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: 55
185
<< 52  53  54    56  57  58 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 02:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by chunder
You accepted 11 11's shadowing explanation, within minutes, as the be all and end all, and that was proven wrong.



Why is it that you and pj and all of the people that believe in this hoax keep saying you proved me wrong? NOBODY has proven me wrong AT ALL...

please post links to the posts that you claim prove me wrong...




posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 02:59 AM
link   
damn I just posted a long ass post and it freaking got deleted..... anyway I'll try to re-post it.....

my logic concerning this story..

My alias is Issac, one day I was working at a super top secret Lab in Palo Alto California and I happened to accidentally take home the mega ultra be-freaking-ond above top secret ET manual home with me and nobody noticed, I saw the pics on the net and I saw the manual lying on my coffee table just sittin there from the 80's and I decided to scan it and post all about it on a free hosted site, despite the fact that I'd be shot and killed if by previous employers knew I ever took that manual home.

I know very well a person that works with classified documents all day long and I know if they ever take them home they'd lose their job, let alone freaking super top secret manuals.

I really enjoy this hoax though, it's very titor-esque as people have mentioned and I believe it was created by the titor crew personally but anyway this hoax has really weeded out the crappiest of the crappy in the field of ufology such as Linda Howe and Whitley Streiber, Linda is an idiot and always has been, but Whitley, he's a bestselling author from his ET contact story Communion, the movie was good because it starred Christopher Walken, I never believed Whitley but in the back of my mind I never thought he was a fraud, now I do, he's a scifi writer and always has been, a true ET contactee of his calibur shouldn've have fallen for this hoax so easily, in fact he said and I paraphrase because I can't find the exact quote because I think he deleted it he said to the effect of "I feel honored to have been connected with this incredible story", on his site www.unknowncountry.com... Whitley now has basically retracted his 100% feeling on this story and says now that it "might be a hoax" well no crap dude it's the hoakiest hoax, I agree with that other dude it looks like something out of a movie promo, perhaps that's what this is all about an up-coming scifi straight to dvd movie about drones that fly around and do nothing very interesting at all.



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 03:00 AM
link   
I used to think the images itself were the smoking gun, but the real smoking gun is the EXIF data...

Hey does anyone happen to have Adobe Album? I want to test what happens when a real raw image from the camera is run through it....

...actually I might even have a copy of Adobe Album... brb.



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 03:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by 11 11

spf33's data did nothing but confirm the fact the Sun was above the horizon. Thats it. I was trying to prove that also....because the sun is so massivly bigger than the Earth, even 5 or 6 degrees above the horizon would create a downward shadow.

[edit on 30-6-2007 by 11 11]


No it wouldn't - spf showed that the arm would not cast a shadow on the drone with the sun in the position that is indicated by the shadows on the pole and also by the other data available.



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 03:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by 11 11

Originally posted by chunder
You accepted 11 11's shadowing explanation, within minutes, as the be all and end all, and that was proven wrong.



Why is it that you and pj and all of the people that believe in this hoax keep saying you proved me wrong? NOBODY has proven me wrong AT ALL...

please post links to the posts that you claim prove me wrong...


Take at look at spf's diagram. It proves you wrong. Obviously we aren't going to agree about this though.
So there we are folks - two differing views, plenty of info from both sides - everyone can make their own mind up.

Lets move on though shall we.



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 03:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by 11 11
I used to think the images itself were the smoking gun, but the real smoking gun is the EXIF data...

Hey does anyone happen to have Adobe Album? I want to test what happens when a real raw image from the camera is run through it....

...actually I might even have a copy of Adobe Album... brb.

I hav adobe album starter 3.0



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 03:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by chunder

No it wouldn't - spf showed that the arm would not cast a shadow on the drone with the sun in the position that is indicated by the shadows on the pole and also by the other data available.



No actually he did not. The entire bottom of the drone has a shadow according to the render spf33 gave us... that means the image is STILL wrong.

Did you even see his render?
img456.imageshack.us...

Supposidly the drone is 58 feet high. How does he know this? Also, his image suggests the drone is perfectly level. Does he have proof it is perfectly level?

by the way.. its not even spf33's image, it was created by someone else, only using 3D Studio MAX. Please tell me how 3D Studio Max is capable of accuratly calculating the shadows, when the artifical Sun is not to scale?

At first I thought it was a Sun position finder, but on the very bottom it says it was made in 3D Studio Max... 3D Studio Max can not be used in this situation.... so actually the image SPF33 supplied is not accurate at all.

you know whats funny? The render spf33 gave us was created in 3D Studio Max, which is the program that I think this hoax all came from... So why would someone use 3D Studio Max to support this hoax? Gee I wonder...



