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: 79
185
<< 76  77  78    80  81  82 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 12:19 PM
link   
It is my current belief that instead of this being a viral marketing campaign, it is more like an 'anti-campaign' designed to keep us stressed out and confused. Instead of looking at this from the perspective that this is a hoaxer or group of hoaxers trying to get attention, if one looks at this as a campaign to take our attention away from other things going on it makes a ton more sense to me. If the gubmint really is trying to track terrorists and the like, I am sure they would come across Viral Marketing websites amongst all the Taliban chat rooms. What better way to distract the majority of truth seekers than to create a campaign that runs concurrent with two mass media marketing campaigns. The reason that people thought/think that the drones/Caret images and information might be related are because both marketing campaigns do indeed have ongoing viral marketing campaigns/alternative reality game.

Here is a link to one of the Transformer hoax documents:
www.sectorseven.org...

Looks real and old to many of you out there I bet....

Here is a link to a Halo3 arg website:
www.societyoftheancients.com...

Looks similar to many of the websites associated with ufology.

So if you are aware of these two campaigns going on, and create your own campaign to confuse the issue, even creating multiple forged documents, computer graphics, you could really throw a wrench in the gears of a place like ATS... and smear places like Earthfiles/C2C along the way, unless of course they are complicit in the charade, maybe to drum up support for the Roswell 60th as someone pointed out earlier....

I don't know... neither do you... Lets stop bickering over who has the best ideas, and start investigating. That is unless you all like walking in circles....

DocMoreau




posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 12:22 PM
link   
keeb, that is a thought I had as well. But wouldn't much of the early info be lost in compression? LMH said herself that she has been cropping/resizing at will. Only original full rez images? I would like to learn more about the tech anyway...
DocMoreau



posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 12:27 PM
link   
I did a steganographic (hidden message) analysis on these following images:



The hidden message that was descovered is:

"I am a 3D modeler that uses layering to fake depth perseption, because I am not good with rendering camera depth of field. That is why all the 'drones' happen to have an object touching them."

And those 3 pictures above are from 3 different people. Also, there are more pitures of the 'drone' that so happen to be touching another object in the picture in some way, with layering, to fake depth perception. Like this one:

img.photobucket.com...



posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11 11
I did a steganographic (hidden message) analysis on these following images:


Are you serious? How did you go about doing that? Also, do you have screenshots of the hidden message?

It sounds like you just want this thread to be over with.



posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 12:45 PM
link   
www.citi.umich.edu...

There you go, do the research yourself, because I have givin up on trying to help sheep.

[edit on 5-7-2007 by 11 11]



posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by blowfishdl

It sounds like you just want this thread to be over with.


Yeah, that's the feeling I'm getting...while I can accept that the images may be CGI, I am still interested in who's behind it all and why...I am just wondereing if the hoaxer may have left clues to be discovered.



posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11 11
I did a steganographic (hidden message) analysis on these following images:
The hidden message that was descovered is:

"I am a 3D modeler that uses layering to fake depth perseption, because I am not good with rendering camera depth of field. That is why all the 'drones' happen to have an object touching them."



Hmmm, so you used StegBreak, did you? This would mean that the key was susceptible to a dictionary attack. So, what was the password Isaac used, so we can all have a look? Which of the 3 ancient embedding apps which the article you linked to finds was used?

You did know that posting that when you know that it is false is a breach of this site's T&C's, and could get you a permanent ban, didn't you?

And why did Isaac spell perception incorrectly in the hidden message, when his article contains none? Whereas you mis-spelled discovered in the first couple of lines of this post. Based on this analysis it would seem to be more likely that YOU wrote the "hidden message" and not Isaac.

[edit on 5-7-2007 by Karilla]



posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 01:26 PM
link   
I used StegSpy 2.1 to analyze the Rajman1977 hi-res photos and found nothing. Likewise with the scans of the Isaac drawings and photos.

Does anyone know of a better program for this? Otherwise, I guess it's a dead-end



posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Karilla

Originally posted by 11 11
I did a steganographic (hidden message) analysis on these following images:
The hidden message that was descovered is:

"I am a 3D modeler that uses layering to fake depth perseption, because I am not good with rendering camera depth of field. That is why all the 'drones' happen to have an object touching them."



Hmmm, so you used StegBreak, did you? This would mean that the key was susceptible to a dictionary attack. So, what was the password Isaac used, so we can all have a look? Which of the 3 ancient embedding apps which the article you linked to finds was used?

You did know that posting that when you know that it is false is a breach of this site's T&C's, and could get you a permanent ban, didn't you?

And why did Isaac spell perception incorrectly in the hidden message, when his article contains none? Whereas you mis-spelled discovered in the first couple of lines of this post. Based on this analysis it would seem to be more likely that YOU wrote the "hidden message" and not Isaac.

[edit on 5-7-2007 by Karilla]


I think it's pretty obvious he's joking, so I don't think T&C's apply here.

Either way I laughed at the focal comment. Maybe this is all just Billy Meier's latest version of the "UFO in a tree" technique?



posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Karilla


You did know that posting that when you know that it is false is a breach of this site's T&C's, and could get you a permanent ban, didn't you?

And why did Isaac spell perception incorrectly in the hidden message, when his article contains none? Whereas you mis-spelled discovered in the first couple of lines of this post. Based on this analysis it would seem to be more likely that YOU wrote the "hidden message" and not Isaac.

