Board Logo
« #6 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Truth »

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Oct 23rd, 2017, 11:10pm


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 ... 58 59 60 61 62  ...  102 Notify Send Topic Print
 sticky  Author  Topic: #6 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Truth  (Read 2240 times)
Latitude
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1024
xx Re: #6 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #885 on: Mar 20th, 2008, 3:18pm »

Yep, Drone_online and Kris Avery (Saladfingers).

I give it a 5 on scale of one to ten. They have talent and tools. I did not care too much for the music. The sequences were not accurate like the part about a jet shooting down a drone. Isaac clearly stated it was not possible. Then there's the dancing drones, bobbing around to the music. It's all an attempt to trivialize the subject. They sure caught hell from LMH over using her voice without her permission.
User IP Logged

My Drone Video
ZETAR
Mod Director
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

GREAT SPIRITS ALWAYS ENCOUNTER THE MOST VIOLENT OPPOSITION FROM MEDIOCRE MINDS E=MC2


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 8290
xx Re: #6 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #886 on: Mar 20th, 2008, 3:23pm »

HEY DOC,
THE PICTURE PROVIDED CERTAINLY LOOKS LIKE AN OPEN OR CUT-AWAY VIEW OF A TURBOCHARGER FROM A LARGE DIESEL ENGINE...SHOWING THE OPEN VIEW OF THE COMPRESSOR SIDE ALONG WITH THE TURBO SIDE...THE SIDE BY SIDE CONFIGURATION EVEN MORE LEADS ME TO CONCLUDE THE AFOREMENTIONED...
WHAT SAY YOU?
NOT SO SURE HOW THE UNIT PICTURED MAY DISPLACE ANY IONS rolleyes
HOWEVER,VERY NICE PICTURE wink
SHALOM...ZETAR cool
User IP Logged

GREAT SPIRITS ALWAYS ENCOUNTER THE MOST VIOLENT OPPOSITION FROM MEDIOCRE MINDS E=MC2
hjdelight
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1653
xx Re: #6 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #887 on: Mar 20th, 2008, 3:37pm »

Ah yes Doc. As usual you have answered the question. Yes it's been awhile but I drop in pretty regular. I don't post as much though because I don't have the time to read everything and don't want to poke the beehive by asking dumb questions. I wish something new would develope though. Other than the detectives and UFO Hunters rehashing things, it's been pretty quiet. Maybe the detectives will turn up something though.

HJ
User IP Logged

Arrogance is a fragile springboard from which to jump to conclusions says I.
DrDil
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Fighting against truth decay!!


Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 4224
xx Re: #6 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #888 on: Mar 20th, 2008, 8:48pm »

The link to the clip/s from last nights UFO Hunters that pertain to the Drones follows, but first and at no extra cost I’ll throw in my personal opinion!!

In my humble opinion I believe that this show was a distinctly average offering which is exactly what I expected it to be so I wasn’t disappointed or indeed surprised. Mainly as a couple of months ago when Mufon released the very sparse and hastily threw together PowerPoint presentation (PPP) on the Drones, Carrion (Mufon International Director) specifically said that the:

Quote:
“Powerpoint presentation we have posted on the Internet was created expressly for briefing the stars of the show on what MUFON knew about DRONES/CARET. That also explains why there are fewer details/notes in the presentation as we had to keep it concise to fit their shooting timeframe. Our follow up MUFON Journal article will contain the details of our investigation.”

This spoke volumes to me and as such I realised that if this was being presented as a briefing document to the UFO-Hunters team then the result would be exactly what it was. I believe if you present a briefing document that has suffered radical omissions merely to fit a tight schedule/timeframe then straight away you’re off to a bad start. The PPP was a diluted representation of the Drones which I feel was watered down to the point of almost wilfully misleading the reader, and I believe that the Kecksburg connection was –and still is- a tenuous link at best. Again (and it’s purely MY opinion) the entire PPP was approached with a pre-determined conclusion of the Drones being, “Disinformation” then the facts were collated and represented to further strengthen this foregone conclusion.

