[HOAX] Isaac CARET - Drones [HOAX]

The best stuff I saw was crude ray tracing, nothing at all as sophisticated as this
anywhere.

Originally posted by chunder
Wildone, 11 11 and others with CGI experience (this is a serious request, no catches).

Would the technology have been available in 1986 to create through CGI at that time the photograph used in fig 4.4 ?

Originally posted by wildone106
Awesome, another nail in the coffin of this hoax..I can't wait...

Another nail??? This proves pretty much nothing except that someone has registered a domain. It's a lead that eventually leads into evidence if we get lucky. In itself it proves nothing... *sigh*

Originally posted by lotusland
NEWS FLASH!

Todd Schwartz (or those involved in the CARET controversy) has now updated the domain registration record for isaaccaret.com and had his personal information removed. It's now a "private" registration. Glad I grabbed the details and posted them when I did!!!

funny, i can still get the data from here:

whois.domaintools.com...

Well thats what Im thinking, its another step forward which I hope will solve this embarrassing circus

Originally posted by PsykoOps

Originally posted by wildone106
Awesome, another nail in the coffin of this hoax..I can't wait...

Another nail??? This proves pretty much nothing except that someone has registered a domain. It's a lead that eventually leads into evidence if we get lucky. In itself it proves nothing... *sigh*

Originally posted by Mechanic 32
Apparently it is very plausible that this has nothing to do with "our" Isaac.

Perhaps someone riding on the coat tails of all of this hooplah about the drones?

Please keep in mind the isaaccaret.com domain was registered BEFORE Isaac went public with his information, ergo this is absolutely associated with "our" dearest Isaac. Don't lose sight of that.

Originally posted by Mechanic 32

funny, i can still get the data from here:

whois.domaintools.com...

Probably not for much longer. If Todd were clued-in, he would have chosen the privacy option at the time he registered the domain. After the fact, it's a bit late as the records end up in many databases on the net.

Once those whois databases are reindexed, however, you'll find his information will be gone.

Todd originally registered with Godaddy and they have already updated their registration record to show it as "private". The others will follow, just a matter of time...

Originally posted by lotusland

Please keep in mind the isaaccaret.com domain was registered BEFORE Isaac went public with his information, ergo this is absolutely associated with "our" dearest Isaac. Don't lose sight of that.

okay, I see where you are going with this. Doesn't hurt to keep an open mind.

I did a search on the wayback machine for "www.isaaccaret.com" all I came up with were default generic advertising sites, and several pages that were "Not Archived"

WayBack Machine website:
web.archive.org...

Originally posted by mr-lizard
Hi all, sorry to be lazy... but without me delving through 75 pages, can somebody sum me up with an unbiased opinion on what we have gathered so far about this drone thing. I'm not too clued up and I don't have too much time tonight.

i.e - the initial basics and what clue's we have gathered and what makes it seem like a hoax etc...

Thanks in advance.

Sure Mr-Lizard. Here's the synopsis:

The drone photos may or may not be artificially created.
The documents posted by "Isaac" at isaaccaret.fortunecity.com may or may not be a hoax.

Everyone has a position on this, including sitting on the fence. But you'd have to go through those 74 pages to formulate one for yourself.

Originally posted by etshrtslr
Here is another story.

A Lawyer, CARET, and Weird Flying Things

www.stevenhuff.net...

The story was already odd, intriguing, for sure. What happened on June 26, 2007 ramped up the weird level considerably. That was when “Isaac” dropped into the story.

Very interesting. In Todd's article, look at one of the headers:

Compliance is 99% disclosure and documentation. When in doubt, disclose it. When you do it, document it. The vast majority of compliance-related issues are due to a failure by the investment adviser to disclose. Failure to disclose properly on Form ADV almost always is an issue during an SEC examination. Do yourself a favor and err on the side of disclosing those soft-dollar arrangements you have been reluctant to admit exist. Yes, you have a conflict of interest, but what RIA using a qualified custodian doesn’t?

Greetings,

The isaaccaret.com domain appears to have been registered on the same day of the public disclosure via Earthfiles/C2C as far as I can tell. Additionally a poster 'on another forum' emailed Todd and got a response (which basically amounts to a dismissal of him being Isaac, and a vague admission of squatting on it). He laughs off the idea that he is Isaac, and mentions no connection with him. Todd is, most likely, another Remora.

pax

Originally posted by lotusland

Originally posted by Mechanic 32
Apparently it is very plausible that this has nothing to do with "our" Isaac.

