It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 90
<< 87  88  89    91  92  93 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 02:31 PM

Originally posted by Frankenchrist
WOW! those are amazing!!! We have entered a world where you cant tell whats real and whats not. And thats exactly where they want us to be.

There will ALWAYS be doubt.

The only thing that doesnt look real are the lil people in the the heli.But I dont give it long before you will see John Wayne and Tom Cruise starring in a movie together one day.

the "lil people" were left in for that reason so you'll know it's not real.

posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 02:35 PM

Originally posted by 11 11
For clarification, I never said 3DS Max was mickey mouse. I said the render they made was mickey mouse. I use 3DSMax on a daily basis.

oh ok.. thanks for the clear... i posted the first pics just to prove a point... that the C2C is not hard at all to produce,and i find it strange how someone could get pics that clear of it and not video... but in my opinion its fake.

posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 03:02 PM

Originally posted by Springer
spf33, 11 11, and rwiggins:

GREAT WORK on getting the "shadow issue" resolved in a graphical way so everyone can see the reality.

Thank you Springer for giving us a place to resolve these issues.

Originally posted by Springer
Now that we have a graphical representation of IMPOSSIBLE lighting that anyone can look at maybe we can move beyond the CGI/not CGI argument and start really digging into WHY and WHO.

I myself, am no longer interested in the Why and Who. I also think that giving this hoax any more time is a waste of life, and all it does is gives the hoaxer what he wants. I especially no longer care about the Why and Who, because its always the same answer in a way. The why is always "just an experiment", and the who is always a "nobody that matters".

Same crap, different toilet.

posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 03:29 PM
1) Even if your shadow analysis were correct, it might as well be a badly lit model.
2) There's plenty of room for shadows in the part we cant see from the angle, look at pict0015.
3) This is only one set of pictures, there's no link between these and the rest of the sets.
Your smoking gun is running out of bullets really fast

posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 03:45 PM

Originally posted by PsykoOps
1) Even if your shadow analysis were correct, it might as well be a badly lit model.

this is a possibility, however small.

but i feel fairly confident that if my 3d scene and render were taken to photoreal completion (or at least matching the pict0016.jpg), there would still be an unavoidable and recognizable shadow in pic 15 and 16.

posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 04:49 PM
Well, it's come a long way and it may turn out to be a hoax, but at this point I still am not off the fence just yet. One thing I think we need to clear up is that even if the drone was superimposed, it may not be CGI, it may be a physical model that was built. And the shadow 3D was great, but we have had a few 3D shadow simulations and they all turn out different so we really would need to know the exact distance and size of objects. What if the light coming from the sun is being shone through a tree we cannot see and only part of the light is getting through to illuminate part of the drone but not the other part? Without knowing everything that was at the scene, we can't make a 100% conclusion. I think it is getting a lot better, pointing towards a hoax, but there are lots of things that will still need to be proven. For example, we see that the language is similar to Japanese, so is there a way we can translate the letters to English based on what we know? Or find someone who speaks Japanese that might be able to decode much of the writing on the primer and on the drones? And I know one of you said not to mention it but I'm going to. People that have taken videos or photos of UFOs have noticed strange aerial phenomena such as light refraction, etc. so perhaps this craft if using some electrogravitic field might do something to light waves. A part of one of the photos in the report, the arm pad section, looked like it was translucent in the photo of when it was supposed to be activated (with the floating pieces beside it). So if the device can generate that sort of translucent effect, surely something would be similar on the chad or rajman pictures.

We really won't be able to proove or disproove anything until the person comes forward who wrote the report and is genuine, or a person who had perpetrated the hoax. We really need to investigate who and what these people are.

[edit on 7/8/2007 by pjslug]

posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 09:37 PM
I have a friend on the art team and he has'nt mentioned anything about this so Im 99.9% its nothing to do with it

Originally posted by pjslug
Nice links that don't work.

Halo game makers have denied anything to do with a viral campaign for them. We've been through and through that road. Try some new ideas, something that hasn't been debated over and over and over again. Try reading the entire thread like the rest of us have.

No game company would release such an intricate plot to drones that have no relation to their game whatsoever which would in fact hurt their sales, since everyone on here agrees it would piss all of us off to find out it was a hoax perpetrated by them. In turn, that hurts sales, not help them.

You can't join in this thread at the very end without full knowledge of everything that has been said up to this point. I suggest you go back and read it.

posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 01:13 AM
It would be a shame if further investigation does not take place and this "story" just drifts away because to date nothing has been conclusively proven.

Yes, to a few people (including me), it has been shown beyond reasonable doubt that one of the rajman pics is likely fake. Yes that likely means all of the rajman pics are fake.

I know I am pointing out the obvious but unless and until a link can be shown between rajman, Isaac or Chad or any of the other witnesses or picture takers it shouldn't have any weight in any other debate. Isaac explains that he came forward after recognising the "language" on the craft in the Chad and Rajman pictures together with some of the parts of the craft. Even if the Chad pictures can be shown as fake that doesn't alter Isaac's statements.