The irony is I feel that the chance of the Drones being disinformation is incredibly likely, but presenting the facts in such a pseudoscientific manner ultimately only detracted from this possibility.

Below are a couple of captures from the PPP that Carrion (as portrayed in the UFO-Hunters episode) feels constitutes a credible association between the two events. The first is a sketch and the second is from the actual commemorative sculpture that UFO-Hunters showed and can still be viewed in Kecksburg.

User Image


----------


User Image


I thought it was rather telling that the UFO-Hunters only showed a distant view of the sculpture, alluding to the fact that the symbols were similar yet still not showing any of the Kecksburg ones, well apart from a shot of a pen which looked to be drawing a line, which was I presume for effect. The alleged Roswell crash is a prime example, in another part of episode the UFO-Hunters even reference Roswell and the fact that witnesses have stated that it involved the recovery and reverse engineering of an alien craft and yet make no reference at all to the symbols which Marcel claims he seen on the debris.

User Image


Or the Rendlesham incident in 1981 when Col Halt et al state the craft had strange, “Hieroglyphics” etched into it.

User Image


Even the UMMO craft had a misshapen, “H” on prominent display which at a stretch could be likened to the Drone symbols.

User Image


Those are just a couple of the more widely recognised examples, but all of which makes it puzzling as to why Carrion/Mufon specifically draw parallels between Kecksburg and the Drones rather than any/all of the other cases as it doesn’t appear to be an exact match to any. And it can’t be because of the alleged crash as surely Roswell would be the natural comparison to make as it’s already strongly etched into the psyche of modern culture, and if the UFO-Hunters series is aimed at the general public, which is certainly as it appears then Roswell would also be the most relevant and thus most effective comparison.

Is there something we don’t know about?

Or is it merely some vague lead or an early hunch (as I suspect) by Carrion, and one which he refuses to give up on?

And again in the recent UFO-Hunters show Carrion brought up the Kecksburg connection and his final conclusion (or, “Top of his list”) of the Drones being disinformation was added towards the end of the show as an almost, “Throwaway” comment.

The UFO-Hunters also consulted Dr. Bruce Maccabee, Ph.D. who (taken from his website), “Is an optical physicist employed by the U.S. Navy, and a noted contemporary UFO investigator specializing in technical analysis and photo analysis of UFO cases.”

I wonder if Mufon alerted the UFO-Hunters to the fact that Bruce Maccabee had extensively studied the earlier images and has previously declared the images a hoax. (This was when Maccabee was consulted by Mufon in a professional capacity as to his opinion on the authenticity of the images). If this titbit was divulged then surely it’s unfairly biased to knowingly consult a pro-hoax advocate on what he already believes to be a hoax? If this was known by the UFO-Hunters team then surely this should have been mentioned before allowing Maccabee to present his opinion to camera? And if it wasn’t known then I feel it raises even more difficult questions of why Mufon didn’t disclose this knowledge.

It’s a verified fact that Maccabee was consulted for analysis by Mufon, Carrion recently confirmed that Maccabee’s analysis had occurred and his views would be included in the upcoming Mufon report on the Drone. I feel this should have been mentioned rather than Maccabee appearing surprised when seeing the, “Progression” of the Drone structure as though for the first time. Also Maccabee only comments on how the Drone is aerodynamically challenged, surely he should be commenting on the authenticity of the images? Especially when you consider that he, “Specializes in technical analysis and photo analysis of UFO cases” and is a primary Mufon consultant on such.

Apparently Dr. Bruce Maccabee first looked at the images months ago (at the 60th Roswell anniversary) and along with three other image analysts independently declared them a hoax, the persons performing the additional analysis were another Mufon image expert, Mr. Jeff Sainio and two experts outside of Mufon but involved in the, “Special effects industry.”

My point is why wasn’t this mentioned?

Or more importantly whose omission was it? undecided

Anyway, The clip can be seen here…..

