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: 84
185
<< 81  82  83    85  86  87 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by alevar
Oh, and as long as people are following this utterly embarrassing line of logic that "because the hoaxer used the word primer, and because THIS guy uses the word primer, they MUST be the same person! IT'S SCIENTIFIC!!!", I'd like to mention this:

Many people have compared the language diagram to the Vegan transmission in the movie Contact. I happened to re-watch that movie the other night (probably because of all this, in fact), and guess what? The solution they find to unlock the contents of the crazy alien language is called THE PRIMER.

As long as we're going to make such a sadly tenuous connection, wouldn't it at least make more sense to go with this one?


You don't have to be so derogatory. I am not following any 'line of logic', merely pointing out something that I found to be interesting. I'm fully aware (as I stated in my original post) that the word 'primer' is not exactly a rarity, and that it often gets used in variety of contexts. In fact, whoever this Keith Edwards is has used the word 'primer' in a perfectly logical context (inasmuch as he refers to a basic introductory book as a 'primer', which is indeed one definition of the word.

Seeing as every single one of us is still clutching at straws, I just thought I'd put a few more straws in the mix to clutch with. Besides, the analysis of use and construction of language is a very legitimate and well-used form of investigation. Whilst this doesn't constitute an 'investigation', it's still something that I feel is far from an "embarassing line of logic". Tenuous? Yes. But then show me something in this thread that hasn't been tenuous.




posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 02:22 PM
link   
You're right, I didn't mean to come across so snarky.

My tone was mostly a reaction to 11 11 making comments like "Finally, this hoax is over" and "This IS our hoaxer" and other silliness. I inadvertantly lumped the primer thing in with that.

I still think it's a very tenuous connection, and I think anyone in academia would agree that it's not nearly uncommon enough as a word to be used as "evidence", but you're right, we need as many straws as we can get and there's nothing wrong with pointing it out. I was just dismayed by how much it seemed like certain people were running with it.

But the idea itself is just as valid as anything else.



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by wildone106
It would'nt take more than few hours to model, texture and render the isaac object/drones. Its just simple geometry and default rendering.


Originally posted by -0mega-

This would remove the question of "Why go through all this trouble to model these craft?" as they have been created for [insert random thing] here, got thrown into the trashcan, but instead of removing any trace of them, got used in an other purpose. Which is this potential hoax.
[edit on 6/7/07 by -0mega-] UPDATED teh post.

[edit on 6/7/07 by -0mega-]


If it only takes a few hours to do, do it. Surely you've spent a lot more time than that on this thread already.

And to 11 11,
I think its time you go on ignore. Oh this is the guy, Keith! Oh, but it was the Isaac from that CGI website that works in video games. No, it was this. It was that. The drones are over here, they are over there. They are not real... Yadda yadda yadda yadda yadda your ramblings have gotten to the point of being so ludicrous and accusatory of others, you'll grab on to anything you can to make yourself think you are right and make it out like the rest of us are morons. For god sakes, grow up.

[edit on 7/6/2007 by pjslug]



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by alevar
You're right, I didn't mean to come across so snarky.

My tone was mostly a reaction to 11 11 making comments like "Finally, this hoax is over" and "This IS our hoaxer" and other silliness. I inadvertantly lumped the primer thing in with that.

I still think it's a very tenuous connection, and I think anyone in academia would agree that it's not nearly uncommon enough as a word to be used as "evidence", but you're right, we need as many straws as we can get and there's nothing wrong with pointing it out. I was just dismayed by how much it seemed like certain people were running with it.

But the idea itself is just as valid as anything else.


It's fine, I know this thread can be frustrating at times! I also agree that there are far too many people on here with an "I'm right, you're wrong, you're an idiot" sort of an attitude. It's just, with so little conclusive evidence for this whole thing, to me nothing is beyond suggestion.

I do agree it's very tenuous. I made the comment in passing more than anything, but I wholeheartedly am with you that it's at best a shred of conjecture.



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Outrageo that was a great post. I see this as only two things going this far into it.

A) A hoax, but it's not a "general public" hoax. It's meant for us, the ATS and C2C UFO crowd. No viral campaign for video games, TV or movies. I'd go with a young guy fresh out of CGI college trying to build his resume.

B) Real. However, knowing what I know now and after reading all the threads, the new Isaac stuff etc, I would lean towards choice A.

Where Isaac's story falls apart, IMHO, is the fact that he was able to smuggle documents and pictures. I've said it before, and I'll say it again here. There is no way the Gov/Aliens are going to let "proof" out into the general public in that manner. I think he went a little "too" far in the story when he described the papers not making ruffling noises, etc when he smuggled them out under his shirt. If, and I repeat the big "IF", there were ways to get pics, docs, etc out from Alien technology projects, we would be seeing them every week now that all the guys involved in most of the early projects are getting on in age, just like the recent confession thread about Roswell.

