UFO Casebook
Board Announcements & News >> The Drone Mystery, Isaac's Account >> #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Truth
http://ufocasebook.conforums.com/index.cgi?board=drone&action=display&num=1223123924

#7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Truth
Post by DrDil on Oct 4th, 2008, 07:38am

This is a continuation of the 2007 California Drone discussion.


Previous Drone thread (#6) is located here.


The Original Drone Sightings are as follows:

1) The *Chad* Drone, originally posted at the Coast2Coast Website.
URL: http://www.ufocasebook.com/strangecraftphotos.html

2) The *Lake Tahoe* Drone - Mufon <submitter> 7013
URL: http://www.ufocasebook.com/strangecraftdrone.html

3) The *Rajman1977* Drone, originally posted at Flickr.
URL: http://www.ufocasebook.com/strangecraft3.html

4) The *Jenna L/Stephen* Drone, originally posted at UFOCasebook.
URL: http://www.ufocasebook.com/bigbasin.html

5) The *Ty* Drone, originally posted at Earthfiles:
URL: http://tinyurl.com/4cpcgk


The *Isaac* documentation, originally posted at Fortunecity.com.:
URL: http://isaaccaret.fortunecity.com/


Other public forums that have been discussing the Drone phenomena have become divided and ultimately derailed by constant bickering and cross-forum politics. Please refrain from posting inflammatory or derogatory statements regarding other websites and their members (regardless of perceived provocation) and please keep on topic with your discussions.


The continued cooperation of all members is greatly appreciated.....
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by jugement on Oct 9th, 2008, 7:12pm

whats up all:still trying to figure this out,just as real as the reality that we all exist. i was reading dark mission the other day to find out that senator mccain was the head of washington commision over nasa,wow.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Oct 9th, 2008, 8:00pm

on Oct 9th, 2008, 7:12pm, jugement wrote:
whats up all:still trying to figure this out,just as real as the reality that we all exist. i was reading dark mission the other day to find out that senator mccain was the head of washington commision over nasa,wow.


Hi Jugement smiley,

I hope you’re well and I’m pleased to see you’re still popping into Casebook.

I've found that reality is a little like beauty as it’s in the eye of the beholder to some extent.
(But then by the same token I suppose even objectivity is subjective….. grin)

Regarding the Drones however then nothing has changed, the doubters still doubt, the believers still believe and those that are straddling the fence still seem to be certain only about their uncertainty.

Cheers.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by jugement on Oct 9th, 2008, 11:36pm

whats up dr scientist dr dill was just at the speed way gas station and you came to mind. about kris and that drone video i still love it.mind your mind for the jewels of your soul.if i seem distant my friend always remember, i am out leaning about the universes great place to travel.take care ,b. of
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Oct 29th, 2008, 5:50pm

on Oct 29th, 2008, 4:25pm, Deltaepsilon wrote:
Hey DrDil, isn't it time to keep this thing rollin' ?

Here's some go on the latest sighting...

http://droneacademy.conforums.com/

Notice the youtubes at the frontpage...isn't it like a drone fighting the wind?

And isn't it like the new sightings in Stephenville, Texas?

I think it's the same craft...or do you have another explanation of these sightings?

Deltaepsilon

It’s nothing to do with me, roll away…..

No other explanation or opinion without further details, well, other than that the *Joint Reserve Base* (Fort Worth) are obfuscating again.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Oct 29th, 2008, 8:24pm

on Oct 29th, 2008, 6:14pm, Deltaepsilon wrote:

Now, now, I sense hostility?
<snip>
If you hate me, I am sure you have a reason,

Neither hostility nor hate to be found here friend.

At this point I’d like you to review one of your earlier posts, I’d provide a direct link but you’ve since deleted the comment, anyway resourceful as ever I saved it for an occasion such as this and it can be seen here.

Now tell me again about the “good ol’ days”…..

[EDIT]
Look I didn’t want to be drawn into this conversation, you mentioned my name so I responded to your questions then you started with ‘hostility’ and ‘hate’……

I removed the “evidence” as you seemed overly upset and that wasn’t my intention. It’s still in your comment where you quoted me so you can leave it there if you wish, I’m easy….. I’ve just seen your comments so I’ll replace it as I have nothing to hide or be ashamed of.

I hadn’t even noticed your post was deleted until I went looking for it to credit the source today, I don’t visit there as much as I used to and I certainly didn’t hold onto it knowing it had been removed but rather because someone whom I once considered a friend had wrote it.

And as for am I ‘proud of my accomplishment?’

It’s not much of an accomplishment cropping your own post and showing you what you wrote at a later date, but whatever you want to credit me with is fine, same as always…..
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Oct 29th, 2008, 9:53pm

on Oct 29th, 2008, 9:49pm, Deltaepsilon wrote:
You simply cannot take a public apology, can you?


What part of my comment would lead you to ask such an argumentative question?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Nov 17th, 2008, 5:28pm

I would like to ask the entire mass of readers here, do you still believe the case of the "California Drones" to be real?

If in doubt, I strongly suggest you to read through the entire string here.

No evidence has to this day been brought to say it's a fake, and it has not been proven that it is some kind of disinformation placed here.

No one has made it perfectly clear, that we're talking hoax.

I strongly suggest you to search more deeply into this question, as it still is unanswered, only by argument, not backed up by a scientific paper.

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Nov 17th, 2008, 5:31pm

on Nov 17th, 2008, 5:28pm, DrStern wrote:
I would like to ask the entire mass of readers here, do you still believe the case of the "California Drones" to be real?

If in doubt, I strongly suggest you to read through the entire string here.

No evidence has to this day been brought to say it's a fake, and it has not been proven that it is some kind of disinformation placed here.