Enjoy..... smiley
User IP Logged

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


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1653
xx Re: #6 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #889 on: Mar 20th, 2008, 9:34pm »

Yes....so this is what you get when the goal is to make money. It's pretty obvious that facts were irrelevent in most of what was presented. I really hate to see this happen because it slowly eats away at the public's trust in what's presented to them. But perhaps I give the public too much credit. It certainly doesn't help the informed on the subject (us) respect the media in any way. It was pure entertainment for Joe six-pack who has a passing interest in UFOs and aliens but doesn't pursue it any further than the boob tube.

HJ
User IP Logged

Arrogance is a fragile springboard from which to jump to conclusions says I.
Latitude
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1024
xx Re: #6 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #890 on: Mar 21st, 2008, 12:38am »

on Mar 20th, 2008, 8:48pm, DrDil wrote:
The UFO-Hunters also consulted Dr. Bruce Maccabee, Ph.D. who (taken from his website), “Is an optical physicist employed by the U.S. Navy, and a noted contemporary UFO investigator specializing in technical analysis and photo analysis of UFO cases.”

I wonder if Mufon alerted the UFO-Hunters to the fact that Bruce Maccabee had extensively studied the earlier images and has previously declared the images a hoax. (This was when Maccabee was consulted by Mufon in a professional capacity as to his opinion on the authenticity of the images). If this titbit was divulged then surely it’s unfairly biased to knowingly consult a pro-hoax advocate on what he already believes to be a hoax? If this was known by the UFO-Hunters team then surely this should have been mentioned before allowing Maccabee to present his opinion to camera? And if it wasn’t known then I feel it raises even more difficult questions of why Mufon didn’t disclose this knowledge.

It’s a verified fact that Maccabee was consulted for analysis by Mufon, Carrion recently confirmed that Maccabee’s analysis had occurred and his views would be included in the upcoming Mufon report on the Drone. I feel this should have been mentioned rather than Maccabee appearing surprised when seeing the, “Progression” of the Drone structure as though for the first time. Also Maccabee only comments on how the Drone is aerodynamically challenged, surely he should be commenting on the authenticity of the images? Especially when you consider that he, “Specializes in technical analysis and photo analysis of UFO cases” and is a primary Mufon consultant on such.

Apparently Dr. Bruce Maccabee first looked at the images months ago (at the 60th Roswell anniversary) and along with three other image analysts independently declared them a hoax, the persons performing the additional analysis were another Mufon image expert, Mr. Jeff Sainio and two experts outside of Mufon but involved in the, “Special effects industry.”

My point is why wasn’t this mentioned?

Or more importantly whose omission was it? undecided
smiley


What is the source of your information regarding Bruce Maccabee? I don't believe this is factual.

User IP Logged

My Drone Video
endzone
Full Member
ImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

LMH your day will come!


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 69
xx Re: #6 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #891 on: Mar 21st, 2008, 01:17am »

I'm just glad to see this vetted on a national tv program like the UFO Hunters. And the L.A. Times article and FOX vetting this as well is stirring up the investigation in a good way. They did the job we are used to seeing on these mainstream shows, but with a different twist this time, it was taken much more seriously than most have been.
I was so amped to see the drones on the UFO Hunters, told all my friends who have been riding the outside of this through my reports to them. Most were very positive in how they received the program and are asking a lot more questions about these now. Also I have a couple folks that are actually recanting their original ideas of this being a hoax. Funny how mainstream media can have that affect on naysayers sometimes.
Oh and Latitude I noticed how quiet that guy who was "shadowing me" got over on that other board when all this hit this week. Wish I could join you there, power hungry got his way. wink
User IP Logged

A lifetime is but a glimpse, a singular point in time. What lies beyond......that is the true journey.
DrDil
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Fighting against truth decay!!


Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 4224
xx Re: #6 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #892 on: Mar 21st, 2008, 04:19am »

on Mar 21st, 2008, 12:38am, Latitude wrote:
What is the source of your information regarding Bruce Maccabee? I don't believe this is factual.


Hi Lat, I thought you’d question it…..

Which part do you believe to be incorrect?

And why do you believe it is incorrect, as presumably you have access to the same information I do?