I'll stick to my guns and say that it's the Aliens that will be the ONLY ones doing any disclosure. It may be announced by a world government, but truth will be told after that it was as the request or approval of our little green friends ;-)



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 02:48 PM
link   
I just found it interesting that this man on the PARC website stated that the Palo Lato Research facility had in their possession alien technology (Roswell related or not, i think not) and i certainly think it's worth investigating further.

As a previous poster stated this Keith Edwards is certainly not shy, what with his research and projects etc, there are so many links to his pages that it warrants further investigation but it DOESN'T mean people hounding him for information. Some people are suggesting that he put it in there as a joke but i'm personally not seeing that, WHY would he put that in there?.

He is obviously a very intelligent man and my main reason it warrants further investigation is to simply understand why he put that claim in there in the first place. Who knows?, all i do know is that he has a lot of information on things i don't understand research wise and i can't help wondering if this is the person that either is responsible for this whole thing or a cog in the mechanism that created an elaborate hoax, i guess only time will tell. Like part of my little quote below say's "IT'S IMPORTANT"



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by October
I just found it interesting that this man on the PARC website stated that the Palo Lato Research facility had in their possession alien technology (Roswell related or not, i think not) and i certainly think it's worth investigating further.

WHY would he put that in there?.



My opinion (seeing as how I've never met the man I can only have an opinion) is that with all the lore about our government contracted labs reverse engineering alien tech (CARET being only the newest addition thereto), he was poking fun.

His writing style is very "non-stuffy", and he seems to be quite a witty fellow, as I read the words I giggled and took it as a "nod to the lore".

Again, as I have no way of knowing for sure this merely my take on it.


Springer...



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Springer,

I'm not so sure about that. I came across his page a week ago while doing some searches and didn't think anything of it. I had always believed this was real from the start and his notations in the webpage only confirm that in my opinion. I don't see it being such a secret anymore. I think the world knows what is going on, and I think the security at these technology companies might just be less cautious. I do not think security at an airforce base would be easy to get through. With all the talk of free energy (now with the Steorn claim) and more and more gravity modification devices showing up every day on YouTube, I think people have a lot more freedom to say what they want now than perhaps in the past. And I think this Keith guy is doing just that, and I don't think he is a hoaxer. If this is the type of technology work that PARC does, it would make sense why knowledge of graphics and linguistics would be required. This only reinforces my belief of it being real.



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 03:21 PM
link   
I'm not sure if anyone has come across this, but I found an interesting paper written by Mr. Keith Edwards.
www.cc.gatech.edu...



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Outrageo
Oh yeah, for those who haven't seen it - Here's another ADMITTED CGI saladfingers drone to ponder:



I am so impressed by "saldfingers'" work I thought a link to the full image was worthwhile;


i9.tinypic.com...

The guy is really getting his chops down. I can't help but feel for him when he puts these images out there and people (typically the "True Believers") immediately proclaim they would instantly know they were CGI if they were presented as "real images", I call BRAVO SIERRA on that!


Most of these folks would be oohing and awing all over this image had they been presented by some "person" who fears for their job, family, whatever and won't reveal their name or contact info, who was out having a stroll in the middle of nowhere and snapped this image with his camera.

Fortunately "saladfingers" is an honest guy who hasn't added to the confusion intentionally. It is pretty damn ironic that certain people DID take his earlier work as real though.


FWIW, the "full" image makes a great wallpaper for your desktop.


Springer...



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by firemndon
I'm not sure if anyone has come across this, but I found an interesting paper written by Mr. Keith Edwards.
www.cc.gatech.edu...


As a point of courtesy, and accuracy, it would be Dr. Keith Edwards.


Anyone who has studied and succeeded to the Doctorate level at a school like Georgia Tech has earned it too.

No biggie though.

Springer...

[edit on 7-6-2007 by Springer]



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 03:46 PM
link   
One intriguing new aspect of this latest saladfingers creation is the conspicuous reliance on anti-gravity/electrogravitics. Look closely at the lower ring of the new 'mothership'. It is completely suspended in mid-air around the central column. This is the first rendition with a circular, integral part not attached to any other part of the craft. kinda cool IMO... Clever CGI artistic license, no?



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 03:52 PM
link   

I had always believed this was real from the start and his notations in the web page only confirm that in my opinion.,.... If this is the type of technology work that PARC does, it would make sense why knowledge of graphics and linguistics would be required. This only reinforces my belief of it being real.


I am leaning toward not real, but I would like your theory to be true. If this is true, we may never know, because we would have to have the craft or a piece of it to be certain, the agencies involved would take harsh measures if necessary to prevent it. I don't think our Government will release any top secret anti gravity technology willingly, if another country were to release something similar that would probably force them to disclose.