No one has made it perfectly clear, that we're talking hoax.

I strongly suggest you to search more deeply into this question, as it still is unanswered, only by argument, not backed up by a scientific paper.

DrStern

Wise words and welcome back!!

(And I sincerely mean that.....)

Cheers. smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Nov 17th, 2008, 6:09pm

Black ops (Operations unseen and unknown to the public) has now surfaced.

The "Isaac" testimony qualifies as such.

That's just as earlier assumptions describes, witheld from the public, and implemented into the world of knowledge slowly, and without question released to the exact same, proclaiming it to be science fact, derived from the artefacts once tested in the '80s.

During the "Cold War"

It has merits deeply ingrown in the secret papers of the time, that now is available in the free sources of Information realeased by governments of the old Western Alliance.

I strongly suggest you to seek information in the "Open Libraries" of your country, as information of great importance is to be found here.

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Nov 18th, 2008, 10:53am

on Nov 17th, 2008, 6:09pm, DrStern wrote:
Black ops (Operations unseen and unknown to the public) has now surfaced.

The "Isaac" testimony qualifies as such.

That's just as earlier assumptions describes, witheld from the public, and implemented into the world of knowledge slowly, and without question released to the exact same, proclaiming it to be science fact, derived from the artifacts once tested in the '80s.

During the "Cold War"

It has merits deeply ingrown in the secret papers of the time, that now is available in the free sources of Information realeased by governments of the old Western Alliance.

I strongly suggest you to seek information in the "Open Libraries" of your country, as information of great importance is to be found here.

DrStern

I am sure if there had been something, you would have been the very first to find out.

I am afraid, if there was any cheese in the refrigerator, it's view has been obfuscated by the reams of bologney put out not by the government but by the hoaxers like Isaac , warners, commercialists, and LMH and C2c, that produce vast quantities of it for our consumption. (personally I like a good German Baloney, the best)
I suggest we clean out the refrigerator and restock it with fresh meat, as old baloney can have unpleasant effects.
If others insist otherwise..well....

Bon Apetite.
smiley

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Nov 18th, 2008, 11:31am

on Nov 18th, 2008, 10:53am, TeachersPet wrote:
by the hoaxers like Isaac


1. Do you personally know Isaac?
2. Has this case been absolutely proven to be a hoax?

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Nov 18th, 2008, 1:04pm

on Nov 18th, 2008, 11:31am, ABCStore wrote:
1. Do you personally know Isaac?
2. Has this case been absolutely proven to be a hoax?

ABC

Absolute? are you kidding..Are you serious?
Study your abcs on reasonable man standard, burdens of proof, then reread the prior discussions and analysis done, here and elsewhere, .then rethink your question.
Which is quite moot at this point.

Thank you.
Have a Great Day.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Seeker on Nov 18th, 2008, 1:17pm

on Nov 17th, 2008, 5:28pm, DrStern wrote:
I would like to ask the entire mass of readers here, do you still believe the case of the "California Drones" to be real?

If in doubt, I strongly suggest you to read through the entire string here.

No evidence has to this day been brought to say it's a fake, and it has not been proven that it is some kind of disinformation placed here.

No one has made it perfectly clear, that we're talking hoax.

I strongly suggest you to search more deeply into this question, as it still is unanswered, only by argument, not backed up by a scientific paper.

DrStern


Well said. I am in complete accord.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Nov 18th, 2008, 2:57pm

on Nov 18th, 2008, 11:31am, ABCStore wrote:
1. Do you personally know Isaac?
2. Has this case been absolutely proven to be a hoax?

ABC

User ImageUser ImageUser Image

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by GForce on Nov 18th, 2008, 3:06pm

on Nov 18th, 2008, 10:53am, TeachersPet wrote:
I am sure if there had been something, you would have been the very first to find out.

I am afraid, if there was any cheese in the refrigerator, it's view has been obfuscated by the reams of bologney put out not by the government but by the hoaxers like Isaac , warners, commercialists, and LMH and C2c, that produce vast quantities of it for our consumption. (personally I like a good German Baloney, the best)
I suggest we clean out the refrigerator and restock it with fresh meat, as old baloney can have unpleasant effects.
If others insist otherwise..well....

Bon Apetite.
smiley


Hi TeachersPet I'm still on the fence where the drone is concerned. Yes I have my issues with LMH and good ole Issac but I haven't seen conclusive proof yet to disprove it. Granted I'm not a drone buff and I'm only slightly interested now due to the lack of NEW evidence but the door is still ajar where I'm concerned.

BTW I like fried bologna! grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Nov 18th, 2008, 3:40pm