The lead starts back when the Los Angeles state section director of Mufon (Steve R. Murillo) replied to an email from Bill Hamilton which was subsequently posted online. The email was from Steve Reichmuth who is also a state section director.

Identifying the Experts:

Quote:
I had several trusted friends & experts in CGI (computer generated Images) examine these images, as well as the earlier Coast to Coast images. One examiner is Mr. Steve Neil who has and continues to do computer generated images for the History channels television program 'UFO Files'. The other effects person is a Mr. Marc D' Antonio. He owns and operates a business in Connecticut named FX Models. http://www.fxmodels.com/

Marc is a former MUFON Field investigator, and has taught Astronomy for a number of years at a local area east coast college. Both Marc & Steve I would consider well grounded and I would consider them both 'non-skeptics' related to 'UFO's. They think UFO's are 'real' and likely 'extraterrestral' in origin. Marc works with computer generated images every day. Both experts state all images of this object are clearly fakes. Mr. D' Antonio is one of my valued expert contacts I network with in studying UFO photographs. He has volunteered to assist in future cases.

As of May 16, 2007, I have not recieved any reply from these witnesses.
Clearly a 'HOAX'. Case completed, but will reopen should I recieve get a reply from the witness. (hopefully).

Very Respectfully,

Steve Reichmuth
Mufon - Northern California
SSD - Alameda / Contra Costa Co.

State Section Director
MUFON L.A.


This wasn’t just a forum post but an official answer between two Mufon state directors on Mufons stance on the Drones.

Next we have Mr Reichmuth’s now infamous OMF excursion and subsequent posting then deleting of details.

Quote:
Re: PART2: - UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
« Reply #13 on Jun 9, 2007, 10:56pm »
Test 1-2-3 - Preserve earlier MUFON post
(Edit: Brought forward from this Thread PART #1)
5/28/07 at 2:00pm,

It is hard not to comment about this. I am the actual assigned Mufon investigator for these alleged images that appeared in a Mufon internet report. I was interested since Delta posted them at my UFOResearcher.com web site. I had some computer generated image experts I know analyze them. Then soon later...a CMS case report shortly later appeared of the same object in my investigation geographical area I cover for Mufon..., and I then had to swing into action on the Lake Tahoe images, and then all the others too in total.

Because of the sensitivity of these images being associated with Linda Moulton Howe's 'Earth files' web site, I requested further experts within MUFON examine the same images for further peer review. This was granted. These experts I will not disclose now....but will be named in any future paper I may someday have to write for the Mufon Journal. Needless to say, they are some of the best photo analysis's in Mufon, and in the world.

All these experts (four) agree emphatically. These images, some 22 and counting are all frauds - 'fakes'. Not only are they fakes, but two experts independently stated they are not even good fakes! Interestingly, they each pointed out different reasons, and because they were consulted individually...just widens the case file with more detailed useful data.


So at this point we’re made aware that there has been four experts consulted, i.e. “All these experts (four) agree emphatically. These images, some 22 and counting are all frauds - 'fakes'

Quote:
The 4 sources of which were two from outside MUFON in the special effects industry (one did work time to time for the History channels 'UFO Files'), and later with permission from Mufon, our own Mufon photo consultants, Dr. Bruce Macabee, and Mr. Jeff Sainio. It was felt important for MUFON experts to also verify the other experts to either confirm or dispute everyone's findings. The result was unanimous the images were fakes. Interestingly, peer review brought out new different reasons among the main reasons they were regarded as hoaxes. So apparently, there are a number of 'red flags' as to why the images are untruthful being claimed to be authentic. The analysis was objective, knowing all these experts opinions lean toward that UFO's being likely alien craft. Two of the outside experts are even possible abductees, so their 'slant' if anything is pre-existing.... it is towards UFO's being extraterrestrial in a very personal way. Still, the outside Mufon experts emphatically stated they were most definitely bogus.


Here we have, “Later with permission from Mufon, our own Mufon photo consultants, Dr. Bruce Macabee, and Mr. Jeff Sainio. It was felt important for MUFON experts to also verify the other experts to either confirm or dispute everyone's findings. The result was unanimous the images were fakes.”

