Board Logo
« #3 THE DRONE ENIGMA- A GLOBAL SEARCH FOR THE TRUTH »

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Oct 17th, 2017, 02:40am


Visit the UFO Casebook Web Site

*Totally FREE 24/7 Access *Your Nickname and Avatar *Private Messages

*Join today and be a part of one of the largest UFO sites on the Net.


« Previous Topic | Next Topic »
Pages: 1 ... 63 64 65 66 67  ...  93 Notify Send Topic Print
 sticky  Author  Topic: #3 THE DRONE ENIGMA- A GLOBAL SEARCH FOR THE TRUTH  (Read 9020 times)
AgentM
Full Member
ImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 220
xx Re: #3 THE DRONE ENIGMA- A GLOBAL SEARCH FOR THE T
« Reply #960 on: Jul 22nd, 2007, 10:47am »

ET may have evolved in a system with a much longer solar year than us, so their biological time would be greater. We would be like insects with a short life span because our Earth makes it around the sun relatively quick in comparison. A statement of "350 years" to ET may mean only days.
User IP Logged

onthefence55
Full Member
ImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 171
xx Re: #3 THE DRONE ENIGMA- A GLOBAL SEARCH FOR THE T
« Reply #961 on: Jul 22nd, 2007, 10:57am »

on Jul 22nd, 2007, 10:36am, jugement wrote:
could it be a magnet?

Possibly.

I'm thinking if it is not a conduit for electrical or fluid then it is a means to conduct the signal that holds everything together.

My theory of the operation of the antigravity/inertia-control is that an oscillating electrical signal is responsible for affecting the atoms. This field is easily conducted through antenna as seen in that connecting rod. This signal can also be transmitted through the air as seen in photo 4 of the CARET documents which show pieces A2 and A3 floating above the table.
User IP Logged

"Only the puny secrets need protecting. Big discoveries are protected by public incredulity." Marshall McLuhan
Drone Research Team
DrDil
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Fighting against truth decay!!


Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 4224
xx Re: #3 THE DRONE ENIGMA- A GLOBAL SEARCH FOR THE T
« Reply #962 on: Jul 22nd, 2007, 10:58am »

on Jul 22nd, 2007, 09:52am, AgentM wrote:
Dr. Dil,
I suspect that what Issac was working with is a smaller version of what we see in the BB drone. As far as the other componants (curved peices) I imagine they are not part of the main body, rather part of the rings.
What do you think?


I promised myself I wouldn’t post any more lengthy dialogue, but seeing as you have asked what I think, here goes………………………….

If that was the case, then as I’ve mentioned before why would they need to be connected to the main body? The Isaac documentation clearly states:

Page 4 of the Q4-86 RESEARCH REPORT

4.2.1 KEY ARTIFACTS

"Antigravity generator, a device that appears to provide a 'source' of antigravity that can then be projected onto or harnessed by other components within the craft. The second two artifacts are curved I-beam segments, that when placed anywhere within a certain radius of the generator during a specific mode of its operation, immediately fly into what is presumed to be their relative positions within the original construction of the craft."


If the curved pieces were indeed part of the rings, then why use the altogether, “Human” way of connecting them with brackets.

According to the exact terminology of the Research Report the rings would, “Immediately fly into what is presumed to be their relative positions within the original construction of the craft.”

This is in no way a direct criticism of you but I personally think that people are too ready to insert any missing piece of information in the form of supposition, yet when these possibilities are questioned the discussion quickly deteriorates into a derisory, “Free for all” aimed entirely at the audacity of the poster who dares to question what is at best, very suspect documentation and incredibly tenuous pseudoscientific methods.

The vast majority of posters in here already have their defining answer and then proceed to work backwards, filling in the blanks with whatever theory will fit.

Personally, I try to have no such preconceived notions and try to base my opinions on the evidence as I find it. Then without the excess baggage which comes with the burden of proof I find it a great deal easier to view things more subjectively.