[edit on 5-7-2007 by Karilla]



Joke
1. something said or done to provoke laughter or cause amusement, as a witticism, a short and amusing anecdote, or a prankish act: He tells very funny jokes. She played a joke on him.
2. something that is amusing or ridiculous, esp. because of being ludicrously inadequate or a sham; a thing, situation, or person laughed at rather than taken seriously; farce: Their pretense of generosity is a joke. An officer with no ability to command is a joke.
3. a matter that need not be taken very seriously; trifling matter: The loss was no joke.
4. something that does not present the expected challenge; something very easy: The test was a joke for the whole class.
5. practical joke.
–verb (used without object) 6. to speak or act in a playful or merry way: He was always joking with us.
7. to say something in fun or teasing rather than in earnest; be facetious: He didn't really mean it, he was only joking.
–verb (used with object) 8. to subject to jokes; make fun of; tease.
9. to obtain by joking: The comedian joked coins from the audience.




Anyhow, 11 11's observation about the drone's proclivity for "touching" things is interesting.

[edit on 5-7-2007 by The Little Penguin]



posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 02:22 PM
link   
A number of UFO sites suggest taking photos with nearby objects, tree limbs etc. in the shot and reasonably close to the UFO, if possible.

I think it's likely that was the goal, if it's not a hoax.

But . . . I understand . . . declaring it a hoax emphatically is much more in vogue, regardless.

Still seems a bit sad for a compulsion, to me.



posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 02:30 PM
link   
It was a joke to uncover another example of CGI. I see some very cleaver people on this forum.
Pengiun, alevar



[edit on 5-7-2007 by 11 11]



posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11 11
I see some very cleaver people on this forum.

[edit on 5-7-2007 by 11 11]


Hey that's pretty sharp!



edit: sorry, couldn't help myself, it was too easy!

[edit on 5-7-2007 by keeb333]



posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by keeb333

Originally posted by 11 11
I see some very cleaver people on this forum.

[edit on 5-7-2007 by 11 11]


Hey that's pretty sharp!



edit: sorry, couldn't help myself, it was too easy!



Large knives are sharp.



posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 03:16 PM
link   
I've been looking at the documents trying to possibly understand what PACL was trying to indicate by them. I get the impression it is describing something along the lines of the digital to analog workings. The symbols relationship to the control features of the hardware.

I am puzzled by the brownish annotations. Example from P122.

"Tri Switch (Heavy State)"

"Dual link union"

"Resembles tail section on the drone" - What a coincidence that they too refer to it as a drone. What happened to the term "crafts".

If it was added by Isaac to clarify, why didn't he go into more detail about the switch or union or anything else shown? He stated they really didn't understand much of the big picture of the engineering but they are labeling it is a switch and a union, which to me implies a known mechanism?



posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by roadgravel
I've been looking at the documents trying to possibly understand what PACL was trying to indicate by them. I get the impression it is describing something along the lines of the digital to analog workings. The symbols relationship to the control features of the hardware.

I am puzzled by the brownish annotations. Example from P122.

"Tri Switch (Heavy State)"

"Dual link union"

"Resembles tail section on the drone" - What a coincidence that they too refer to it as a drone. What happened to the term "crafts".

If it was added by Isaac to clarify, why didn't he go into more detail about the switch or union or anything else shown? He stated they really didn't understand much of the big picture of the engineering but they are labeling it is a switch and a union, which to me implies a known mechanism?




Honestly, those "annotations" are by FAR the most hoax-reeking detail of the entire production. They smack so badly of someone haphazardly stitching together random "scientific-sounding" terms that it's unbearable.

I think the guy might know (or think he knows) a thing or two about basic electronics, or engineering, or something. It just sounds to me like he's cobbling together a couple of keywords he's heard before, in a context that makes them vaguely plausible.

It sounds MARGINALLY better than the techy dialogue you usually get in Hollywood sci-fi, but that's about the highest compliment I can pay it.



posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by chunder

Originally posted by Razimus



Not a bad try, but really only a passing resemblance. If you can show the schematic that was supposedly used and then step by step how the picture could be constructed until you have an exact replica you would have proven that it is possible to recreate through CGI techniques.

Unfortunately even then though it won't prove the original picture was created that way.


haha not a bad try? you crack me up, it's an exact match, no I don't need to get the exact model but if that's what you want to do go ahead, the caret drone is a pipeline pig, for those that didn't see my comparison go to space time news.



posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11 11That is why all the 'drones' happen to have an object touching them."


You do realize that there are several pictures where the object is not touching anything at all?






Do you like apples?



posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by ExquisitExamplE

Originally posted by 11 11That is why all the 'drones' happen to have an object touching them."


You do realize that there are several pictures where the object is not touching anything at all?






Do you like apples?


uhm, do you realise that the less it touches the easier it is to copy and paste? does anyone here know that a 1000 wide pixel 3d cgi animation pasted onto a 5000 pixel wide scenery shot and resized down to 800 pixels wide will pretty much always result in a "flawless" pixelization,



anyway... about the object being a pipeline pig, Sava said the following...

"Hah!!! I took a look at the pictures of the "drone".

I am almost positive I know what that thing is - we use it in my industry. It is a pipline inspection tool, a so called "intelligent pig" we shoot those things down pipelines (oil, gas, water, etc). They test for coorsion, cracks or other pipe structural defects."

The caret-drone *IS* the obscure tool known as a pipeline-pig, just because you don't recognize it, doesn't mean it isn't the same... I'll try to illustrate what I mean in response to the post that it's not exact..




posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Razimus
...it's an exact match, no I don't need to get the exact model but if that's what you want to do go ahead...


What you posted is very interesting and I for one would REALLY like to see the exact model if you can find it!



edit: I'm looking right now...


[edit on 5-7-2007 by The Little Penguin]



new topics

top topics



 
185
<< 76  77  78    80  81  82 >>

log in

join