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: 49
185
<< 46  47  48    50  51  52 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11 11Thats all it meant..


my apologies then. it's just that i personally would be very sceptical if any mod on any forum i post would applaud me
not to mention i would never post that heh. no offense meant though, i see your point. but the point still stands, there's no 100% damning evidence yet that the pics are rendered (or real for that matter), AND we're not only moving in circles but basically standing still atm.

bah, already 3am.

edit, typos.

[edit on 29-6-2007 by Lamâshtu]




posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11 11

Originally posted by Outrageo

With all due respect, bragging about getting 2500 points from Herr Springer, with an attitude like yours, for basically being his mouthpiece regarding the CGI argument ad nauseum, says almost as much about ATS moderator bias as it does about your own abrasive approach.

I'm a bit saddened by this revelation. Thanks for tooting your own horn so eloquently.

[edit on 6/29/2007 by Outrageo]


I wasn't bragging, I was proving a point to someone who has braught NOTHING to this thread..

[edit on 29-6-2007 by 11 11]


Nothing? Why don't you go back and read the almost 20 pages of thoughts I've posted labeled PART 1 - PART 16.



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by pjslug
PART 1 - PART 16.


true, and it's kind of sad that we're still discussing cgi vs prop vs shopped vs real vs whatever, and not the more interesting parts of the story. and yea i'm guilty as charged myself.



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 07:53 PM
link   
Are U2U's offline or something?
They are working for me, I just checked. Just wondering why all of the previous posts between primarily 2 people haven't been discussed in that forum...



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by pjslug
Blaine,

That doesn't corrolate because arm 1 is on the same level plane as arm 2 which puts them both above the power lines. What you are seeing is just an optical illusion.
Also, take a look at the other photos of it in the air where there are no powerlines or trees in its path.

[edit on 29-6-2007 by pjslug]


Interesting how many new people are joining in


You are misunderstanding. Yes, they are both above the power-lines. Makes no difference to my point.

You should check the full photo first. See the link in the quote. It's too big to post here. You will see that the line that is wedged is arching the line against gravity slightly. Also, the arms are not level. they are stepped down. You can see that from the shadows. The object is also not parallel to the horizontal parts of the power pole. It is sitting at a slight angle which is what is causing the wedged line to lift up slightly. Easy enough to do for an Electrician (one of my first professions) with a little boom and bucket on their work truck. Just need to have the tools with long insulated handles to do this.

As to what this is; I've seen a similar device in a factory setting before. Those arms rotate to adjust the flow. The loop shaped things at the bottom of each of the curved arms above the object are part of a spring that allows the weight of what passes through to open it up while the tension keeps the items centered and in a row.

I could of course be wrong. This is my opinion at this point. It could change. I assume everyone will also look at the full photo.

I don't think expressing an opinion would put any-one's reputation on the line in a debate. To not debate back and forth would seem foolish to me.

As too the Caret photos. CG and I don't know why people who have spent time looking at and performing CG renders would say otherwise to be honest.



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11 11
man you people sure know how to jump to conlcusions.


I'm sorry but I find this statement very ironic. We've had people in here since the start who have claimed this is a hoax. We've also had people claim it's the real deal from the start. While we've only had one image come up so far as a wannabe replica to the CGI image to see if it CAN indeed be replicated. The object shown does NOT look anything like the one which was the attempted recreation.

It's like comparing R2D2 from Episode 3 to R2D2 in Episode 4 of Star Wars. That's really what it looks like.

Personally, I can't find enough evidence to dismiss this either way. Which is why I think it'd be healthy to stop with the constant back and forth and think of a new field within the Isaac report to tango with. While if the image was conclusively CGI, then yes, it'd obviously reduce the credibility of this person to zero.

We picked up on the writing which was moving in a healthy direction. We could be discussing the physics of the object. We could be doing a plethora of things.

For instance:

If this object could really cloak fully then it'd have to be able to bend light around itself. This is being proven possible in today's labs. We've managed to cloak objects from microwave radiation. Light is simply another form of electromagnetic radiation so, we're getting closer to such a possibility of turning invisible from light.

So, if you're able to cloak yourself from light, how would light react if the object is made of such a material? What if you're bouncing out of that state?

Just a few things to think about.



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 07:58 PM
link   
When you have folks just believing everything a nonentity tells them it's pretty alarming. There aren't any real people attached to this case other than Linda Moulton Howe, George Noory, and Whitley Streiber. That's it! Only the "reporters" are real people. So far all of the witnesses are spooks. The first rule of considering evidence it to consider the source. Can somebody please tell me how this can be done in this case? Has anybody seen any original photos? No. Have any alleged witnesses been met in person? No. It's just one CGI after another CGI after another questionable photo after another questionable photo followed by questionable stories. I'm not even being a skeptic, I'm just being rational, there is nothing on the table except a large pile of what ifs. There's not much one can do with a pile of what ifs except speculate, which is what most of us have been doing. And it sure doesn't make any sense to believe in speculation. It doesn't make any sense because who knows what might happen. Go with your gut? Sure, but even the smallest bit of reliable evidence is needed for that to happen. Intuition doesn't just happen out of thin air. When you're speculating you basically expanding on all available facts usually. But in this "drone" case we've been speculating on non-factual material that only in fact exists. This case will only become more elaborate, and eventually nothing will be possible to be disproved or proved, because if the people do not exist, then there is no real evidence. That's the subtle play that's being made here. Keep on believing but you're never going to get to see the "real" for real. At least folks really saw the Phoenix lights and they showed their faces and gave real names and just about everything. Poor people, middle class people, rich people, blue collar and white collar people. That's substantial. This "Chad" nonsense doesn't even rise to the standard of pulp.



