[HOAX] Isaac CARET - Drones [HOAX]

Originally posted by Sys_Config
Thank you 11 11, I'm really ready to let the string to my little red baloon loose too. It was fun. As for psy not buying , i was never selling and neither was mufon , but caret is. I don't think Caret has a refund/return policy. As for psi,audio credibility alone, convincing speakers or wow witness, is not the quality evidence i would bet the farm on. ..

And hey, if we are ever proven wrong, great..power to them, i'll be the first to say..good going..a job well done.


intelligence may have its limits, but stupidity has none.


SyS
^i^

[edit on 11-7-2007 by Sys_Config]

I have to ask why you are thanking 11 11 ?

And then I'm going to ask what's with the last line, is this another veiled hint that someone who doesn't agree with your point of view is stupid ?

If it isn't fine, my mistake, if it is what's wrong with you and the others like you ? Why can't you just make your point and express your opinion without having to insult others ?


[edit on 11-7-2007 by chunder]

Originally posted by Sys_Config
you can fool all of the people some of the time, some of the people all the time, but never all the people all of the time..(pt barnum?)

You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.
Abraham Lincoln, (attributed)
16th president of US (1809 - 1865)

This is interesting

Questions still haven't been answered, however: Are the CARET documents and the drone photos and videos related. This is, after all the original question posted in page one. Does CARET exsist, or has it ever in the past? Is it likely, or even possible, that the imagination of the person who created the drone just happened to coincide enough for Isaac to bring us what could be one of the greatest information dumps of all time? And enough of us have copies of the CARET documents that there may be no chance of a coverup?

Just some food for thought.

Frank, if the mods want to warn you over a one liner, remind them that a picture is worth a thousand words. Ask any old Chinese.

Seriously, that is interesting. I would need to go back and take some looks at other pictures, but very much worth comparing.

Frank,

The little images on the cup looks like the code for smilies in instant messaging.

I doubt you'll find anything to match up with the "language" on a Pepsi can.

I dont know if this has been posted but LMH has just updated her website with an article titled:"Professional Computer Engineers Comment
About "Isaac" and CARET Document"



[edit on 11-7-2007 by Bunch]

Ok, this is what I think might be going on. I started a thread that pretty much got slept on. the inevitable

I think all this alien text, drones, "aliens" on tv selling every product around, is all to desensitize us when diclosure happens. So its not all that scary.

The pepsi cup "glyphs" looks similar, and is in a strange circle patern, just like in the Isaac documents. So it looks "familiar".




[edit on 11-7-2007 by Frankenchrist]

The Pepsi cup glyphs are merely a series of "emoticons", smiley faces and the like that can be created using any AASCII character keyboard. :-)

They have no correlation with the drone text - but they are fun and interesting.

For a little more interest, click on this link for the "Bad Robot" producer's trailer ARG, shown in front of the Transformer's movie. There are two stars in the sky. Pass your cursor over the star on the right...

Fun stuff - pass cursor over right star in sky. The weird alien text will materialize on the screen. Cool, huh?

Oh yeah the 5 puzzles on this page are fun too...

[edit-fix link]



[edit on 7/11/2007 by Outrageo]

I see now that on Earthfiles, the story of the sighting which included an interview with the oldest lady in Memphis is now rewritten.

from Earthfiles
...in central Memphis is where Kathleen Deaton,
44, lives and saw a "sperm-shaped" aerial object in June 2005...

That makes me wonder about the quality of the material.

Originally posted by roadgravel
I see now that on Earthfiles, the story of the sighting which included an interview with the oldest lady in Memphis is now rewritten.

from Earthfiles
...in central Memphis is where Kathleen Deaton,
44, lives and saw a "sperm-shaped" aerial object in June 2005...

That makes me wonder about the quality of the material.

What did it originally say? I personally never take anything lmh says seriously...

The bulk of the story and interview is roughly the same. It previously started with the person being the oldest resident in Memphis. I don't have a copy of the page so I can't list any other revisions, if any. I just wondered why that part was changed. Seems important as it was the witness.

Dear Chunder In answer to your query:
My posts stand by themselves..I may disagree or disagree..I don't look for statements that go one way or another. If tomorrow I find something that contradicts my previous post, I will post it, blurb what I understand. because thats the right thing to do and only way you get to the truth.

I am happy someone found value enough to agree, others did not. My daddy taught me good manners and thats why (no conspiracy or plot)I thanked 11-11 . I have no axe to grind as you stated to him about prior posts. And I am not going to let you walk me down that path. I am not obsessed with proving this a true event, at face value or a hoax. That would be exceeding the limits of my intelligence, because even absent 100 percent of all the facts, I have seen enough circumstantial, and damned good Compelling circumstantial evidence that in the least an intelligent guess can be made. Convictions in criminal cases require beyond reasonable doubt not every doubt, civil courts require only 51/49. By civil standards i think a substantial case has been made or is close to that thresh hold.. Sometimes thats all you have to work with. Having worked in the criminal court system, in psychiatric centers.I have met good scammers,with great documents for their schemes, and very deluded sick and brilliant people but still sick. patterns develop eventually and you connect the dots. I have never said Hey gang, stop . Thats a personal choice. I am not going beyond what I know, beyond the reasonable doubt and keep going when instead I should pause and reflect. to do so :Thats being stupid..thus my quote..which comes from the line of thinking that a man who knows his limits can move mountains. When you don't its no different than someone putting change in a slot machine and leaves the casino with empty pockets. Hopefully, hoax or not we all will leave here better, and more informed persons with their dreams intact.

