[HOAX] Isaac CARET - Drones [HOAX]

Originally posted by LoDGiKaL
I've been looking through these threads and on other boards and though I might of overlooked it, who has noticed the fact that the panels on the craft in this image, resemble the 'language primer' from Isaacs' website?

I could be wrong, it's not the exact same construction or whatever you want it to call it, but it this look simillar. I also might be completely repeating the whole point....

i180.photobucket.com...

This is probably because the "language primer" images were parts of the textures used to make the 3D model of the aircraft. A lot of people keep asking why someone would take their time to create the "language primer" images, and I will answer you all...

Because the "language primer images" were most probably used as a Decal on the 3D models.

www.3dtotal.com...

Bo,
Yes, I've thought it was controlled dissemination for awhile now. It seems unlikely that Isaac would have the resources to retain a big name lawyer who does $100 million a year, if the isaaccaret.com website is connected, which in all probability it is since it was registered on the same day. I would expect more diagrams and pages of the report to follow, and here's why I say that: if this was someone who was scared for his life to reveal any of this information but wanted to let the public know that there is something else out there, he certainly wouldn't have said he's got hundreds of more pages. If he was scared, which obviously he was or he wouldn't have covered up his identity, he wouldn't be foolish to say I have hundreds of more pages and I may reveal more in the future. He knows this is a planned disclosure, and someone is giving the authority to do it. It could also be that these are documents that one of the 400 people in the disclosure project have. Maybe the disclosure project is finally deciding to disseminate this information directly to the public as it should have in 2001.

Food for thought.

[edit on 4-7-2007 by pjslug]

I don't know, the scanned material looks authentic. However maybe I'm wishful.

What do you have to say it's a hoax?

If the parts of the A1 unit are held together by anti-gravity technolgy, isn't that assertion in itself a contradiction? Anti-gravity would be repulsive, unlike gravity which is attractive.

Anti-gravity would cause parts to separate, not assemble.

?!?!

I just saw the site xbox360.ign.com... then looking at the different image, it is an exact match to the wing from drone photo. Viral Advertising from microshaft.

[edit on 4-7-2007 by dntwastetime]

[edit on 4-7-2007 by dntwastetime]

Originally posted by srb2001
If the parts of the A1 unit are held together by anti-gravity technolgy, isn't that assertion in itself a contradiction? Anti-gravity would be repulsive, unlike gravity which is attractive.
Anti-gravity would cause parts to separate, not assemble.

It's probably in the sense that, if all these objects are repulsing gravity, then they are bound together since they are surrounded by gravity.

Thats a very good point though. Wouldn't it be a hell of a lot easier to use magnetic technology? Rather then developing a huge language and completely over complicating the problem?

halo3.com...



Isaac CARET



Something simular?

11 11

with all due respect, did i miss something?

edit

to be honest, why should anyone promoting halo 3 on a big scale throw out #lloads of cash for a seriously small part of the market (loonies like me and you posting here). it doesn't make no sense. halo 3 will be a goddamn blockbuster no matter what, theres NO reason to spend LOTS of $$$ just to entertain some neglectable part of the market.

[edit on 4-7-2007 by Lamâshtu]

I really think we need to "reboot" and inject some common sense into this discussion:

1) To everyone who's trying to "figure out" the language, and to everyone who's critiquing how the "hardware" allegedly works, why?

If it's real, everything does what it does for a reason. It's designed by extraterrestrials with incredibly advanced technology. I doubt very highly we're going to find flaws in it as human beings. And according to Isaac, some of the best and brightest engineers spent years trying to figure out the diagrams out, and that's WITH millions of dollars worth of hardware, software, a huge, multi-disciplinary staff of people that probably had 11 PhDs each, and DIRECT ACCESS to all of these articles. Do you really think we're gonna figure something out from a photocopied reproduction of one of those diagrams and a copy of Photoshop?

Likewise, if it's a hoax, it's all mumbo jumbo anyway made up by some graphic designer, and it's even MORE pointless to try to analyze this stuff.

And if you think you can prove it's a hoax by determining that some aspect of the story doesn't make sense on a technological level, you're right back where you started-- either it's real and you wouldn't likely understand WHY it makes sense anyway, or it's a hoax and it doesn't HAVE to make sense because it isn't real.

In either case, it's irrelevant.

2) For the love of god, the Halo 3 connection has been debunked as thoroughly as one could ask. Matt Asher created ##.### and included the drone image for god knows what reason. He has no relation to Bungie and Bungie has said this themselves. Apparently he pulled the same stunt with the Halo 2 ARG. 27.COM MEANS NOTHING.

More importantly, has anyone ever seen an ARG that has LESS of a relation to the product in question than this? The best evidence people can muster (aside from the unrelated ##.###) are vague geometric similiarities between one tiny graphic from Halo and one tiny graphic from Isaac's stuff. But there's absolutely no real connection whatsoever beyond these silly details. What marketing team is going to spend MONTHS giving us this totally unrelated material, only to tie it all together later on? They're wasting money by the truckload if this really is Halo 3 related and I can't imagine they'll be asked back for Halo 4 (or whatever).