This doesn’t mean I think that the entire Drone flap is a hoax, but neither do I feel any of it is beyond reproach. And as for the Isaac documentation the only correlation I can see between the Big Basin Drone and the documents is on the, “Q3-85 Inventory Review” page.

In fact if you take Isaac at his word then he himself tells you (granted in a diluted and round about sort of way) that the antigravity generator is an entirely different phenomenon from the Inventory Review page.

In the document it states, “Research on the internal functionality of A1 began late in Q4-86, and as such, little is currently known.”

From what Isaac has told us this means, literally the fourth quarter of 1986 (October to December.) So I feel we can safely assume that “Q3-85 Inventory Review” means July to September in 1985. More than a year before Isaac and his team were even presented with the antigravity generator, yet this has been glossed over as it’s a major inconvenience in trying to reconcile the documents with the Big Basin Drone sightings.

And instead everyone has accepted as fact the concept of the antigravity generator being linked to the Inventory Review page and subsequently the Big Basin Drone, where as in reality the link only exists in the eye of the beholder.

In fact, I feel sure that if there was any other reference to the Drone technology in the Inventory Review then this too would have been included by Isaac.
User IP Logged

Can't keep my eyes from the circling skies,
Tongue-tied & twisted, just an earth-bound misfit.
Marvin
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Mmm, yes, very curious, very interesting....


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1119
xx Re: #3 THE DRONE ENIGMA- A GLOBAL SEARCH FOR THE T
« Reply #963 on: Jul 22nd, 2007, 11:51am »

on Jul 21st, 2007, 6:24pm, RoH wrote:

And somebody made this enlargement of it? I don't know how:

Then we got the Ty highrespicture:

User Image

And when you look closer they are different!

Why did we want the highres, when sombody got a highres picture from Stephen? Remember that my 2nd picture is from before the Ty pictures.

I'm jumping over to what Atrueoriginal calls a debunker...

User Image

User Image

The above two are not the same images. No enlargement here... I think someone is pulling your leg--- hard.

I am having major issues with the Ty photos, with all of the sky (and basically in the tree gaps) I am getting RGB values all being the value of 255. There is no variation, except to change in resolution that creates anomalous stuff on the low res photos.

I took a photo of the overcast sky around noon time…

User Image

My highest RGB value was 179 to 181. As you see there is visual variation in pixels though out the sky.

Around the Steven photo enlargement (I inserted) I am getting 248 to 253 (with a back lit sky)… then back to there reported “Steven BB” enlargement, we are back to all being 255 and no variation. It appears to be one of the Ty photos.

I see no natural cause for a whole sky to be equal to:
R = 255
B = 255
G = 255

With no variation.

Something is a foot.
« Last Edit: Jul 22nd, 2007, 7:15pm by Marvin » User IP Logged

Oh Goody! My Illudiom Pu-36 Explosive Space Modulator!

User Image

"You naughty earth specimens!"
oljack666
Guest
xx Re: #3 THE DRONE ENIGMA- A GLOBAL SEARCH FOR THE T
« Reply #964 on: Jul 22nd, 2007, 12:00pm »

on Jul 22nd, 2007, 09:11am, Xeroid wrote:
Just a couple of things that I ponder, if I may....

Just for a moment I'd like to discuss "what if they are real" as opposed to "are they real"


Xeroid, I have more then a few comments that I ponder on frequently but I'm going to move them to another location, which I'll post in here when I'm done forming my thoughts. It may be an hour or two because I have other things to attend to as well.
.
« Last Edit: Jul 22nd, 2007, 12:05pm by oljack666 » User IP Logged

OnlookerDelay
Full Member
ImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Mars is an accessible other world, with a rich history, and I believe it's hiding unbelievable secre


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 114
xx Re: #3 THE DRONE ENIGMA- A GLOBAL SEARCH FOR THE T
« Reply #965 on: Jul 22nd, 2007, 12:07pm »

on Jul 22nd, 2007, 09:55am, MarkM wrote:
Finally - something on Friday:

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/shows/2007/07/27.html

Hope she gets more than 5 minutes!