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 08:00 PM
link   
blaine, slightly OT but, something like this?

www.honeywell.com...

sorry but i was waiting for a chance to throw this one in



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lamâshtu

Originally posted by Blaine91555
1- it appears the cable is wedged to help hold it in place and the level of focus matches.


sorry for the one liner, but wedged, you mean as a real object? it would be huge, and tbh it doesn't look like interfering with the cable does it?


That would make the entire object a few feet across? If it's way above the lines it would be bigger. I think you have it backwards?



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 08:03 PM
link   
As stated in one of my PARTs, I mentioned that I thought the Isaac situation could have been brought about by one of 4 potential parties

- VIRAL MARKETING
- STUDENT BODY
- THINK TANK
- MILITARY DISSEMINTAION/DISINFORMATION/EMPLOYMENT

I am strongly beginning to feel like it was intentional military dissemination. If it was someone coming out of the woodwork with a story such as this that the military didn't want out there, it would have been shut down by now - just as certain SETI and crop circle pages have been.

Do any other believers agree?



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 08:05 PM
link   
Here is your 100% proof of hoax.

It turns out the 3D render software used to create this model and image, didn't have their light source node high above the object. In this photo, if the main light source was truely the Sun, then there should be a shadow under that arm on the body.




This is proof, 100% CGI.


===edit image size=====



[edit on 29-6-2007 by 11 11]



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555If it's way above the lines it would be bigger. I think you have it backwards?


heh yes if it was way above the lines it would be *even* bigger. hmmm maybe i was misleading myself, if it was a prop then yes, why not.



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lamâshtu
blaine, slightly OT but, something like this?

www.honeywell.com...

sorry but i was waiting for a chance to throw this one in


Not like that. Imagine this object upside down. The whisk looking part would be like a funnel. At the bottom of each of the whisk wires you can see a little squarish loop. As the weight of the objects going through the funnel pushes it out the loop part seats against the ring putting tension on the wires which in turn keeps the item(s) passing through it centered. That part of this device has been fairly obvious to me since I first saw this thing.

I can not find an example so I've not posted my thoughts. Don't want to get in any more arguments. I don't mind debates but I'm sick of arguments instead of trying to make progress. I'm not a hothead and I don't like it when this place turns me into one.



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 08:11 PM
link   
11 11,

Again, you aren't paying attention to the position of the sun. Clearly from the way all the shadows on the pole and the object are visible, the sun is coming from a position close to the horizon. It isn't midday above the craft. And the shadow on the pole is not from the arm, it's from the two pieces of wood on the pole itself.

[edit on 29-6-2007 by pjslug]



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 08:12 PM
link   
That makes sense. Theres nothing else we can really analyze. Isaac (may have) made a very good hoax. I think we should now wait until more pictures are released so theres more to examine.



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by pjslug
As stated in one of my PARTs, I mentioned that I thought the Isaac situation could have been brought about by one of 4 potential parties

- VIRAL MARKETING
- STUDENT BODY
- THINK TANK
- MILITARY DISSEMINTAION/DISINFORMATION/EMPLOYMENT

Do any other believers agree?

You asked:Do any other believers agree?

I dont like to label myself and put into any -buckets- per se, a believer or non-believer, just a seeker of the truth, thanks though.

Yes to the above possible, Also I strongly think that it could also just be one person, not affiliated to any of the above. Possibly someone in the industry, the hoax (if a hoax) is not all that elaborate and far from perfect, many errors, bad writing, holes in the story etc. One industrious person 1 week maybe 2 weeks at a minimum to produce this stuff.

[edit on 6/29/2007 by greatlakes]

[edit on 6/29/2007 by greatlakes]



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by greatlakesOne industrious person 1 week maybe 2 weeks at a minimum to produce this stuff.


which is a lot. i'm still on the fence tending to hoax, or hoax inside a hoax, but all this makes less sense to me by the minute.



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 08:15 PM
link   
Originally posted by pjslug

I am strongly beginning to feel like it was intentional military dissemination.



to scatter or spread widely, as though sowing seed; promulgate extensively; broadcast;


From Here.
Really ? Is this "spread widely" ?

Is this "scattered" ?

Again, I think you are either part of, or in on this Isaac fiasco.

Lex



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11 11
Here is your 100% proof of hoax.


I agree with you completely on the Caret photo's being 3D renders. These are different. I think they are real earthly hardware with symbols stenciled on.

Now that I've seen a higher resolution picture; I believe these have nothing whatsoever to do with the Caret stuff.

As always, I could easily be wrong. Keep going. With all this activvvvvvvvvvv (Darn cat just jumped in the middle of the keyboard
) activity this should be solved shortly



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by pjslug
And the shadow on the pole is not from the arm, it's from the two pieces of wood on the pole itself.

[edit on 29-6-2007 by pjslug]


DUH, I know its from the wood on the pole itself.. I just named those arms too, cant you see the damn blue arrows landing right on the wood?

The wood is casing a shadow onto the main pole, this means, the arm of the craft should be casting the SAME type of shadow on the body of the craft...

Your explination was not thought out.... think again... no matter what, the sun was above the object.. not level with it... even if it was level with the Sun, the arm on the craft STILL doesnt have a shadow!



new topics

top topics



 
185
<< 46  47  48    50  51  52 >>

log in

join