ARGs may be mysterious and elusive, but within a VERY short time it's always clear what they're about and what they're selling. Why? Becuase millions of dollars are spent producing them.

It would be analogous to spending a zillion dollars on a minute-long Super Bowl commercial, then wasting the first 58 seconds of it on something totally unrelated. It just makes no sense.

3) There is just no new info on it. The pattern we've seen so far suggests that there's probably a conviniently-timed "new release" just around the corner, but until then, we're really just going in circles. I think this is as interesting as everyone else, but we've really said everything that can be said so far. If this is the last thing we see from "Isaac", then I would imagine it was all a hoax and this was probably the big finish. If we get more, then we can decide what it means then.

I just think the amazing research talent of this thread would be better spent elsewhere. He's either given us pure art that has no meaning, or something so advanced that we're simply not going to crack a fraction of a percent of it. So let's see what else is going on in UFO land and focus on that. If the Isaac case merits further research, we'll know beacuse something else has come out. Until then this is basically yet another UFO-related curiosity.

Precisely!

11 11, those are similar, yes, but then again, It's just a circle with some lines.

Like those people who say that Christians stole the Cross from a pagan religion. Well, it's two perpendicular lines, it's bound to be repeated.

Those are similar, but that doesn't mean anything at all. Because you know, The Ring's logo is pretty similar too. It's a circle.

Originally posted by srb2001
If the parts of the A1 unit are held together by anti-gravity technolgy, isn't that assertion in itself a contradiction? Anti-gravity would be repulsive, unlike gravity which is attractive.

Anti-gravity would cause parts to separate, not assemble.

?!?!

Unverifiable in the extreme, I do think our Government agencies may have some sort of anti gravity technology. There actually is a proper scientific term for the theoretical manipulation of gravity and that is "gravity modification", (or electrogravitics), from the very small amount of valid research out there, it does seem possible to have either negative or positive fields, (not independently verified,(yet)), one researcher (Eugene Podkletnov), has even reported generating a gravity beam or force beam effect. But the CARET report is so fantastic that it strains credulity past the breaking point.

I 'think' I have a fresh idea!!![/size=5]

Please note the 'cropped' quote below and I will explain my idea further below it.

Originally posted by T0by
This post was taken from ufocasebook.com and was made by 'watching waiting'
Though if i were a clever hoaxer I would be aware that my scans would look a little too good for its time. XPARC would be the perfect company background to explain these scans.

www.ufocasebook.com
'To all of you junior typestyle detectives, I'm tired of you guys assuming the world of computers revolves around PC/Windows and Mac. Desktop publishing was not invented on the Mac or PC.

Ever heard of a little term called WYSIWYG? Any guess where that came from? I'll tell you. WYSIWYG, or What You See Is What You Get, originated at Xerox PARC and was first commercialized in the Xerox Star in 1981 and by 1985 had been improved in the Viewpoint 6085.The new hardware provided 1MB to 4MB of memory, a 10MB to 80MB hard disk, a 15" or 19" display, a 5.25" floppy drive, a mouse, Ethernet connector and a price of a little over $6,000.

Let's not forget laser printing. The laser printer was invented where? Yep, you guessed it, XPARC.

"One of the best examples of the power of the tech sector was Xerox PARC, a research center in Palo Alto, CA. XPARC was responsible for some of the major milestones in the history of computing. While I never had the privilege of working there myself I did know many of the people who did and I can say that they were among the brightest engineers I ever knew."

The CARET project was working on the most advanced technology on the planet, albeit extra-terrestrial in origin. Isaac stated they were using super computers, probably Crays at that time. They had the "brightest engineers". Don't you think they'd have the best word processing/desktop publishing platform of its day which was the Xerox? They probably had something better than the commercially available Viewpoint 6085.

I am wondering about the viral marketing idea again with the possibility that this could be the initial, or even test stages for a new piece of CGI software developed by the seemingly (way) advanced XPARC to be released in the future.

I mean if they show cgi work on there new software and no cgi expert on the planet can conclusively prove that it is cgi then this would be a wonderful piece of software with the capability of making other cgi software obsolete.

From the statement above XPARC look like they could be the prime candidate for a project like this, and maybe even a new programming language (hence the language deciphering??).

It could even be a new computer or programing language that this is building towards.

This whole dilemma is seemingly full of subliminal clues, and maybe we are all making this more complicated than it needs to be.

Ever heard the saying "its staring you right in the face"?

Are we looking too deep when maybe the simple truth is hidden amongst the complexity of this experiment?

New cgi software coming?



[edit on 4-7-2007 by xSMOKING_GUNx]

Dude, the image we're seeing was done on a desktop computer, and lets say for a second it was'nt (!) Its perfectly possible to re-create something even better lookin than this on a desktop PC, look at the other images I posted or just go to cgtalk.com gallerys..there is nothing groundbreaking about this image whether its real or a fake real.