On the other hand if it is a hoax, then time is on our side, eventually the person(s) responsible will be identified. Someone said that the law may have been violated, anyone know any specifics?



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer

Originally posted by firemndon
I'm not sure if anyone has come across this, but I found an interesting paper written by Mr. Keith Edwards.
www.cc.gatech.edu...


As a point of courtesy, and accuracy, it would be Dr. Keith Edwards.


Anyone who has studied and succeeded to the Doctorate level at a school like Georgia Tech has earned it too.

No biggie though.

Springer...

[edit on 7-6-2007 by Springer]




My apologies to Dr Edwards



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by RING0
On the other hand if it is a hoax, then time is on our side, eventually the person(s) responsible will be identified. Someone said that the law may have been violated, anyone know any specifics?


Assuming this is a hoax there is no law broken (you may be thinking about Ghost Raven, the other HOAXER who impersonated a Federal Agent or somesuch) IF it's real then several laws have been broken and jail time is a certainty unless you believe the possibility that this is "sanctioned disclosure".

Springer...



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 03:59 PM
link   
I actually prefer SaladFingers drones to the "originals". The guy is very good and we should all count our blessings that he hasn't decided to gain the dubious satisfaction of hoaxing.

The thing I have been thinking is: If Dr. Edwards (a fine surname, ahem) is Isaac, does it necessarily mean that everything he said is false?

He may not have hidden his identity very well (unless it ISN'T him and Isaac purposefully left clues to link his page to Dr. Edwards!
), but what if (I know, what-if's are a bummer, but....)...

....Dr. Edwards, as a student working at PARC, did figure out the real use of certain things he'd been asked to work on.

....decided he HAD to let people know (which would fit with his presence on the PARC fora). How else would he have gone about it? A student might actually be harder to silence than somebody more senior with more to lose.

Just a thought what I thunked.

[edit on 6-7-2007 by Karilla]



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 04:01 PM
link   
To all that commented to me:

I am light years ahead of all of you. I have proven this to be a hoax long ago, and now I am just waiting for the person who did it to be discovered. While you guys are still 'iffy', and hung up on stupid mini details, and undecided, I have already proven this entire thing is CGI and a hoax, and have moved on.

So, if my comments don't fit your latest research, and my advanced knowledge of CGI doesn't match your visual guesses, then I suggest just putting me on ignore because I really really really really really really could care less...

I have moved on, and its funny watching you people hang on to the last thread. Seriously, if this entire drone thing was taken to a real U.S. court, this thing would have been decided by the jury ages ago that its a hoax, because of the layers and layers of evidence that disprove EVERYTHING.

I still can't even believe this entire thing went past the "EXIF" data part. Since when does anyone believe a picture is real when the EXIF shows the image is not raw, and changed? Its a joke, Ive seen way better CGI get called a hoax simply because of the EXIF data impurities. But this one kept going... geee, what has this UFO community come too?

[edit on 6-7-2007 by 11 11]



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 04:02 PM
link   
A law MAY have been broken if it's illegal to make Linda Moulton Howe look silly, but if that's true, I think most of us would be on death row by now.



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by alevar
A law MAY have been broken if it's illegal to make Linda Moulton Howe look silly, but if that's true, I think most of us would be on death row by now.


He was impersonating a law inforcement officer. Thats a felony. TY Come again.



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 04:05 PM
link   

I am leaning toward not real, but I would like your theory to be true. If this is true, we may never know, because we would have to have the craft or a piece of it to be certain, the agencies involved would take harsh measures if necessary to prevent it. I don't think our Government will release any top secret anti gravity technology willingly, if another country were to release something similar that would probably force them to disclose.

On the other hand if it is a hoax, then time is on our side, eventually the person(s) responsible will be identified. Someone said that the law may have been violated, anyone know any specifics?


Didn't you see the sci-fi channel program, which is now on youtube, about the guy who sold a piece of the roswell craft to a collector who sent it on for rigorous testing by 3 independent labs? Jesse Marcel Jr. even confirmed it was the material he saw originaly. They were filming the documented reports and about to air it when it was suddenly pulled from the air. Subsequently, there were people that were killed over it. So you're right, the government would not let anyone get ahold of the technology but with the recent events of the drone (if real) I have to believe that some sort of disclosure to the public is happening. I don't think it would be more than a few years at most, especially if Steorn releases their free energy device, that all this knowledge is confirmed to the public. George Bush Sr. when head of the CIA was recorded on the phone saying "If the people knew what we have done, they would drag us into the streets and hang us."



new topics

top topics



 
185
<< 81  82  83    85  86  87 >>

log in

join