Based on history, I'd say Linda will get at least 2 hours for this. She'll spend at least a half hour playing the phone conversation with the Computer Science and Engineering professor (who will be going on record with his name) with his opinions and impressions on this. Apparently he is very impressed with the Isaac letters and CARET document.

I'm very curious to see who this will be... could be an enlightening program.

Investigative reporter Linda Moulton Howe will share a fascinating interview with a university professor in Computer Science and Engineering, who is so impressed with the Isaac letters and CARET document (more info) that he agreed to talk about them on the record.

Usually, Open Lines on C2C with George Noory are pretty much dead-air, IMO. Even after Linda leaves Friday, this could stir some drone calls from listeners. We'll just have to see.
User IP Logged

Marvin
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Mmm, yes, very curious, very interesting....


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1119
xx Re: #3 THE DRONE ENIGMA- A GLOBAL SEARCH FOR THE T
« Reply #966 on: Jul 22nd, 2007, 12:20pm »

User Image


User Image

I believe the above two are the same....

That would be ii, not bb.

It looks like someone is buying a Rolexx watch....
« Last Edit: Jul 22nd, 2007, 12:28pm by Marvin » User IP Logged

Oh Goody! My Illudiom Pu-36 Explosive Space Modulator!

User Image

"You naughty earth specimens!"
Fencesitter
Full Member
ImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 57
xx Re: #3 THE DRONE ENIGMA- A GLOBAL SEARCH FOR THE T
« Reply #967 on: Jul 22nd, 2007, 12:40pm »

on Jul 22nd, 2007, 10:47am, AgentM wrote:
ET may have evolved in a system with a much longer solar year than us, so their biological time would be greater. We would be like insects with a short life span because our Earth makes it around the sun relatively quick in comparison. A statement of "350 years" to ET may mean only days.


Aging and lifespan are evolved traits, not something necessary to the process of life itself. We age and consequently die so that our offspring with potentially new traits can occupy the same geographical area without competing for the same resources.

Lifespan of an organism is something selected by evolution based on available resources, the organism's population density, environmental stability in the area, etc. Like any other organic trait, it is a process that can/will be controlled through genetic manipulation.

It is reasonable to expect that any species capable of interstellar travel has developed the technology to alter their genome to produce whatever level of strength, intelligence, lifespan, etc, that they desire. There is some evidence for that:

If Isaac's document is not a hoax, he alludes to 'super intelligence' in the species that uses the glyph-on-substrate control mechanism. Unless something very peculiar in their environment required a massive intellect for survival before they established an "evolution-slowing" social system (like we have had for over 5000 years), then it is reasonable to assume they engineered such intellectual capabilities into themselves. By the same token, it is reasonable to expect they could have 'turned off' the aging process, so would have essentially limitless lifespans if they so desired it.

I think with any species sufficiently advanced, the environment in which they originally evolved would actually have very little bearing on their current physical appearance, lifespan, or intellectual capacities...
User IP Logged

oljack666
Guest
xx Re: #3 THE DRONE ENIGMA- A GLOBAL SEARCH FOR THE T
« Reply #968 on: Jul 22nd, 2007, 12:50pm »

on Jul 22nd, 2007, 11:51am, bakosawa wrote:
.


A debunker must have absolute proof with evidence. The kind of proof where everyone gets up, walks out the door without question and goes home.

I don't know what you have. Be more specific in your statements. Dwell a little at least.

Bakosawa, I know how badly you want the title but you must earn it. lol grin
.
« Last Edit: Jul 22nd, 2007, 1:48pm by oljack666 » User IP Logged

oljack666
Guest
xx Re: #3 THE DRONE ENIGMA- A GLOBAL SEARCH FOR THE T
« Reply #969 on: Jul 22nd, 2007, 12:54pm »

on Jul 22nd, 2007, 12:20pm, bakosawa wrote:
User Image

User Image

I believe the above two are the same....