Perhaps someone riding on the coat tails of all of this hooplah about the drones?

Please keep in mind the isaaccaret.com domain was registered BEFORE Isaac went public with his information, ergo this is absolutely associated with "our" dearest Isaac. Don't lose sight of that.

I finally took the time to read Isaac's story and look at that website, and I'm honestly surprised that this topic is still under discussion. "Isaac" is obviously a fraud. There are many reasons, but if nothing else, that scan of the "alien artifact" is undeniably a CGI render. Other members have already pointed out more technical reasons explaining why this is a CGI render. But even I can tell that it's not a real object.

Are we to believe that this is a scan of a photograph from the 80's? And what's up with the perfectly white and uniform background? Why would it be sitting on a bland surface with nothing near it? Wouldn't it be in a display, or with people around it, or with some kind of experimental apparatus hooked up to it?

Originally posted by organelle
Greetings,

The isaaccaret.com domain appears to have been registered on the same day of the public disclosure via Earthfiles/C2C as far as I can tell.

In light of all that has been uncovered, I guess we can only wait and see now, what if anything will come from the opening of that website (www.isaaccaret.com), if and when it does open that is.

Unless Todd contacts anyone else who had left messages for him, and they relay the contents of the message back to us.

[edit on 7/3/07 by Mechanic 32]

Originally posted by Postal76
I finally took the time to read Isaac's story and look at that website, and I'm honestly surprised that this topic is still under discussion. "Isaac" is obviously a fraud.

The discussion now is not so much about the information's authenticity as to the reason for it. You have to admit that someone put a bit of effort into creating the documents and the photos, so the question is why?

Is this someone with a morbid sense of humour, driven to see the community get bent out of shape arguing over it?

Or is there some financial gain to be made from all of this? Perhaps we'll all be asked to make donations soon so that poor Isaac can host his documents somewhere with enough file space.

Or is this being perpetrated at a higher level to see if those who REALLY work on these "sooper seekret" projects might come out of the woodwork and reveal what they know?

We're now moving onto "why", and not dwelling so much on "how" this was set up.

I think ultimately the ego of the hoaxers will be their undoing..


[edit on 3-7-2007 by wildone106]

I have been following right along with the caret/drone saga also and I have to admit reading the documents, to me, seem like this guy Isaac has some real street cred but then days go by and you think of the things you just can’t put your finger on because you want to believe this is all possible and excuse the little things like a few misspelled words as nit picking but… I would like to know why he never went into what ever it is that powers this thing. I mean come on even the documents never make any mention and that would be just as intriguing as what the thing supposedly does. Is it Duracell or Eveready? Also every person that claims to see 1 of these drones seems to make a report and go back into hiding and never tries taking it farther or reposting and getting there story out everywhere one would think people would want to hear it. Do some video interviews. Leave contacts and answer any questions people may have. I don’t know but seems other UFO witnesses don’t have a problem revealing there identities. Some I guess do but the drone sightings just don’t add up. I dunno watchyall think.

Originally posted by painfactorisit
I have been following right along with the caret/drone saga also and I have to admit reading the documents, to me, seem like this guy Isaac has some real street cred but then days go by and you think of the things you just can’t put your finger on because you want to believe this is all possible and excuse the little things like a few misspelled words as nit picking but… I would like to know why he never went into what ever it is that powers this thing. I mean come on even the documents never make any mention and that would be just as intriguing as what the thing supposedly does. Is it Duracell or Eveready? Also every person that claims to see 1 of these drones seems to make a report and go back into hiding and never tries taking it farther or reposting and getting there story out everywhere one would think people would want to hear it. Do some video interviews. Leave contacts and answer any questions people may have. I don’t know but seems other UFO witnesses don’t have a problem revealing there identities. Some I guess do but the drone sightings just don’t add up. I dunno watchyall think.

I agree. I want to believe, of course I do, but the evidence just isn't there. Whilst I wouldn't say I could now call this a hoax, you would have thought that multiple sightings, photos, supposed top secret leaked information and a host of eyewitnesses would have equated to something far more substantial and concentrated than what we have.

