoff... ..
What I thought at first was it seemed like it was almost setup to be the answers to the questions...As in Linda was asking questions to pre-recorded answers....
I also remember one broadcaster that was on C2C had a show where he did all the voices and had other actors do voices....I forgot his name at the moment...
He always did state this before the show and during the show thou....

But then I thought about it more and the only other explanation that I can think of is two....

I don't know what their recording system consists of but there is always bound to be a noise gate of some sort....
en.wikipedia.org...
They may have the levels set incorrectly for the person that they are talking to and drop out could happen of the voice...Or they have the levels set for Linda and she has a different volume and tone in her voice then the guest so this could also play a role in the noise gate when the guest speaks.....

The other thing is perhaps there was to long of a pause in-between Linda and the guest speaking....So before turning it into a podcast some quick editing was done on the audio file to shorten the duration of that pause..But during the editing the voices at the very end were also the part that was cut-out along with the length of the pause...Due to sloppy editing of the audio or just hurriedly edited audio....

reply to post by CFandM


I've noticed those anomalies and thought it sounded like sloppy editing. She asks some very leading questions, and some times it's obvious she and her interviewee have been over the stuff in "rehearsal." It often used to sound like she was holding a small tape recorder up to a telephone receiver! Of course all that obvious editing could be the result of something TV interviews are notorious for, which is taping the interviewer asking much more sharply worded questions and editing it into the tape in order to make the reporter seem tougher or to skew the meaning of the interviewee's words. Like everything else out of that particular processing plant, just what exactly the ingredients are is kept secret.

Originally posted by sarcastic

I believe assuming EVERY photo is a lie, is also a lie.

It takes some care and follow through to determine if a photo is real and sometimes the proof comes later but that doesn't mean that we can't know anything.

I think the belief that we can never really know anything is an admission of defeat and submission to the will of unseen others and I refuse to do that.


sarc

I have no idea who you are talking about. Nobody here does those things, or believes those things. Wait, what's that? Oh, I think I hear your grandma calling!

thats very interesting Double and Cf, I always felt it was crummy recording of a phone, I do have a link to her collection of podcasts if you need to go over them. My favorites were Brents, what the heck, like a dozen times, and the sisters, where what they described was nothing like the drone but linda kep steering her. That one had arms, legs, lights , all kinds of stuff, That was the xmas drone. We need to label them like that for easy reference. Brents was the lexus drone. Then the Sermon on the MT. drone, in Oregon, stuck on that hilltop.See how that helps? Mnemonics really works.
Still, it would be excruciating to listen to those over and over. I almost quiver at the thought.

reply to post by Double_Nought_Spy

I'm confused here. Half this thread is belittling the evidence. If you were truly objective you would be reserving judgment until conclusive evidence shows up.

I think this place is too worried about individuals doing harm and not worried enough about deep pockets staging it.

I saw the drone and I reported it. They told me 21 other people had seen the same thing spread over several years. What I expect is if it's real somebody is going to see it again.

My family doesn't tell me that what I see is just my imagination. They wait to see if it shows up next time and leave me alone about it.

That's courtesy I think.

Originally posted by sarcasticMy family doesn't tell me that what I see is just my imagination. They wait to see if it shows up next time and leave me alone about it.

Never mind. I think, they love you though. And I praise you, that you try to put the drones, where they belong: To the muppet show.

I loved both...

I ran across this on mufon. i wonder if this is the one Klatu said linda had.
The link to pictures are below. Only the first jp shows a little ring with a shine. It looks remarkably like Numbers ring. Shall we call this the..ELO drone.?

mufoncms.com...
Radomly taking pictures of valley early in the morning. The dogs were barking and I thought a deer might be out there. I had my camera on burst and was holding the shutter button down. I took two pictures one after the other. The first one had this black thing in it. The second it's gone. I don't know what it is. I only saw it that night when I downloaded it on the computer. As I was looking at all the photos I had taken that day I found something else on the mountain top. The second picture shows the black something on the mountain. The last one is it moving away and a better shape to it. They move so fast that it would be hard to see them with the naked eye.

I have my thoughts just wanted share, as I thought when shooting pictures for deer, you do not aim at the sky, unless it is only one kind of deer. And it is not the season yet.
Enjoy

Date was 6-27.

[edit on 1-7-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 1-7-2008 by Sys_Config]

reply to post by Sys_Config


Good find, Sys! Starred.

I told you I had a feeling the drones would be resurfacing (whether or not that's what is in the pic).

And your post was starred, too, kermit.

Originally posted by sarcastic
reply to post by Double_Nought_Spy

 

I'm confused here. Half this thread is belittling the evidence. If you were truly objective you would be reserving judgment until conclusive evidence shows up.