That would be ii, not bb.

It looks like someone is buying a Rolexx watch....


That's good bakosawa because they are the same. You missed some posts. Start with where RoH came in yesterday and work your way forward. They are the same but different and presented at different timeframes. Look at OnTheFence post after RoH's.

« Last Edit: Jul 22nd, 2007, 12:56pm by oljack666 » User IP Logged

Lox
Junior Member
ImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 20
xx Re: #3 THE DRONE ENIGMA- A GLOBAL SEARCH FOR THE T
« Reply #970 on: Jul 22nd, 2007, 1:21pm »

on Jul 21st, 2007, 10:16pm, Whane The Whip wrote:
http://whane.the.whip.googlepages.com/headsup

Please comment me via PM and let me know if the summary is accurate. It took me a while to put it together and I intend to use it as springboard so-to-speak so if it is not accurate I would appreciate you guys and gals letting me know. smiley I will gleefully fix even the tiniest discrepency.
.


The precise date when the "Isaac" CARET materials became public was 2007-06-26. See http://www.coasttocoastam.com/shows/2007/06/26.html, and http://www.earthfiles.com/news.php?ID=1277&category=Environment
User IP Logged

RoH
Full Member
ImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 183
xx Re: #3 THE DRONE ENIGMA- A GLOBAL SEARCH FOR THE T
« Reply #971 on: Jul 22nd, 2007, 1:24pm »

on Jul 21st, 2007, 7:46pm, onthefence55 wrote:
There is no Hi-res picture from Stephen.

That picture you showed is from Ty not Stephen.

What exactly are you asking for with that comment?


You are absolute right OTF, my mistake, too tired last night, sorry.
User IP Logged

Latitude
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1024
xx Re: #3 THE DRONE ENIGMA- A GLOBAL SEARCH FOR THE T
« Reply #972 on: Jul 22nd, 2007, 1:26pm »

on Jul 21st, 2007, 6:24pm, RoH wrote:
The symbol is alive!



And when you look closer they are different!

User Image

Sombody most have got a highres of the ii picture from TY?

EDIT: I was to tired last night, and made some wrong conclusions about the stephen picture, this is now corrected with the ii picture from TY, sorry for the mistake. RoH


I thought I would weigh in on this topic.

It's true that these are comparisons of Ty ii and aa, no Steven hi res was ever released.

User Image

But I think RoH is correct, the round part does change orientation! What could account for this?

Is it possible the part turned itself between pics? It would be nice to see the other hi res pics to confirm this.

So what do we have here? A smoking gun or more evidence against cgi or model hoax?


User IP Logged

My Drone Video
B J Booth
Administrator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1751
xx Re: #3 THE DRONE ENIGMA-More from Dave
« Reply #973 on: Jul 22nd, 2007, 1:39pm »

After yesterday's comments on this thead, Dave sent me some more info, and another photograph. See below...

Something just doesn't smell right to me. I am a PhD scientist (chemistry/pharmacology) and I think like a scientist. Isaac's story just doesn't make sense. How would they have any idea how those artifacts worked?

If a computer was taken back only 100 years into the past, to 1907, would anyone have been able to figure out what it was or how it worked without a power supply? Yet, Isaac claims that they had technology vastly ahead of anything we have, and they could were able to figure out how to turn it on and off, and what it was.

It is highly doubtful that advanced technology would be based on principles that we present know. What is the likelihood that they would use the same voltages or currents?

Also the security on real artifacts would be so tight that no ordinary person would be allowed make photocopies of pages of manuals. And isn't it a huge coincidence that the "linguistics manual" symbols show up on the sides of the ship? What are the chances of that? And why would they be there? Plus, the "craft" is not aerodynamic with all those rods on it.