on Nov 18th, 2008, 2:57pm, DrDil wrote:
User ImageUser ImageUser Image


Now that is one absolute I agree with, DrDil, and without disparaging any member, it looks quite apparent the attempt to revive discussion by those ignoring results of analysis, ie, proof, and ignoring the absolute need for witness, the inconsistent and contradictory statements of isaac, and lying by witneses..analyzed here!, and yet, they bring nothing new except same hackneyed rhetoric..over and over , and somehow..that is supposed to make this a real event.
Not one alien has been produced, not one artifact, from anywhere to even tie this event to. (except Chupacabras from Brazil, Shirley..and even that Uruguay, that Reed artifact and Jamie in Mexico, and ..Robert even)..Anything and everything...just to keep Caret talk going..
They can draw any line they like, and redefine the burdens of proof if they wish..The Reality is..they can't meet even meet the Reasonable test , let alone insanely request absolute from us, who will not change the rules, to suit a desired result.
They asked for testing when they critiqued Biedny and others.. ..they got it..now they can live with it..we certainly can.
Its comical you have them at another site, attempting to do same, in sheer desparation..with the help of higher ups, yet it is to no avail.
Instead its causing a hemmorage of all the level headed to consider leaving and wonder just what their true motive is in the absence of any proof this is anything but a hoax...
..I only posted , because I thought Dr Stern knew better..than to mix this hoax with research in propulsion , heck you can use startrek for that, we need to let them know..we can see through this facade or charade..
Its not discussion..its propaganda.
The Drone Mystery..is no longer a mystery.
To anyone who has read the work done by those such as yourself DrDil..truly detailed, exhaustive, as Marvins, and Allisone, and Torvald..
Its an insult for anyone to come an act as if that work had never happened.
Work done in a passionate search for Truth, NOT a one sided result the others wished for, and have lied for, and continue to supress evidence of hoax..such as Tom Vances involvemnt, who really exposed the witness lying as to location., or the other Needle nose Drone, just a couple of miles away, where the boyfriend wrote email..that girl had lied, but won't release email .. They released walter..because Walter would have gone over their head.,
So Sad, even if it means lying, and misdirecting ..just like a hoaxer..the questions should be, why did they lie, and not demand absolutes from us. We did our part..Honestly and truthfully, and for the average person..convincingly.

By Jove..Gforce good to see you..Reed didnot follow us here did he? cheesy


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by walker02 on Nov 19th, 2008, 6:15pm

DrStern i think i would weigh in on the real side, i'll agree with some others here that isn't convenced its a hoax. On a side note anyone involved in these forms, would you try to submit any info, i mean photos and maybe a sentence or two, it would be like handing them a banana clip.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Nov 21st, 2008, 04:19am

I have selected a couple of papers, that in a professional way shows how to find out if a digital photo is authentic or not:

PUBLICATIONS
Digital Forensics

http://www.ws.binghamton.edu/fridrich/Research/LukFriSPIE06_v9.pdf

Detecting Digital Image Forgeries Using Sensor Pattern Noise

--o0o--

http://www.ws.binghamton.edu/fridrich/Research/Crop_scale.pdf

Camera Identification from Cropped and Scaled Images

--o0o--

Have these methods been used on the photo series of the Drones?

DrStern

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Nov 21st, 2008, 07:46am

on Nov 21st, 2008, 04:19am, DrStern wrote:
I have selected a couple of papers, that in a professional way shows how to find out if a digital photo is authentic or not:

PUBLICATIONS
Digital Forensics

http://www.ws.binghamton.edu/fridrich/Research/LukFriSPIE06_v9.pdf

Detecting Digital Image Forgeries Using Sensor Pattern Noise

--o0o--

http://www.ws.binghamton.edu/fridrich/Research/Crop_scale.pdf

Camera Identification from Cropped and Scaled Images

--o0o--

Have these methods been used on the photo series of the Drones?

DrStern


User Image

Do you mean something like this:


JPEGsnoop 1.2.0 by Calvin Hass
www.impulseadventure.com/photo/
-------------------------------

Filename: [C:\Marvin\Raj\PICT0017.jpg]
Filesize: [388766] Bytes

EXIF IFD0 @ Absolute x[00000026]
Dir Length = x[000C]
[IFD0.x0103 ] = 6
[ImageDescription ] = MINOLTA DIGITAL CAMERA
[Make ] = MINOLTA CO.,LTD
[Model ] = DiMAGE X
[Orientation ] = 1
[XResolution ] = 72/1
[YResolution ] = 72/1
[ResolutionUnit ] = 2
[Software ] = V100-02
[DateTime ] = 2007:05:16 17:43:02
[YCbCrPositioning ] = 2
[ExifOffset ] = x00FA
Offset to Next IFD = [000001F0]

EXIF IFD1 @ Absolute x[0000020E]
Dir Length = x[0005]
[Compression ] = 6
[XResolution ] = 72/1
[YResolution ] = 72/1
[JpegIFOffset ] = 578
[JpegIFByteCount ] = 2409
Offset to Next IFD = [00000000]

EXIF SubIFD @ Absolute x[00000118]
Dir Length = x[0010]
[ExposureProgram ] = 2
[ISOSpeedRatings ] = 100
[ExifVersion ] = x30323230
[DateTimeOriginal ] = 2007:05:16 17:43:02
[DateTimeDigitized ] = 2007:05:16 17:43:02
[ComponentConfiguration ] = x01020300
[CompressedBitsPerPixel ] = 4/1
[MeteringMode ] = 5
[LightSource ] = 0
[Flash ] = 0
[FlashPixVersion ] = x30313030
[ColorSpace ] = 1
[ExifImageWidth ] = 1600
[ExifImageHeight ] = 1200
[FileSource ] = x03000000
[SceneType ] = x01000000


*** Searching Compression Signatures ***

Signature: 0166B0BC0B82C8233430BF67FA31C829
Signature (Rotated): 0166B0BC0B82C8233430BF67FA31C829
File Offset: 0 bytes
Chroma subsampling: 1x1
EXIF Make/Model: OK [MINOLTA CO.,LTD] [DiMAGE X]
EXIF Makernotes: NONE
EXIF Software: OK [V100-02]

Searching Compression Signatures: (3314 built-in, 0 user(*) )

EXIF.Make / Software EXIF.Model Quality Subsamp Match?
------------------------- ----------------------------------- ---------------- --------------
SW :[Adobe Photoshop ] [Save As 10 ]

ASSESSMENT: Image is very likely processed/edited
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Nov 21st, 2008, 11:31am

on Nov 21st, 2008, 07:46am, Marvin wrote:
SW :[Adobe Photoshop ] [Save As 10 ]

ASSESSMENT: Image is very likely processed/edited


This does not prove anything either way. All it does is identify the Adobe Photoshop tag and determine because of that the photo was processed. This never was disputed. According to our examination, the Raj photos likely had color correction applied at a minimum. If that's enough for you or anybody else to proclaim hoax, so be it then. It's a hoax. Move on. But the fact that you continue to beat the subject up means to me that you either am not convinced in your secret mind or you have an agenda to make sure others think a certain way.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Nov 21st, 2008, 11:33am

Quote:
Do you mean something like this:


JPEGsnoop 1.2.0 by Calvin Hass
www.impulseadventure.com/photo/


Hi Marvin!