I am wondering about the viral marketing idea again with the possibility that this could be the initial, or even test stages for a new piece of CGI software developed by the seemingly (way) advanced XPARC to be released in the future.

I mean if they show cgi work on there new software and no cgi expert on the planet can conclusively prove that it is cgi then this would be a wonderful piece of software with the capability of making other cgi software obsolete.


New cgi software coming?

[edit on 7-4-2007 by Springer]

Originally posted by wildone106
Dude Get educated

[/quote

Dude (< as you say) just opening my mind keep your hair on!!

Groundbreaking? maybe not.

Proven cgi deffinately not! just looking for reasons why not.

[edit on 4-7-2007 by xSMOKING_GUNx]

Alevar, good points well made.

In relation to 1) no-one on this thread has attempted to explain the diagrams in detail and in terms of how they relate to the technological operation of any device, that is probably beyond the majority of most here (certainly is me) and unfortunately the kind of people who could shed some light tend to dismiss the whole subject (or are under orders).
The Q4 86 report is supposedly written by someone who has some understanding. It was written by a human and if it can be proven mumbo jumbo in terms of the explanations as to how the technology works it goes towards the veracity or otherwise of the document and Isaac's claims.

2) For what it's worth I agree.

3) I don't think this is just yet another UFO related curiosity, it is either possibly the best constructed hoax ever to be perpetuated on the UFO related community or the most important revelation possibly in the history of mankind.
Maybe a reboot is necessary just to think about the implications of even the possibility that some kind of free energy antigravity device exists. Imagine it's worth in $, how much would a Chinese tech engineering company pay for even a non working prototype of something like that. The report and symbols alone if real would be near priceless.
Either way further debate is warranted, even if it doesn't further add to any information then as someone else mentioned it at least shows that there are open minds that can discuss the issues raised.

Personally I believe that the debate is moving forward and that we are gaining insights. If nothing else we, and several other forums, are 10 days and huge amounts of discussion into this and so far no conclusive evidence of a hoax, with a few pointers towards there being some truth in it (I would count the Xerox connections in that bearing in mind the direction some products took from the middle 80's on).

Anyway, the human mind is supposed to be inquisitive, some of us just can't help it.

Thanks for clearing my post up springer.

halo3 drone wing an exact match from that ign site?
Where? I can't see it. The only resemblence is the circular symbol, which is even stretching it a little.
I definately wouldn't use the term exact match.

I love it how my theory has been ignored, this forum must have a great deal of logic-deprived individuals, no offence, I'm sure there are some bright people here, but for the most part, you people will never find the truth, because you're consistently looking in the wrong places for the wrong things, and if the computer animated stills copied and pasted on scenery photos can fool you, and if some fancy art-work in a faked manual can fool you then pretty much anything can.

My theory,

saladfingers123456 (youtube video originator), is the same artist that made the mock up shots, he remains anonymous, no-one knows him, he will not respond to comments because he is also Isaac, and he's also Chad, they are all the same person, all part of the same story, is it a hoax or a publicity stunt? only time will tell. I believe this story possibly may have been created by the same hoaxers of the john titor story.

Please, disprove my theory, I've yet to hear a single comment disproving my theory. All I hear is "butthead he made the video after the photos", etc etc etc, he didn't have enough time in my opinion, to make the videos after the fact, the photos were made using the computer animation, I reproduced some of the photos using extremely low quality stills from the youtube video, with the full size full resolution cgi stills I could reproduce every photo easily and so could anyone else.

Please don't repeat what you've heard, I've already heard it try to use your own brain power to spout off a reply that came from your own head.

My theory,

saladfingers123456 (youtube video originator), is the same artist that made the mock up shots, he remains anonymous, no-one knows him, he will not respond to comments because he is also Isaac, and he's also Chad, they are all the same person, all part of the same story, is it a hoax or a publicity stunt? only time will tell. I believe this story possibly may have been created by the same hoaxers of the john titor story.

The quality of the saladfingers123456 animation was low enough that it was surprising that Linda Howe was talking about it as if it were real, she took a credibility hit from that incident. If anyone thinks that drone in the saladfingers video is equal to the Chad photographs then you are in the minority. Everything about it was amateurish and I doubt that saladfingers was trying to fool anyone, and this is evidenced by his own words. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, so most of us are restricting our explanations to the available data, which is very thin right now. I was in the Transformers camp and was proven wrong, but my reasons for thinking so were based on the limited information available. It seems that this forum has reached a consensus that the Chad probe affair is not real. And we are now focusing on the source of the materials.

Sorry. But I think you should definitely look at the pics I posted around page 23..and further look at cgtalk.com & cgchannel gallerys..you'll see how possible things are

Originally posted by xSMOKING_GUNx

Originally posted by wildone106
Dude Get educated

[/quote

Dude (< as you say) just opening my mind keep your hair on!!

Groundbreaking? maybe not.

Proven cgi deffinately not! just looking for reasons why not.

[edit on 4-7-2007 by xSMOKING_GUNx]