Quote Source

So now we have four experts and all with a different opinion on why the images are faked, I know what you’re thinking: “What if he’s lying?”

Well when James Carrion was visiting OMF I asked him (a couple of times before it elicited an answer, but the dialogue was as follows):

Firstly my question:

Quote:
Jan 15, 2008, 9:22am, DrDil wrote:
Jan 14, 2008, 11:04pm, DrDil wrote:
Hi James I hope its okay to ask a couple of questions.

I believe Steve wrote:

"The confidential report within the Mufon CMS will remain confidential. But I will confide this much...it is classified as a 'HOAX'.....

Respectfully, these are my personal opinions being directly 'hands on' involved, and are not necessarily those of Mufon.”

Is this correct, and if so has this classification changed, is your current investigation to further strengthen this classification, an attempt to counter it or a completely new investigation?

Since the original sightings that Mufon investigated, have the subsequent Drone images and Isaac documentation been attached to the prior ones (Mufon Case #7013) i.e. is this an all encompassing investigation or is it a selective one? And if so do the new additions inherit the classification of the originals?

Or were the first two accounts maintained in this fashion because you had reason to believe they originated from the same source, is this belief still held and if so has any further attempts to verify this fact been pursued?

(The following wasn’t posted to this forum)

He also wrote that he personally emailed the "Tahoe wife" witness several times and that they never replied, is this how you discovered it was, “a bogus email” or has further analysis been carried out?

Steve has also said that after gaining permission from Mufon that the images were sent to your own Mufon photo consultants, Dr. Bruce Macabee, and Mr. Jeff Sainio. He adds that, “The result was unanimous the images were fakes”.

Can you verify this?

Many thanks.....


And then James Carrions reply:

Quote:
Steve's assessment was based on the two photos submitted to MUFON. Our wider special investigation encompasses the entire set of photos and ISAAC documents. We are at an impasse in our research because the photo witnesses do not check out. If we can't track down the real photo witnesses, then this case will not receive a label.

Steve never received responses to the email address left by the alleged witness.

Jeff Sainio and Bruce Maccabee's assessment will be included in the MUFON Journal article.

Quote Source

So this makes it official, Steve Reichmuth is obviously telling the truth as the International Director of Mufon James Carrion agrees to this previously unanswered statement regarding Mufon’s own experts and further verifies who they were.

And as regarding the opinion of the experts, James Carrion also said that:

Quote:
Re: Main Discussion
« Reply #153 on Jan 13, 2008, 2:31pm »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I asked if there were any experts who have come foreward to authenticate the photos and you quoted an anonymous expert. I would like names and credentials, the same I provided in my presentation. Again, using the court of law analogy, in highly technical cases such as this one, it is all about which side has the most credible and believable experts. Now imagine if the prosecution trying to prove fakery puts Avery, D'Avino, Maccabee, Sainio on the stand and they all explain from their point of view why the drone photos are CGI, and then the defense puts on the stand an expert with a hood over his face to hide his identity. Who do you think the jury is going to believe?
« Last Edit: Jan 13, 2008, 2:32pm by jcarrion »


User Image

PLEASE NOTE THAT, “D’Avino” IS AN ERROR BY CARRION AND SHOULD READ, “D’Antonio”

Quote Source
User IP Logged

Can't keep my eyes from the circling skies,
Tongue-tied & twisted, just an earth-bound misfit.
DrDil
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Fighting against truth decay!!


Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 4224
xx Re: #6 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #893 on: Mar 21st, 2008, 04:20am »

And lastly we have further confirmation from Steve Reichmuth from just a couple of days ago when he comments on the recent private investigator story and yet again unprompted divulges the name of Dr. Bruce Maccabee and his conclusions:

Quote:
Posted March 19, 2008 18:14
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amazing, sad really. Asking the wrong people.

I am wondering about the 'money' backing this 'Open Minds Forum' query. Several people have visited the website....and report it is anything but open minded, and you are harshly criticized if you mention that there. This confirmed my impressions too.