Yes, I mean something like this. I'll need 3 (three) or more (preferably) lists like this from 3 different digital image programs - source of these programs has to be of different origin. This counts for every single photo.

To summon data that is trustworthy enough to start a paper on these "Drone photo's" it is of the atmost importance that all single photo's has been tested (3 or more times by each program) and the result is similar (or close) to the one you present here.

Furthermore, it would be interesting to know if the images provided by "Isaac" really are scans, and not manipulated photo's.

I'm sure some programs to determine this is available on the Internet.

Latitude wrote:
Quote:
This does not prove anything either way. All it does is identify the Adobe Photoshop tag and determine because of that the photo was processed. This never was disputed.

I agree 100 %. But if we do not try...this whole thread will lose it's purpose grin

DrStern

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Nov 21st, 2008, 2:11pm

on Nov 21st, 2008, 11:31am, Latitude wrote:
This does not prove anything either way. All it does is identify the Adobe Photoshop tag and determine because of that the photo was processed. This never was disputed. According to our examination, the Raj photos likely had color correction applied at a minimum. If that's enough for you or anybody else to proclaim hoax, so be it then. It's a hoax. Move on. But the fact that you continue to beat the subject up means to me that you either am not convinced in your secret mind or you have an agenda to make sure others think a certain way.


Hi all smiley,

Lat I believe as EVS pointed out that Marvin was (by answering EVS’ question) merely discussing the Drones, and as this is the Drone discussion board…..

Besides the fact that nobody had even hinted at the fact that the because the EXIF data shows Photoshop was used in the editing process that it qualifies the image as a hoax, in fact I find it a little strange that you were so quick to assume that this is what was implied.

Furthermore, it appears as if you are both in 100% agreement!!

on Nov 21st, 2008, 07:46am, Marvin wrote:
ASSESSMENT: Image is very likely processed/edited

on Nov 21st, 2008, 11:31am, Latitude wrote:
This does not prove anything either way. All it does is identify the Adobe Photoshop tag and determine because of that the photo was processed.

So, what’s the problem?

It’s also getting a little tired when anyone who believes the image/s are hoaxed offers an opinion then someone such as yourself states that if this is what they believe then they should, “Move on.”

Why?

I believe that not only the images are hoaxed but that none of the witnesses even exist (as claimed/portrayed).

Why in your opinion should my personal belief have anything to do with whether I should comment or not?

And with respect, who are you to tell anyone to, “Move on”?

on Nov 21st, 2008, 11:31am, Latitude wrote:
“But the fact that you continue to beat the subject up means to me that you either am not convinced in your secret mind or you have an agenda to make sure others think a certain way.”

It’s that kind of thinking and public statement that is typical from those who believe in the reality of the Drones. You rarely (if ever) hear that kind of statement from the pro-hoaxers, in fact you are more likely to hear the exact opposite as I’ve often seen the pro-hoaxers ask for analysis/evidence to be presented that can refute their position or that could strengthen the argument for real.

I put it to you that the above statement you made shows a blatant agenda at work….. undecided

And as for, “Beat the subject up?!”

That certainly WASN’T what was happening, EVS simply asked a question which Marvin answered. So I ask you to please refrain from attempting to stifle or police the discussion while here at UFOCasebook and save the selective ethics for any other forums you may frequent.

Anyway, it’s nice to see Marvin & EVS posting again regardless of what you think…..

Cheers.

EVS, (regarding your signature) unless you’re planning on leaving us again then there should be a *c* in *exiting* wink.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Nov 21st, 2008, 2:28pm

Quote:
EVS, (regarding your signature) unless you’re planning on leaving us again then there should be a *c* in *exiting*


Hi DrDil,

I thank you for detecting my small "mishap".. grin

Typo

EVS,,,oops DrStern cool

Ps: I'm neither "pro" or "con". Just want to know the truth behind this amazing story. Until 100 % proven I choose to believe...so some will say I'm "pro" grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Nov 21st, 2008, 2:42pm

on Nov 21st, 2008, 2:11pm, DrDil wrote:
I put it to you that the above statement you made shows a blatant agenda at work….. undecided

I only have one agenda. Open mindedness.

Quote:
So I ask you to please refrain from attempting to stifle or police the discussion while here at UFOCasebook and save the selective ethics for any other forums you may frequent.

Those are serious accusations there, DD. Who's stifling who? I enjoy stimulating discussion especially in the drone thread. Check my posting history. I only sought to clarify the Jpeg Snoop conclusion.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Nov 21st, 2008, 3:07pm

on Nov 21st, 2008, 2:42pm, Latitude wrote:
Those are serious accusations there, DD. Who's stifling who? I enjoy stimulating discussion especially in the drone thread. Check my posting history. I only sought to clarify the Jpeg Snoop conclusion.

I’m well aware of your history and they’re not accusations Lat they’re fact.

Marvin answered EVS question then you flew off on a tangent accusing Marvin of stating hoax when no such thing was posted and then suggesting he should move on.