For all we know there could have been a security investigation ongoing for the last 21 years into how damning material could have been removed from the CARET laboratory and in the end this was the only way of flushing someone out who could have far more sensitive information than that already forwarded.

Highly unlikely but until we do know for sure I would appreciate any further evaluations anyone could add with regard to any other pics and especially the documents Isaac forwarded.

For what it's worth I find the following statement from Isaac strange -

"I am also trying to get in touch with the witnesses so far, such as Chad, Rajman, Jenna, Ty, and the Lake Tahoe witness (especially Chad)".

Wouldn't just "the witnesses" suffice and why name them all, it's like attention is being drawn to their individuality, which makes me look in the opposite direction. Also whay say "so far", does this indicate prior knowledge that additional witnesses will follow ?

Pure conjecture as always and I'm not saying it's a hoax or otherwise.

posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 01:27 AM

Originally posted by whiterabbit29
Really not to sure what to make of this.
I was fairly sure that the explanations of the photos being CGI were a pretty fair guess, but this kinda opens things up again.

Anyway I'll post the link and see what everyone thinks

admin edit: Added "CARET" to title for clarity.

[edit on 6-28-2007 by Springer]

I'd like to respond to the OP's orignal post after reading the letter and viewing the "photo copies/scans"...

I have read numerous goverment documents, field manuals and the like. The documents that he has scanned seem to fit perfectly into the mold of a "government sponsored doc". . .

The pictures also seem to be 35mm quality, printed on paper, and scanned...

The letter however (for a man so "smart") contains gramatical errors (as if im perfect!) that I would not expect for one that is "spilling his guts".

Whoever put this shizzz online knows gov. docs, knows how to doctor images perfectly, and also knows what "crop circles" look like.

Anyone else notice the distinct similarity between the diagrams and "crop circles" (which are pretty much proven a hoax/man-made)....

I don't doubt the government was jealous of the private tech sector, but in all honesty--the feds would NAB anyone bright/smart enough instantly out of grad school to work for them instead of IBM or Microsoft/Xerox if they actually HAD extra terrestrial "artifacts". The goverment has more money than even don't lecture me about pay and benifits...

The gov. has the best/brightest minds because they can afford it. They don't need to steal them away from the private sector.

My .2 -- HOAX!!! (but a fun and really, really GOOD one!)

posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 02:23 AM
Dont even get into the crop circles. There is no way more than 1% of them are hoaxes. There is just no way a team of people in 6 to 8 hours can do some amazingly cryptic ones such as the alien face touching the binary code circle, which was translated by a Mexican Astronomy Dr. guy... They are messages for us to pay attention to, to let us know, the people, that they are here. They say everything will work out ok, but they see much pain will come first. They don't like seeing us kill eachother, and we must not weaponize space (that is the MOST important)!!!!! Asides, the real crop circles all contain traced of microwave radiation or x-ray radiation, they have their expulsion nodes blown out, genetic damage, etc.. These are things that hoakers can't fake. I've seen comparisons of ones that hoaxers have made and it took them 24 hours with 6 people to make a simple design. These aliens do a very complex design in a matter of minutes hovering over the fields with two little balls of light.

[edit on 7/9/2007 by pjslug]

posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 08:15 AM
So who 'owns' the Chad/Isaac images? In terms of copyright? Im thinking if they started to get used for advertising or sold on T-shirts..the real hoaxer would be forced out of the woodwork to claim foul on those making money of his creation..

But then could he..because the images belong to the U.S. government technically..(!) see what I mean..

[edit on 9-7-2007 by wildone106]

posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 10:54 AM
Another update on the Earthfiles website with a witness seeing a stop start drone. This one apparently looked Organic and there is a diagram of it:

It doesn't look like any of the other drones but it would appear that LMH is tying it into the whole drone story. What do you think?

I personally think it may be related simply because of the way the thing moved (If she's telling the truth that is)

posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 02:16 PM
I am not saying it is real or not real. We have the oldest resident in a fair sized city with the sighting.

This very old lady says things like 'I ran though the house' and uses terms like 'C-130'. Does not seem like the language of an older woman from the south.

But, hey, I could be mistaken.

Maybe some 'literary license' in the story.

Edit to add: Maybe this Memphis drone is added to portray them as part machine/part life form. This one has not shed it's shell yet. It's a juvenile.

[edit on 7/9/2007 by roadgravel]

posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 02:33 PM

Originally posted by October
Another update on the Earthfiles website with a witness seeing a stop start drone. This one apparently looked Organic and there is a diagram of it:

It doesn't look like any of the other drones but it would appear that LMH is tying it into the whole drone story. What do you think?