Belittling the evidence?? What evidence? Pictures that can not be verified can not be considered evidence! Anonymous witness testimony by folks who can not be located is not evidence!! Isaac's release of crapola can not be considered evidence!! Kermits troll-like posts at ATS can not be considered evidence!!! It has been over a year, if evidence was gonna show up i think we would have seen it by now....don't you?

So please enlighten us.....what evidence exactly are you talking about??

[edit on 1-7-2008 by TheShadow]

The photos were supposed to have been taken in burst mode, 2 match what would be burst mode, then suddenly the weather changes. Do these devices suck clouds. I am puzzled.


Sometimes evidence speaks for itself, and if if it causes a good laugh so be it.
I left that link on trolling for everyones benefit.. Although this is not a neo pagan site or coven, where any opinion, however disruptive is allowed, There are limits even there. Where a banning is seen as a way for the troller to find his or her own path and nitch. Its a positive step. But Speaking in generalities and truisms or philosophical quips and clips, that have nothing to do with the topic at hand, because in their opinion we are insensitive and closed minded does not cut it in a forum like ours.It is a tool used to garner sympathy from the unwary.Now I could go back to my googles and yank the last forum experiences, with this type.
So let's get back scrutinize this last one sighting ,, and determine what weight it should be given, and where it falls .or as our little friend says, "belittle" this last evidence, (from his perspective any questioning is "belittling.). That sounds so Nietchiesque where all is space and atoms, and everything else opinions. Thats aint gonna work here bubba.









[edit on 1-7-2008 by Sys_Config]

Well it might be showing up as a dragon errr Bird-Fly Drone....
If it does then we can say isn't it funny how the pictures are getting more clear and in much better quality...But the craft itself is getting smaller and smaller making it indistinguishable from a bird or some person attached to a kite and taking a ride down the mountain...

Originally posted by CFandM
Well it might be showing up as a dragon errr Bird-Fly Drone....
If it does then we can say isn't it funny how the pictures are getting more clear and in much better quality...But the craft itself is getting smaller and smaller making it indistinguishable from a bird or some person attached to a kite and taking a ride down the mountain...

Spot on, CF they as a class ,learned from this last epidode, much like pigeons learn to peck, soon the whole flock knows. But we've learned too. I hope.

reply to post by Double_Nought_Spy


Yep their secrets will still be kept just that..
But it does also remind me of those wacky morning radio shows that had been using audio from movies then calling someone on the phone and having a conversation with them..The live person on the other end supposedly had no clue what was going on..It was funny...Til you started hearing more and more radio stations using that as a gag....

@sys..Why is it always a mountain and a shadow....Whatever happened to the basic glowing orb that looks like an out of focus water stain on the lens or the flash reflecting off a waterdrop in the air......
Or perhaps an airplane taken at a long exposure so it looks like a saucer...
Well I am sure that we have learned but only some perhaps..

[edit on 1-7-2008 by CFandM]

[edit on 1-7-2008 by CFandM]

reply to post by pjslug


@pj "whether or not that's what is in the pic" slug:

Not only can you tell when someone's telling the truth or not, but now you claim to be a prognosticator! Is there no end to your hidden talent?

You indeed predicted that the drones would return to the forefront, saying:

"I told you I had a feeling the drones would be resurfacing."

Looking at SYS's MUFON site last 20 report shows nary a drone listed, and the few photos show, well, no drones at all! Wonder who chased them away? But perhaps you mean the "ring craft" on the LMH site?

What - now every sighting of every UFO is a misunderstood drone? Or a drone in sheeps clothing? Or an ex-drone; a drone that has ceased to be?

Now I get it.

You forgot to post the smiley face pj. Right?

________________________________________________________________________

@sarcastic
You said:

"I'm confused here. Half this thread is belittling the evidence. If you were truly objective you would be reserving judgment until conclusive evidence shows up."

I know you are 17, in high school, and all, but use ‘evidence' properly and you will make more of an impression here:

Definitions of evidence (law):
All the means by which any alleged matter of fact whose truth is investigated at judicial trial is established or disproved.
- wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

The fact the pjslug pats you on the back does not indicate group approval.

And, personally, I think we here have paid more than enough attention to you. If you give us something that is evidence-worthy, we would really like to see that.

That would be the courtesy you referred to.

While I consider most (or all) of the "drone stuff" to be faked/hoaxed, I am always interested in any "new" items to pop onto the scence...i dont, for instance, IMMEDIATELY discount something but i certainly examine and re-examine using a comparison to all the info we have already ascertained.