Stifling: repressive in not allowing full expression.

Stimulating: to encourage something such as an activity or a process so that it will begin, increase, or develop.

Stimulating: Such as EVS proposing the EXIF theory then encouraging others to help investigate it with him.

Stimulating: Such as Marvin taking EVS up on this idea an stating that the Photoshop tag was suggestive of the image being, “Very likely processed/edited.”

Stifling: You then telling Marvin to move on if that’s what he thought and that you can’t understand why he doesn’t (move on) unless he has, “An agenda trying to make sure others think a certain way.”

Stifling: You accusing Marvin of beating up the subject when in fact he was stimulating discussion.

on Nov 21st, 2008, 2:42pm, Latitude wrote:
I only have one agenda. Open mindedness.

Quote:
Some minds remain open long enough for the truth not only to enter but to pass on through by way of a ready exit without pausing anywhere along the route.

Elizabeth Kenny



Cheers!! kiss
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Nov 21st, 2008, 3:11pm

on Nov 21st, 2008, 2:28pm, DrStern wrote:
Hi DrDil,

I thank you for detecting my small "mishap".. grin

Typo

EVS,,,oops DrStern cool

Ps: I'm neither "pro" or "con". Just want to know the truth behind this amazing story. Until 100 % proven I choose to believe...so some will say I'm "pro" grin

Always a pleasure EVS wink,

Perhaps the best way forward would be to establish a timeline regarding the images, i.e. who handled them, if the EXIF shows they were edited theb was it a PC or Mac (like LMH uses), scanned, emailed or hard-mailed etc. etc.

Perhaps if you ask Lat nicely he may ‘stimulate’ the discussion further by sharing what he knows…..

Cheers. smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Nov 21st, 2008, 3:23pm

on Nov 21st, 2008, 11:31am, Latitude wrote:
This does not prove anything either way. All it does is identify the Adobe Photoshop tag and determine because of that the photo was processed. This never was disputed. According to our examination, the Raj photos likely had color correction applied at a minimum. If that's enough for you or anybody else to proclaim hoax, so be it then. It's a hoax. Move on. But the fact that you continue to beat the subject up means to me that you either am not convinced in your secret mind or you have an agenda to make sure others think a certain way.





I think you are reading more into my post than I placed there Lat. I was just responding to a question with a question.

Quote:
Searching Compression Signatures: (3314 built-in, 0 user(*) )

EXIF.Make / Software EXIF.Model Quality Subsamp Match?
------------------------- ----------------------------------- ---------------- --------------
SW :[Adobe Photoshop ] [Save As 10 ]

ASSESSMENT: Image is very likely processed/edited


As you are aware, the above is the assessment of the software… and yes, this is old news to us, but not to everyone.

Quote:
This does not prove anything either way.



So, if you want to point out the obvious, this is objective evidence or proof. It is proof the photo was washed through Photoshop. Since Photoshop can be a bit pricey, I would have to assume people do not go out drop this kind of cash just to download photos for their camera (isn’t that software included with the camera?). So if they are not buying it to download photos, what are they using Photoshop for?

It is a glaring red flag that has to be examined and explained (and not speculated as meaningless).

Oh, and not to mention that the Raj drones have the shadow fingerprints of being CGI with a secondary sun source (which have been documented). Other than that, you are correct… the Photoshop tag does not prove anything. wink

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Nov 21st, 2008, 3:38pm

This is getting so entangled but I stand by my post to you Marvin.

Please show us the result of 3 or more programs, and as DrDil says, search the timeline of the photo's.

The more "clean" the photo's are the better chance there is to establish the unity of the different outputs.

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Nov 21st, 2008, 4:16pm

on Nov 21st, 2008, 3:38pm, DrStern wrote:
This is getting so entangled but I stand by my post to you Marvin.

Please show us the result of 3 or more programs, and as DrDil says, search the timeline of the photo's.

The more "clean" the photo's are the better chance there is to establish the unity of the different outputs.

DrStern



If you are interesting in ROI analysis, then I understand your desire to see three analysis... but considering some of this software is leased by the year (at $25,000 per year), I personally do not have the deep pockets for such a thing.

While people have offered to help pay for such an analysis... the interest has not be all that high to get it done (I can only speculate that is more fun to keep the myth alive than to place another nail in the coffin). With the Drone and Isaac photos, we have a number of "dead" bodies (and the objective evidence to show they are “dead”)... but there are those who are not willing to go to the visitation, much less the funeral.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Nov 21st, 2008, 4:30pm

on Nov 21st, 2008, 4:16pm, Marvin wrote:
If you are interesting in ROI analysis, then I understand your desire to see three analysis... but considering some of this software is leased by the year (at $25,000 per year), I personally do not have the deep pockets for such a thing.

While people have offered to help pay for such an analysis... the interest has not be all that high to get it done (I can only speculate that is more fun to keep the myth alive than to place another nail in the coffin). With the Drone and Isaac photos, we have a number of "dead" bodies (and the objective evidence to show they are “dead”)... but there are those who are not willing to go to the visitation, much less the funeral.


I understand, Marvin. I was not aware of your capabilities.

Not to worry, I'll see what I myself can come up with, now I want the truth to this enigma, be it true or not. It may take me a while, but so be it. smiley

Cheers wink

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Nov 21st, 2008, 5:22pm

cheers smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Nov 21st, 2008, 6:27pm

on Nov 21st, 2008, 4:30pm, DrStern wrote:
I understand, Marvin. I was not aware of your capabilities.

Not to worry, I'll see what I myself can come up with, now I want the truth to this enigma, be it true or not. It may take me a while, but so be it. smiley

Cheers wink

DrStern



Doc,

Don't miss understand Lat and I when we play... and we have been doing this along time (truly Lat, although we disagree... I see you as an old friend that helps to keep us thinking and challenged).