That having been said, this is the most unsure I have ever been of a hoax. Plenty of hoaxes in the past have been easy to spot because of terrible photos, ridiculous backstory or a scarcity of actual resources. But this one does have it all. Of course, there are very convincing arguments that all this is a fake (potential CGI, problems with Isaac and the reports etc.) but I haven't as yet, been convinced that it must be.

Unfortunately, I think we're at the mercy of the powers that be until we get more info on this (which it looks like we may just be doing). Some believe, some don't, but nobody can make a concerted case one way or another. Whoever did this did their homework, and covered most of their bases. I don't think we're going to 'catch' this hoaxer out completely, I think we're going to have to rely on them to give us more information to work with.

If I had witnessed one of these crafts, I would contact one of my local newspapers or national media outlet. I would offer to give them access to my camera's SD card so they could see the image was not altered in photoshop. They could access it directly from the memory card.

That doesn't rule out a physical model being made and photographed in the wild, of course.

But the credibility factor becomes MUCH higher when a witness is willing to identify him/herself and give a television station/newspaper the credible evidence they need to go public with this story.

Not too many hoaxers would prepared to take something THAT far, nor would a newspaper be willing to risk its reputation on such dodgy information. So a witness who is willing to be interviewed on camera, who would surrender their camera's digital card for analysis makes them more believable.

Now for those of you who think the big newspapers wouldn't risk their reputations on something like this, think again. The Chicago Tribune actually ran some responsible coverage of the O'Hare airport UFO, and MUCH to their surprise, it was the single most popular article they had ever written. It was the one story people were interested in reading more than anything else.

Buoyed by that response, they actually dedicated a journalist (Jon Hilkevitch) to perform a more in-depth coverage of what happened at O'Hare.

Now contrast that with those involved with the drone sightings. They're all anonymous and none of them reported these sightings to their local news outlets.

And they all give rather thin excuses for why their identities can't be revealed.

And now we have investment lawyers registering domains on behalf of those involved.

If nothing else, this has been a very good exercise in deconstructing information and the use of critical thought. I think the ATS members and the other forum boards out there have really done their homework on this one and should be commended.

If/when true disclosure comes, we as a community may be more able to spot authenticity because of exercises like these.

The pictures of the "assembled" green object look like an actual model, (versus a CGI model.), could it be the result of a Rapid prototyping machine I am not certain if they are capable of making models with sufficient detail to look like the one seen in the photograph and if true would mean the scale of the object could be measured in inches. With this in mind, looking at the picture, it does have a look of a small scale model. These machines are quite expensive and this could point to an elaborate and expensive infrastructure being utilized by the perpetrators.

Originally posted by RING0
The pictures of the "assembled" green object look like an actual model, (versus a CGI model.), could it be the result of a Rapid prototyping machine I am not certain if they are capable of making models with sufficient detail to look like the one seen in the photograph and if true would mean the scale of the object could be measured in inches. With this in mind, looking at the picture, it does have a look of a small scale model. These machines are quite expensive and this could point to an elaborate and expensive infrastructure being utilized by the perpetrators.

Its possible, but unlikely, Rapid prototyping has come a long way since the older methods and can produce very accurate models, but the smoothness of a surface in such models is lacking still I believe. Few years back it was also known (and stil?) as stereolithography as one process. A variety of methds are used today, most involve solidifying a resin with a laser beam in layers. These layers then build up to form the 3d part, however the accuracy of the laser produces some degree of 'bumpiness' or irregularities in the surface.

Most likely not Rapid prototype nor a physical model at all in my view, but a CGI model.

[edit on 7/3/2007 by greatlakes]

Originally posted by Lexion
Then why, Sir do you even post on ATS ?
Those of us who research this subject "sift" through
quite a bit of pages. Please don't "bother" us with your admittedly "lazy"
attitude.

Lighten up will ya? Just because YOU have nothing better to do in life than to sit in here all day does not mean everyone has the time to read every post in every long thread that interests them...

Some of us have a life you know

And just exactly how much "research" did YOU do to determine its a hoax?

:shk:

On THAT note, seeing as I just got back from a week on the beaches in LA and DIDN'T have time to catch up on the thread... I thought I would post this that was in my email... It may already be in here somewhere though

Mystery of the Drones... Solved

[edit on 3-7-2007 by zorgon]