I don't see how you took my statement to personally . I hope not. because I don't know you and you don't know me. Life is a big sandbox and on occasion sand gets on the icecream. As I thought after it might offend, I removed and put something that says the same thing. Unfortunately, It looks like you caught the garter lucky you.



Have a Blessed Day
SyS
^i^

Sysconfig,
Thanks for taking the time to respond. Once you had changed the last statement in your post I tried to remove my post, but for some reason I cannot edit it. The quote you replaced the original with may mean the same in effect to you, but it is a well known quote and in the context of this thread can be taken either way and is not offensive. The first quote appeared to have been a statement to the effect that someone who disagreed with your point of view was stupid. I disagree with your point of view and so I was personally offended, the fact you realised it may offend and removed it is commendable and it would be good if others followed the same lead.
In my opinion, whilst certain pictures may have been proven beyond reasonable doubt to be constructed, the remaining pictures and the CARET documents themselves have not. Others have a right to a differing opinion which should be respected and I hope to continue to read yours.

To everyone else who reads our exchange apologies if you believe it is off topic or otherwise irrelevant.

I don't know about you guys but I feel that if I was to capture something like this, I wouldn't even compress it to jpeg or the such. Maybe it's because I don't use Adobe Album...but regardless it would seem logical to release such photos to the public at the least compressed format possible.

Originally posted by chunder
... and it would be just as stupid to call it a hoax without any solid evidence.

I already gave solid evidence of false lighting. I am the one that pointed it out, and proved it with mathematical equations. If it wasn't for me finding the flaws in SPF33's example, he wouldn't have fixed it and came back proving my mathematical calculations correct. Even after ALL of my PROOF of a hoax, there are STILL people to blind to see the truth, including you. Its funny.... I have proof after proof after proof, of CGI, and the only ones denying it are the ones not smart enough to see the proof.

Originally posted by chunder
Personally I find nearly all of your posts insulting, not because I don't think it's a hoax, just because of the language you use and the fact you try and foist your opinions on others by calling anyone who disagrees with your tenuous opinions stupid. Take a look in the mirror pal.

I am not "foisting" opinions. I am spreading FACT. FACT's that most people here are not old enough, wise enough, or have the experience enough to calculate and understand. Some day you will though...maybe..

Originally posted by chunder
As to any actual content of your post, which isn't very much at all as usual, you are now claiming some of the drone images are too clear. Would you care to elaborate on that ?

Chunder I thought you read this entire thread, but I guess not. A few 100 posts ago along with all my other factual posts, I pointed out the fake depth perception and false depth of field in most pictures. Some pictures have totally in focus mountains that I calculated to be a couple miles away, while a drone is closer and in focus also... You can't have both things that are miles apart in the same exact clarity and focus. Its not possible, neither are most of the drone pictures. They are physically impossible, because of the way our cameras are designed with lenses. Its to bad you lack the knowledge to know such things...

Originally posted by chunder
Now please bear in mind that I don't really want you to but last time I took your bait it did result in someone else actually providing some real evidence.

If it wasn't for me, SPF33 wouldn't have made that render I was to lazy to make. Which proved all my calculations correct. So, why don't you go tell off someone that didn't debunk this entire thing.... Which isn't me, because I did debunk this entire thing....

I debunked it so long ago.... it took a full week for people to comprehend the facts I was pointing out, and I calculated that it will be another few weeks before the rest of my facts get verified.


This entire thing is so funny now... people believe in the drone LOL. Its about equivalent to how funny it is when you see a little kid talk about Santa Clause.

--if you feel insulted by this post, it must be true--

[edit on 12-7-2007 by 11 11]

Originally posted by Vinci
I don't know about you guys but I feel that if I was to capture something like this, I wouldn't even compress it to jpeg or the such. Maybe it's because I don't use Adobe Album...but regardless it would seem logical to release such photos to the public at the least compressed format possible.

You are right, when I found the EXIF data was edited, I was shocked anyone actually thought the drone was real. Mostly all conspiracy sites, including this one, used to be real strict about a pictures EXIF data. If the picture wasn't straight from the camera, it wasn't real. Simple as that.

Even though EXIF data is editable, at least edit it back to normal, this drone creator didn't even bother to do that.

Surprisingly so too, I mean, they did the whole CGI bit

Maybe they should reinstate that strict EXIF policy for "OMGZ UFO PHOTO"'s?

Originally posted by 11 11

I already gave solid evidence of false lighting. I am the one that pointed it out, and proved it with mathematical equations. If it wasn't for me finding the flaws in SPF33's example, he wouldn't have fixed it and came back proving my mathematical calculations correct. Even after ALL of my PROOF of a hoax, there are STILL people to blind to see the truth, including you. Its funny.... I have proof after proof after proof, of CGI, and the only ones denying it are the ones not smart enough to see the proof.

This entire thing is so funny now... people believe in the drone LOL. Its about equivalent to how funny it is when you see a little kid talk about Santa Clause.

--if you feel insulted by this post, it must be true--

[edit on 12-7-2007 by 11 11]

The point is that you often come off as being very narcissistic, it is good that you have determined for yourself that these are fake, but you must present yourself with a humble and compassionate demeanor to be truly "enlightened".

This story reminds us of the one Jesus told about people who were kind and helpful to others. He said that one day the king would say to his people: "Come. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you. For when I was hungry you gave me food, When I was sick and you visited me. I was in prison and you came to me."

But the people asked, Lord, when did we see you hungry, and feed you? Or sick or in prison and come to you? and the King answered: "In as much as you have done it unto one of the least of these, my brethren, you have done it unto me"

--if you feel insulted by this post, it must be true--

[edit on 12-7-2007 by 11 11]

That's a novel line of logical thinking.

I won't comment any further, it seems I gave you enough rope earlier.