It is my opinion there has been enough evidence found to seriously place the veracity of the whole BB Drone story and photos (and Isaac) into grave doubt (to reasonable folks, it has been proven within a reasonable doubt). Truly, the preponderance of the evidence clearly has shifted the weight or burden of proof to anyone that claims there is or maybe some truth to the story. Anyone that claims there is no evidence to prove the situation one way or the other is either ignorant of the facts and evidence… or is being intellectually dishonest. There is plenty of evidence, but there has been a “shell game” played with the interpretation of that evidence. When being accommodating to the “what ifs” and the “it may be possibles,” does the remote series of unlikely events fall into place for the BB Drones to “remotely” be a real event.

If one rationally weights the odds… if it is a 50:50 or 1:1,000,000, does it begin to make some tangible sense that a fifty-fifty shot is more likely to be true than a one shot in a million. The weight of all proof has all of the physical and tangible evidence falling to the side of this affair being a hoax. There is zero evidence to support the reality of the photos, the stories or the alleged witnesses. The facts, when researched, have gone on to support deception, not truth.

The missing piece in this equation is the absence of any and all witnesses. The photos (even if nothing could be found to be wrong with them) make poor witnesses on their own accord. One cannot cross examine or ask questions of a photo, especially photos with an untraceable line of custody. It is difficult to believe that all of the reported witnesses have gone silent… that the people they would have spoke to, have never gone public. Their silence is as deafening as it is unbelievable.

In the end, you will have to follow your heart, DrStern… for a enlightened heart will always guide you to the truth.

BTW, it is good to see you posting again!

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Nov 21st, 2008, 6:37pm

on Nov 21st, 2008, 6:27pm, Marvin wrote:
Doc,

Don't miss understand Lat and I when we play... and we have been doing this along time (truly Lat, although we disagree... I see you as an old friend that helps to keep us thinking and challenged).

Marvin,

on Oct 26th, 2008, 4:10pm, DrDil wrote:
Besides, as Lat knows I don’t mind ‘going the extra mile' for him!! grin

on Oct 26th, 2008, 4:28pm, Latitude wrote:
smiley Thanks, Dr Dill. I take it as a complement. Plus it makes it that much more fun.

Cheers to you wink


(Does Mr Understand know?! laugh)

Cheers.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Nov 21st, 2008, 7:46pm

on Nov 21st, 2008, 3:23pm, Marvin wrote:
I think you are reading more into my post than I placed there Lat. I was just responding to a question with a question.

Maybe. Maybe not. We'll see.

Quote:
So, if you want to point out the obvious, this is objective evidence or proof. It is proof the photo was washed through Photoshop.

It's only proof that photoshop was used at some point. It is unknown what it was used for. Jpeg snoop cannot determine that. Nobody has ever proved what it was used for.

Quote:
Since Photoshop can be a bit pricey, I would have to assume people do not go out drop this kind of cash just to download photos for their camera (isn’t that software included with the camera?). So if they are not buying it to download photos, what are they using Photoshop for?

Ah ha! Now we get to the crux of why you posted the jpeg snoop, to cast doubt on the pics. My suspicion was correct!

Quote:
It is a glaring red flag that has to be examined and explained (and not speculated as meaningless).

But it could be meaningless. It could be any number of things. We may never know why. But how many pics on flickr of a girlfriend that has a PS tag in it? Are those fake girlfriends?

Whenever somebody mentions the PS tag in the Raj pics they always forget that the Stephen pics have no PS tags. Kind of kills the whole argument doesn't it? (also the Tahoe pics)

Quote:
Oh, and not to mention that the Raj drones have the shadow fingerprints of being CGI with a secondary sun source (which have been documented).

Possibly faulty conclusions based on faulty data and faulty skills. It's not an easy task. CGI artists have been trying to replicate reality since the advent of the genre. Some hit the mark better than others. To claim that any given geek with access to cgi software should be able to easily replicate the photos is over simplifying it.

Quote:
Other than that, you are correct… the Photoshop tag does not prove anything. wink

So in the end we do agree. We just took different routes to get there. smiley


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ZETAR on Nov 21st, 2008, 8:16pm

TIS NICE TO SEE THE TEAM SPIRIT ALIVE AND WELL ON THIS TOPIC... grin
SHALOM...ZETAR grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by hjdelight on Nov 21st, 2008, 9:40pm

Yeah, it's like visiting a museum....it never changes. You guys are going to argue this til the end of eternity.

HJ
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Nov 21st, 2008, 9:49pm

on Nov 21st, 2008, 7:46pm, Latitude wrote:
It's only proof that photoshop was used at some point. It is unknown what it was used for. Jpeg snoop cannot determine that. Nobody has ever proved what it was used for.


While it is true, if you just look at this one, single piece of evidence (removed from all other evidence and ignoring anything else that has been learned)… one can make the argument of innocence and ignorance that the Photoshop tag does not point to deception. But we know Photoshop was not used to play ping-pong, to put gasoline in a car or to make a flower garden. What can Photoshop be used for? Oh, I know… as a $650 to $1000 camera downloader program… good call. wink


on Nov 21st, 2008, 7:46pm, Latitude wrote:
Ah ha! Now we get to the crux of why you posted the jpeg snoop, to cast doubt on the pics. My suspicion was correct!


Actually, that was not the intent… it was a demonstration that it can be detected. Do you think we should be suspicious? Are you saying that the detection does cast doubt? Or are you just a suspicious guy like me? wink


on Nov 21st, 2008, 7:46pm, Latitude wrote:
But it could be meaningless. It could be any number of things. We may never know why. But how many pics on flickr of a girlfriend that has a PS tag in it? Are those fake girlfriends?