Dr. Bruce Macabee looked at these photos months ago at the 60th Roswell annivercery. He easily spotted them as CGI fakes. Note the power lines in the photo do not match up exactly. A clumsy paste in. These PI's are going to get rich looking for something trhat does not exist except on the internet. The answer is in the photo above. Wish it were otherwise.

Detectives on a wild goose chase, acquainted with 'bad scotch' and very ignorant of 'computer graphics'. The hoaxer must be laughing out of his/her chair.

The more this is 'pushed' on the internet, the more it suggests a government disinformation campaign perhaps after all.

Steve R


User Image

Quote Source

So there you have it smiley, James Carrion – International Director Of Mufon:

Again, using the court of law analogy, in highly technical cases such as this one, it is all about which side has the most credible and believable experts. Now imagine if the prosecution trying to prove fakery puts Avery, D'Avino, Maccabee, Sainio on the stand and they all explain from their point of view why the drone photos are CGI.”

This clearly states that Maccabee along with the others hold the “point of view” that the Drones are CGI.

And state section director Steve Reichmuth:

“Because of the sensitivity of these images being associated with Linda Moulton Howe's 'Earth files' web site, I requested further experts within MUFON examine the same images for further peer review. This was granted. These experts I will not disclose now....but will be named in any future paper I may someday have to write for the Mufon Journal. Needless to say, they are some of the best photo analysis's in Mufon, and in the world…..”

“Later with permission from Mufon, our own Mufon photo consultants, Dr. Bruce Macabee, and Mr. Jeff Sainio. It was felt important for MUFON experts to also verify the other experts to either confirm or dispute everyone's findings. The result was unanimous the images were fakes. All these experts (four) agree emphatically. These images, some 22 and counting are all frauds - 'fakes'. Not only are they fakes, but two experts independently stated they are not even good fakes…..”

“Dr. Bruce Macabee looked at these photos months ago at the 60th Roswell annivercery. He easily spotted them as CGI fakes.”


All of which I believe speaks for itself…..

on Mar 21st, 2008, 12:38am, Latitude wrote:
What is the source of your information regarding Bruce Maccabee? I don't believe this is factual.


So what is your reasoning/source that leads you to your disbelief in the factual accuracy of my previous statement?
User IP Logged

Can't keep my eyes from the circling skies,
Tongue-tied & twisted, just an earth-bound misfit.
DrDil
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Fighting against truth decay!!


Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 4224
xx Re: #6 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #894 on: Mar 21st, 2008, 05:06am »

on Mar 20th, 2008, 3:23pm, ZETAR wrote:
HEY DOC,
THE PICTURE PROVIDED CERTAINLY LOOKS LIKE AN OPEN OR CUT-AWAY VIEW OF A TURBOCHARGER FROM A LARGE DIESEL ENGINE...SHOWING THE OPEN VIEW OF THE COMPRESSOR SIDE ALONG WITH THE TURBO SIDE...THE SIDE BY SIDE CONFIGURATION EVEN MORE LEADS ME TO CONCLUDE THE AFOREMENTIONED...
WHAT SAY YOU?
NOT SO SURE HOW THE UNIT PICTURED MAY DISPLACE ANY IONS rolleyes
HOWEVER,VERY NICE PICTURE wink
SHALOM...ZETAR cool

Hi Zetar smiley,

I wasn’t sure what you meant so I went looking, are you referring to something like this?

User Image

User Image


User Image
(Apparently this one is an integral electric turbocharger, which takes the place of the former screw-type compressor grin).


Personally I always liked the, “Pipe pig” comparison…..

User Image


I don’t believe the unit was based on the pipe pig but always appreciated the aesthetic similarities and so always thought it was one of the better (visual) comparisons.

Regarding the displacement of ions, from what I understand, the anti-grav device is exactly that, a manipulation of gravity rather than ions.

User Image


Is that what you were referring to?

Actually Whitley Strieber posted an, “Exclusive” recently regarding the Popular Mechanics article from 1964 about an ion propulsion device (that was then under development by engineer Major Alexander P. de Seversky).