[edit on 30-6-2007 by 11 11]



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 03:18 AM
link   
I've found an inconsistency in the linguist analysis primer that is not CGI related. If you look at the pages 119-123, the irregularities of the 3 punched out holes do not match in any of them. 119 and 120 are not the same page, neither is 120 and 121. That would mean that the original document had 2 pages with info, followed by 2 blank pages. That makes no sense. Even if it was isaac who punched the holes, he would have made them all on the left side of the pages.



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 03:20 AM
link   
meh, I see no one took my bait and used the helicopter pic to challenge 1111 on his shadows theory, so I had to do this myself lol:



[edit on 30-6-2007 by Anciel]



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 03:20 AM
link   
It says "real world scale" LOL. Yeah im sure the Sun is 20 feet in diameter and 80 feet from the drone LOL!




posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 03:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by 11 11
I used to think the images itself were the smoking gun, but the real smoking gun is the EXIF data...

Hey does anyone happen to have Adobe Album? I want to test what happens when a real raw image from the camera is run through it....

...actually I might even have a copy of Adobe Album... brb.


Check this page out:
www.danandsherree.com...
Near the bottom there is a message concerning performing lossless rotation in Adobe Album. The person notes that the first time he performs it the file size is reduced by 79kb but with subsequent rotations it stays the same. I am guessing that it re-writes exif information.

If you have a copy see what happens if you use Adobe Album to import photos directly from a camera. Since the software is doing the write it may also effect exif data at this point.

I don't see exif data itself as indicating much since it can be edited rather trivially, but I would question the reason for it being intentionally obfuscated.


[edit on 30-6-2007 by mvario]



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 03:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anciel
meh, I see no one took my bait and used the helicopter pic to challenge 1111 on his shadows theory, so I had to do this myself lol:



Sorry but your helicopter exmaple has zero reference to the angle at which the chopper is flying.. With the drone example, we can pretty much tell that it is level by referencing it with the telephone pole...

Your example was irrelivent. Please find another.



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 03:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by greatlakes
I hav adobe album starter 3.0


Hey perfect! Grab one of these photos:

www.imaging-resource.com...

Open it up in Adobe Album, and save it with another name. Then post it some where so we can download it.



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 03:40 AM
link   
A huge page about "the drones" in french... with more (dis-)infos


ovnis-usa.com...

There is some photos and reports that are a little too strange like this:

www.ufoevidence.org...

I have try to find in google some spacecrafts that could be similar to the drones, but i have find nothing... still searching in movies and mangas...




posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 03:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by dernailer
A huge page about "the drones" in french... with more (dis-)infos


ovnis-usa.com...

There is some photos and reports that are a little too strange like this:

www.ufoevidence.org...

I have try to find in google some spacecrafts that could be similar to the drones, but i have find nothing... still searching in movies and mangas...



Wow nice find



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 03:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by 11 11

Originally posted by greatlakes
I hav adobe album starter 3.0

www.imaging-resource.com...
Open it up in Adobe Album, and save it with another name. Then post it some where so we can download it.

Done. Find the renamed image as processed thru Adobe Photoshop Album Starter Version 3.0 here:

s141.photobucket.com...



[edit on 6/30/2007 by greatlakes]



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 03:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by greatlakes

Originally posted by 11 11

Originally posted by greatlakes
I hav adobe album starter 3.0

www.imaging-resource.com...
Open it up in Adobe Album, and save it with another name. Then post it some where so we can download it.

Done. Find the renamed image as processed thru Adobe Photoshop Album Starter Version 3.0 here:

s141.photobucket.com...



[edit on 6/30/2007 by greatlakes]


Did you import that into Adobe or just open and rename it? Could you try one more thing? Do a rotate the image and save.



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 03:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by dernailer
A huge page about "the drones" in french... with more (dis-)infos


ovnis-usa.com...
There is some photos and reports that are a little too strange like this:
www.ufoevidence.org...

Yeah I found that site also, it basically references stuff on ATS and on openminds forum as well. The author is a member there (at openminds), I forget what his avatar is...But anyway that information is found at that other forum in english if needed.



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 03:59 AM
link   
Err theres only one option in the file menu, its called "Get Photos...from files or folders...". Thats what I used. Then I doubleclicke d the image in the album (only one image in the album) and renamed it. Then uploaded it.

Ill post the new rotate and rename next.

EDIT:

Ok, the rotated image and renamed here: s141.photobucket.com...

Let us know what you find...

[edit on 6/30/2007 by greatlakes]



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 04:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by 11 11
Sorry but your helicopter exmaple has zero reference to the angle at which the chopper is flying.. With the drone example, we can pretty much tell that it is level by referencing it with the telephone pole...

Your example was irrelivent. Please find another.


Actually, the fact that you don't know for sure whether the drone is tilting or not renders your basis on the telephone pole for complete certainty of the alignment of the shadows flawed.

*nvm*

[edit on 30-6-2007 by Anciel]



new topics

top topics



 
185
<< 52  53  54    56  57  58 >>

log in

join