But what's going on? I don't know. "Isaac" is clearly in on it. At this point, my opinion is that it is a very elaborate hoax, but I sure can't explain why they would do it. I asked about that video before too, and could never find it again. It would take considerable effort to create that video, so who made it, and why? I think the source of that video might have some answers if it could be located.

Also, if Isaac is a real person, I think the CIA or FBI would have been on the case as soon as any of those pictures appeared. The project would still be highly classified, and I'd imagine that they also would have forced you to take the pictures down if they were real and tried to find who posted them.

Another possibility is that some government agency is seeing how people would respond to a very elaborate hoax. Again... why?

I'm still puzzled, but I don't think the "strange craft" are what they are purported to be.

I'm not logged in as a [Forum] member because I only have time to check the site every other day or so, looking for good pictures. Years ago I was a member of NICAP and I'm still looking for that one really great
authentic picture.

I actually hadn't seen the long thread on the strange objects until tonight. I skimmed through it and found the comments about the picture I sent you. I'm not trying to fool anyone. So here are the details of what I did. I'm not an AutoCad expert, or even a photoshop expert. I mostly restore and colorize antique photos for people. I use scratch remover, clone brush, and a few other functions relevant to restoring and enhancing old torn or faded photos. I use Jasc Paint Shop 9 to enhance and work with them.

So, I downloaded the big basin hi res picture. In Paint Shop I converted it into a greyscale image, and then into a negative image. There is a one-step photo enhance function in Paint Shop that has several functions included such as contrast enhance, color
balance, edge restore, etc. A lot of times it will be enough to make an old faded picture look much better.

I had used it on the original picture without any improvement, but decided to try it on the negative, but take out the color (greyscale) to try to get better
detail (I worked with a fellow years ago that was red-green colorblind and he said during the Viet Nam war they used color blind people to look at jungle photos because they could spot the camouflage thrown up over Viet Cong camps). So sometimes I take out
the color to see the detail.

Anyway, the story is getting long. So I hit one-step photo enhance, and saw grey boxes appear around the object. I sent you that picture, but what I saw is not evident when it's up on the site, so I repeated the function four more times and it emphasized the patchwork and I think it will now be evident.

I had no idea whether it was an artifact of the software, so I took a picture of the sky (Kodak
EasyShare DX6490 4 megapixel) and cut out a small section with some branches and did the exact same photo enhance operation on it, five times. There were no larger boxes evident around the tree brances,
as there were around the strange object.

Maybe some hard-core graphics experts can tell me what I did, but it looks like the strange object has rectangular blocks of pixels around it that are unlike a normal picture taken of the sky. I think you don't see it in the normal image because white getting whiter isn't as evident as a slight shade of light grey getting lighter.

User Image
User IP Logged

B. J. Booth, UFO Casebook Webmaster
www.ufocasebook.com
Latitude
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1024
xx Re: #3 THE DRONE ENIGMA-More from Dave
« Reply #974 on: Jul 22nd, 2007, 2:10pm »

on Jul 22nd, 2007, 1:39pm, B J Booth wrote:
After yesterday's comments on this thead, Dave sent me some more info, and another photograph. See below...

Something just doesn't smell right to me. I am a PhD scientist (chemistry/pharmacology) and I think like a scientist. Isaac's story just doesn't make sense. How would they have any idea how those artifacts worked?


Dave has no special skills that make him an expert on this case. I think in this case his PhD is irrelevant. He seems to come at this like so many other uninformed lurkers. He even speaks of a video which is no doubt from Saladfingers and has been proved to be disinfo.

Sorry, only my opinion. No disrespect intended.
User IP Logged

My Drone Video
Pages: 1 ... 63 64 65 66 67  ...  93 Notify Send Topic Print
« Previous Topic | Next Topic »

Become a member of the UFO Casebook Forum today and join our more than 19,000 members.

Visit the UFO Casebook Web Site

Donate $6.99 for 50,000 Ad-Free Pageviews!

| |

This forum powered for FREE by Conforums ©
Sign up for your own Free Message Board today!
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Conforums Support | Parental Controls