User Image

According to the Popular Mechanics article, the craft, "Flies on pure electricity.....It uses tall metal spikes that are installed above an open wire-mesh grid….High negative voltage is shot from the spikes toward the positively charged wire grid, just like negative and positive poles on an ordinary battery. As the negative charge leaves the spike arms, it peppers the surrounding air like buckshot..."

This particular exclusive was one of Latitudes interests (of the, “Lifter” variety) and so was discussed in detail on this forum about 8 or 9 months ago..... smiley
User IP Logged

Can't keep my eyes from the circling skies,
Tongue-tied & twisted, just an earth-bound misfit.
DrDil
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Fighting against truth decay!!


Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 4224
xx Re: #6 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #895 on: Mar 21st, 2008, 05:47am »

on Mar 21st, 2008, 01:17am, endzone wrote:
I'm just glad to see this vetted on a national tv program like the UFO Hunters. And the L.A. Times article and FOX vetting this as well is stirring up the investigation in a good way. They did the job we are used to seeing on these mainstream shows, but with a different twist this time, it was taken much more seriously than most have been.

I feel I should probably clarify my own position a little, I agree that the recent Drone episode by UFO-Hunters was most certainly a much-needed injection of the Drone phenomenon into the publics consciousness, what I was commenting on was the way in which an image analysis expert was approached for his opinion and it was never mentioned that he was a recognised Mufon expert on image analysis, and furthermore had already provided a consultation to Mufon on the exact topic at hand and I feel this should have been disclosed.

I wasn’t criticizing the, “Content” as such but rather the, “Intent” behind it. I suppose it was disappointment really as we all already knew of Mufons position on the Drones and personally I was hoping to see the UFO-Hunters team undertake their own investigation rather than allowing Mufon to merely re-state their opinion.

This is what prompted me to ask whose omission it was…..

I’d also like to add that I believe Steve Reichmuth’s last comment regarding the private investigators and OMF is nothing more than sour grapes. I personally feel it was a master stroke enlisting the help of private investigators to locate the utility pole and the subsequent publicity that has ensued is fantastic. It all raises awareness in the Drones as well as providing a real chance at perhaps finally solving the mystery to the satisfaction of all involved, which is something that everyone wants to see and I wish the OMRT the very best of luck in their endeavours and eagerly await the results of their investigation. smiley
User IP Logged

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


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1024
xx Re: #6 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #896 on: Mar 21st, 2008, 10:24am »

on Mar 21st, 2008, 04:20am, DrDil wrote:
So what is your reasoning/source that leads you to your disbelief in the factual accuracy of my previous statement?


I see where you went wrong. You relied on second hand sources and questionable ones at that. You should know by now that anything coming from Steve Reichmuth concerning the drones cannot be trusted. He has been caught in lies before.

My information comes from a very reliable source, Dr Maccabee himself. It seems people are trying to put words into his mouth. I think you should cease this line of questioning until you confirm your facts with Maccabee.
User IP Logged

My Drone Video
hyundisonata
Junior Member
ImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 48
xx Re: #6 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #897 on: Mar 21st, 2008, 10:55am »

I remember watching on a uk TV channel about some guy in the usa who built a similar device this was a good few years back, what he had was a balsa wood frame with lots of thin wire over it he then attached a power supply and hay presto it was flying, something to do with disrupting the air under it, now no doubt the design would have been improved on by now and a suitable light power supply added and you have the drones add remote control and have fun fooling every one
User IP Logged

DrDil
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Fighting against truth decay!!


Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 4224
xx Re: #6 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #898 on: Mar 21st, 2008, 11:35am »

on Mar 21st, 2008, 10:24am, Latitude wrote:
I see where you went wrong. You relied on second hand sources and questionable ones at that. You should know by now that anything coming from Steve Reichmuth concerning the drones cannot be trusted. He has been caught in lies before.

My information comes from a very reliable source, Dr Maccabee himself. It seems people are trying to put words into his mouth. I think you should cease this line of questioning until you confirm your facts with Maccabee.