The only fake girlfriends I’ve ever seen had Adam & Eve tags, plastic valves and required a bicycle pump to inflate… I think you’re safe.


on Nov 21st, 2008, 7:46pm, Latitude wrote:
Whenever somebody mentions the PS tag in the Raj pics they always forget that the Stephen pics have no PS tags. Kind of kills the whole argument doesn't it? (also the Tahoe pics).


I do not recall bring up the Stephen and Tahoe pics being in this discussion. So it may kill someone’s argument… but it must be on a different post.

There has to be more than one way to “skin a cat” and Snoop does not have all of the possible different software built in for detection. It is constantly being updated… much like anti-spyware. Ah the pleasures of future releases.


on Nov 21st, 2008, 7:46pm, Latitude wrote:
Possibly faulty conclusions based on faulty data and faulty skills. It's not an easy task. CGI artists have been trying to replicate reality since the advent of the genre. Some hit the mark better than others. To claim that any given geek with access to cgi software should be able to easily replicate the photos is over simplifying it.


"Possibly faulty conclusions?"

What is possibly?

What is the fault?

Much opportunity has been afforded to opposing evidence… but none has been given, the only thing that has been used to point to faulty conclusions are opinions and “what ifs.” I saw the evidence, it is hard core and indisputable. Take that “possibly faulty” evidence to a well known and respected professional… let’s see which side of “faulty” they will come down on. There is zero doubt in my mind (from my professional experience in perception and appearance).


on Nov 21st, 2008, 7:46pm, Latitude wrote:
So in the end we do agree. We just took different routes to get there. smiley


Yes, in the end (as usual), we agree to disagree. But that is why I like you Lat… you keep me on my toes. wink

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by aussiegrail on Nov 21st, 2008, 11:34pm

Hi everyone.

Very interesting article on the Drones and Cameras.

Seems to me that to prove anything these days you have to take the Camera direct to a specialist to decide whether or not you have faked the photo. You dare not download to your Computer, immediately its classified as fake.

All of us have a different photo program, I use Corel
what difference does it mean which program is used?

Problem with this article is it now being used as a debating session and the real question has been lost.







Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Nov 22nd, 2008, 12:18am

on Nov 21st, 2008, 11:34pm, aussiegrail wrote:
Hi everyone.

Very interesting article on the Drones and Cameras.

Seems to me that to prove anything these days you have to take the Camera direct to a specialist to decide whether or not you have faked the photo. You dare not download to your Computer, immediately its classified as fake.
All of us have a different photo program, I use Corel
what difference does it mean which program is used?

Problem with this article is it now being used as a debating session and the real question has been lost.


Really? where did you see that stated anywhere in that manner?
Before we go in ad nauseum circles here which is what I see happening, I just looked at the 27000 posts at OMF, the 7900 posts at at ATs and the 5000 plus posts here, and a years work, I havent seen that kind of premature conclusion at all.
If you go here
http://lucianarchy.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=cali1&action=display&thread=3544
you will see the analysis that was done, hardly the work of people who pre judged it fake, but tampered with they were. even attemps to change the model of the original camera,.and in another instance, defied the laws of physics..things that just Don't happen by themselves..'
Well informed opinions..not knee jerk reactions..as you seem to imply, forgive me if I'm wrong or misunderstood, , ..not giving the case a chance merely because it was download to not just one but several computers..
Enough was gleened from this case that a workshop how to detect hoaxes was done by a a CGI and models expert at last years Mufon Conference, and who complimented the thorough work of both camps, done by the people in that link. hardly a debunking agency, in fact, its an advocacy org for ufos .
or if you want to see the issues as to both pictures and witnesses in a very balanced and concise manner you can go here
http://www.dronehoax.com/
or here for a very very pro real.
http://www.droneteam.com
and compare..
A real question to me now is why did the people who vigorously promoted this "Unsolved Mystery" ,Earthfiles Linda M Howe, who who still holds the "real evidence" and remaining photos, and who disingenuously forgot to mention Isaac in a c2c broadcast on UFO classified documments, and C2C George Noory, and Communion Hall of fame Whitley Strieber fail to include it on their Sci Fi Channel Debut the other night. People who have gone on record saying "real", championing the cause, calling for new witnesses, and one even dreaming one up in an early morning vision and heralding a new era..
Alas.Not an honorable mention, not a vowel, consonant, or dipthong, not a whimper, .not even a peep. What motive can we ascribe to that deafening silence on the matter?

Just what other question did we lose track or sight of ?
Thank you
smiley



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ZETAR on Nov 22nd, 2008, 01:16am

HEY TEACHERSPET,
NO QUESTION ABOUT IT...SOME OF THE MOST CREATIVE ,BRILLIANT, DETERMINED, AND ACADEMICALLY ACOMPLISHED INDIVIDUALS SUNK THEIR TEETH AND TIME INTO THIS SAGA OF UFOLOGY...THE TRAGEDY IS THE DEVISIVENESS WHICH RESULTED ALTHOUGH I SEE MANY REACHING OUT WHOM REALISE THE BUMPS IN THE ROAD IN ANY PHENOMENA AND THEY ARE BETTER OFF WITH THE INTERACTIONS OF THOSE MINDS THAN HAD THEY NOT ENCOUNTERED AT ALL...

THE FLAGS FLYING IN THIS ARE DIVIDED INTO TWO CAMPS...THE SAD ASPECT IN MY MIND IS THAT IT CAN'T BE ONE FLAG ...FOR THE TRUTH...WHICH HERETOFORE HAS BEEN AND ELUSIVE CRITTER grin...