I personally think it may be related simply because of the way the thing moved (If she's telling the truth that is)

I don't know if it's related or not, but thanks for posting this... I live in TN and find it very interesting!!

posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 03:00 PM
pipe pigs are very expensive. the time it would take to 'dress' one up like the antigrav unit would be very time consuming and take great skill.

it would be easier to make an antigrav prop from scratch, or cgi.

many things resemble other, unrelated things. its weak and vague as far as 'proof' goes.

this whole pipe pig thing smacks of ignorance and desperation at best, disinformation at worse...

posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 03:03 PM

Originally posted by chunder
It would be a shame if further investigation does not take place and this "story" just drifts away because to date nothing has been conclusively proven.

But that's typical of UFO study. You pick it apart as much as you can, and when you get to the end of the road, you have to let it drop until you either get more information or your investigation methods improve. It's okay.

If it was really important, it'll pop back up again.

posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 03:10 PM
On the pipe pig angle, I don't think the three spoked 'wheels' are for keeping the thing level inside a pipe, because I've SEEN those self-righting wheels on the Isaac gravity generator somewhere before, but for the life of me can't think.

I've tried every combination I can think of for robot wheels or stabalisers, etc but nothing so far. I don't remember if it was a toy, or an actual product (leaning more this end of the scale) but I think it was on some sort of self-built battle-robot which allowed it to self right (or work whatever way up it got flipped).

I also took another look at the writing on the thing and apart from the To Protect piece, most of the rest is too out of focus or small to read let alone make out in any fashion.

On the 'new sighting', I don't think its related, but I think LMH is grabbing at whatever she can to continue this, since realistically, if people expect her to be the knowledge of all drone related articles, then that's bound to make people sign up to her membership area surely? Easy way to make money, even if she's got to listen out for stories that 'might' be related. I'm not saying she's participating, more, perpetuating, keeping it running since capitalism is the key to being the best UFO expert these days... I doubt its related, and I agree she doesn't 'talk' like I would expect her to, but that could just be she is extremely educated if a little vague on UFOs.

posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 05:23 PM

Edit to add: Maybe this Memphis drone is added to portray them as part machine/part life form. This one has not shed it's shell yet. It's a juvenile.

A little itty baby drone! Mama drone was pregnant you know, and like all other life forms she had to give birth. You remember the movie "*Batteries not included" ??
Oh brudder..... Be careful what you say, people might think you're being serious.

Ok well this sighting certainly doesn't seem to be related except for the fact that it could be something the military has built for surveilance. I would be pretty frightened too if I saw a sperm-like object in the air that stopped when I yelled at it.

posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 07:00 PM
RE: The "Pipe Pigs"

The thought is they were the "inspiration" for the design in a CGI render.


[edit on 7-9-2007 by Springer]

posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 07:26 PM
One of the pipe pigs looks very close, I just can't manage to find a high resolution photo of it. If anyone knows where a high res pic could be found let me know thanks.

As has been said, start selling some of the isaac scans as t-shirts to force the hoaxer to come forward, if anyone wants to buy em, but who really would want to buy one? this hoax hasn't really built up enough interest for merchandise yet, if ever.

As for anything reported on by linda howe, I've been listening to coast to coast am since 1990, longer than most people, and I've heard linda's annoying voice hundreds of times, to the point where I turn down the radio whenever she's on, it's not the pitch so much as it's the bad information she reports on, she's like a tabloid journalist, will report on anything from anyone and assume it's all good information. I just tossed up my page for fun, and I'll try to update it, and I'll be wrong in things but I'll admit it when I am, I treat my page more like a blog, so I'll have typos, inconsistancies, but at least I'll do my own research, and yes saladfingers emailed me on the 6th, proving he is not part of this hoax, but anyone talking with linda could dupe her in a second, this once time she was on the show and even when her theory was proven wrong on some small story of dead animals or something, she stuck by her false story, she's pretty prideful.

It's the pride which will get in the way of the truth with a lot of these type of reporters, I don't care about the pride, but then again I'm just doing it as a hobby, whereas they take it more seriously, they go to UFO conferences give speeches, they have a following of people to look good in front of, I'll just make up a number but I'd say at least 90% of UFOlogists, are beyond the twisted media of fox news or cnn, they'll twist the stories to the point of their financial or fame gain, it's just most ufologists seem very dishonest to me, they or their witnesses claim they saw reptilians, big eyed greys, etc, because they read about it in a book, and they like to corroborate with eachother on this scifi sourced information, the only ETs I've seen were in the movies, and I seriously doubt anyone who claims they've seen one in person, the same goes for this story, but beside that, it's just the lack of actual research that these ufologists have a knack for, they just spout something they've heard without even attempting to back it up, not everything is top-secret, some things are just plain un-true, and so they can't be backed up and shouldn't be perpetuated like this story for example which is so clear to me as being a hoax, the manual does remind me a lot of a video-game manual, the fact that it was ever taken seriously by anyone is what astounds me far more than any of the photos.

--- Razimus

top topics

<< 87  88  89    91  92  93 >>

log in