If it was just Reichmuth I wouldn’t have raised the issue at all, I was aware of Reichmuth and the weather history being questionable but I didn’t think the word of James Carrion was ever questioned, which is why I quoted him, also I knew you would raise the question of Reichmuth’s credibility:

on Mar 21st, 2008, 04:20am, DrDil wrote:
James Carrion – International Director Of Mufon:
Again, using the court of law analogy, in highly technical cases such as this one, it is all about which side has the most credible and believable experts. Now imagine if the prosecution trying to prove fakery puts Avery, D'Avino, Maccabee, Sainio on the stand and they all explain from their point of view why the drone photos are CGI.”

And it wasn’t a, “Line of questioning” it was a reply to your comment regarding the factual content of a post which was simply MY opinion on the UFO Hunters segment, and one which I based on the available information. If you hadn’t questioned my opinion it wouldn’t have been mentioned again, hence my opening gambit:

“The link to the clip/s from last nights UFO Hunters that pertain to the Drones follows, but first and at no extra cost I’ll throw in my personal opinion!!”

I thought it may be misconstrued which is why I further posted:

on Mar 21st, 2008, 05:47am, DrDil wrote:
I feel I should probably clarify my own position a little, I agree that the recent Drone episode by UFO-Hunters was most certainly a much-needed injection of the Drone phenomenon into the publics consciousness, what I was commenting on was the way in which an image analysis expert was approached for his opinion and it was never mentioned that he was a recognised Mufon expert on image analysis, and furthermore had already provided a consultation to Mufon on the exact topic at hand and I feel this should have been disclosed.

I wasn’t criticizing the, “Content” as such but rather the, “Intent” behind it. I suppose it was disappointment really as we all already knew of Mufons position on the Drones and personally I was hoping to see the UFO-Hunters team undertake their own investigation rather than allowing Mufon to merely re-state their opinion.

This is what prompted me to ask whose omission it was…..

Apparently to no avail as you still missed my point, but my statement still stands, i.e.

What I was commenting on was the way in which an image analysis expert was approached for his opinion and it was never mentioned that he was a recognised Mufon expert on image analysis, and furthermore had already provided a consultation to Mufon on the exact topic at hand and I feel this should have been disclosed.”

Even if you are privy to information that Dr Maccabee isn’t a recognised Mufon expert on image analysis or he hasn’t been approached for his opinion (both of which would directly contradict the words of James Carrion) this doesn’t mean I’m not entitled to state my opinion based on the words of Mufon’s International Director regarding such.

You questioned the validity of my comment and I presented all the relevant information at my disposal and which was instrumental in the forming of my opinion on the UFO-Hunters show and I STILL don’t understand why it wasn’t disclosed that Dr Maccabee performs image analysis for Mufon and had previously looked at the Drone images in this capacity.

“I think you should cease this line of questioning until you confirm your facts with Maccabee.”

Thanks for your concern but I don’t need anything confirming to form an opinion on the fact that I believe Dr Maccabee’s prior involvement should have been disclosed, that’s the great thing about personal opinions/beliefs/points of view etc..... smiley
User IP Logged

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


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1024
xx Re: #6 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
« Reply #899 on: Mar 21st, 2008, 12:34pm »

on Mar 21st, 2008, 11:35am, DrDil wrote:
Even if you are privy to information that Dr Maccabee isn’t a recognised Mufon expert on image analysis or he hasn’t been approached for his opinion (both of which would directly contradict the words of James Carrion) this doesn’t mean I’m not entitled to state my opinion based on the words of Mufon’s International Director regarding such.


I'm not saying that Dr Maccabee is not a recognised Mufon expert on image analysis. He might be. I did not confirm that with him. My position is that if you want the truth about Dr Maccabee's position on the drone case you should ask him and not take any third parties word on it. He is very approachable. His response to me was in so many words that he is undecided and that the case should be investigated by the highest levels.
User IP Logged

My Drone Video
Pages: 1 ... 58 59 60 61 62  ...  102 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