NONETHELESS,...THE DEBATE HAS BEEN LIVELY.

MY SIDELINES OBSERVATION PLACES MUCH OF THE RESPONSIBILTY IN THE DEVISIVENESS AT THE FEET OF "LMH" AND HER REFUSAL TO RELEASE SPECIFIC PHOTOS...IN LIEU OF THAT NOT COMING TO PASS SOME DYNAMIC INVESTIGATIVE WORK HAS TAKEN PLACE WHICH SHOULD BE CREDITED FOR THEIR HARD WORK...

IT IS A FACT THAT THE MILITARY HAS DRONES WHICH ATTACH TO ELECTRICAL WIRES AND RECHARGE...THEY MORPH TO LOOK AS SOMETHING ELSE WHILE DOING SO...I HAVE OFTEN THOUGHT THERE MAY HAVE BEEN SOME COLLUSION WITH THEIR DRONE PROGRAM AS A COVER,DISTRACTION,BAIT AND SWITCH TO FURTHER SOMETHING MORE TERRESTRIAL THAN EXTRATERESSTRIAL...

WELL UNTIL THE NEXT PHOTOS OR SIGHTING...THIS IS THE NATURE OF THE BEAST...

SHALOM...ZETAR

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Nov 22nd, 2008, 01:40am

Hi Zetar! yes the military does have some wonderful and yet frightening things, at the nano level especially..
and even DNA specic weapons, I understand, You know, Darpa funded that organic neural setup at Mason University over 3 years ago..to interface with all these cameras, and learn behaviour..
I hope it does not catch a cold..I hate to see what happens when it sneezes..
This I think,,that we come up with more clever things than the ET..

As for Linda..perhaps she has better luck with the perpetual motion rock. You know that Pet rocks were quite the rage in the US like the hoola hoop and chi-chia plants..cheesy

smiley



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Nov 22nd, 2008, 10:34am

on Nov 22nd, 2008, 01:16am, ZETAR wrote:
THE FLAGS FLYING IN THIS ARE DIVIDED INTO TWO CAMPS...THE SAD ASPECT IN MY MIND IS THAT IT CAN'T BE ONE FLAG ...FOR THE TRUTH...WHICH HERETOFORE HAS BEEN AND ELUSIVE CRITTER grin...

NONETHELESS,...THE DEBATE HAS BEEN LIVELY.


Truth is a funny thing. What one culture holds to be true, maybe discarded by another culture as erroneous. Individual people and believes are not much different and can vary due to personal experience and the like.

What I am interested in, is fact and object evidence. They are the foundations of “Western thought” when describing the concept of truth.

This maybe an insight into the divisions you are seeing when “camps” are seeking the “truth.”

on Nov 22nd, 2008, 01:16am, ZETAR wrote:
MY SIDELINES OBSERVATION PLACES MUCH OF THE RESPONSIBILTY IN THE DEVISIVENESS AT THE FEET OF "LMH" AND HER REFUSAL TO RELEASE SPECIFIC PHOTOS...IN LIEU OF THAT NOT COMING TO PASS SOME DYNAMIC INVESTIGATIVE WORK HAS TAKEN PLACE WHICH SHOULD BE CREDITED FOR THEIR HARD WORK...


Personally, I think we need to move beyond this blame game. It is a side track to the “truth.”

We have enough objective evidence and investigation to draw a conclusion. More anonymous photos, more anonymous explanations by phone, email or on a forum has not and will not add credence to the Drone case. The only missing piece to the evidence “story” is a witness.

You cannot take photographs and a story to court, you need a “body” or person. Without the person (in this case, the witnesses)… you don’t have a case. One can debate fake photos all day long as being real... to the uninformed, it is just an endless debate that has tempting arguments on both sides. But without the person who took the photos, in today’s world of CGI and Photoshop, the photos alone are meaningless.

Since we do not have any of the myriad of witnesses, all we can do is to check the stories against the photos… which have been done. What do we discover? Deception.

Chad claimed he took his photos in Bakersfield… as supported by the DRT, the photos were actual taken near San Jose (near the Big Basin area). That is deception.

Raj claimed to have taken his photos in Capitola… but the street light in one of the photos does not exist in Capitola. Hmmm, another deception.

Ty claims the Drone he and his bicycle friends watched (and photographed) just basically hovered in one spot, even as he took photos. But on examination of the photos, there is a point where the Drone appears to quickly approach him (it did not just stay on one spot). How could he not remember that? More deception? The list goes on and on.

With the lack of history for the line of custody of all photos, Photoshop tags, evidence of tampering and CGI… How does one sustain the “truth” and veracity of the Big Basin Drone as the only solution in the face of the known facts and evidence?

It would seem to me, the burden of proof solely falls on anyone claiming reality in this case... but without a witness, LOL.


Peace
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Nov 22nd, 2008, 2:35pm

on Nov 22nd, 2008, 10:34am, Marvin wrote:
We have enough objective evidence and investigation to draw a conclusion. More anonymous photos, more anonymous explanations by phone, email or on a forum has not and will not add credence to the Drone case. The only missing piece to the evidence “story” is a witness.

You cannot take photographs and a story to court, you need a “body” or person. Without the person (in this case, the witnesses)… you don’t have a case. One can debate fake photos all day long as being real... to the uninformed, it is just an endless debate that has tempting arguments on both sides. But without the person who took the photos, in today’s world of CGI and Photoshop, the photos alone are meaningless.
Yes but one thing we have learned through not only the drone case but almost all of ufology is that only one side is the safe and provable... and for a good reason. If a photo witness did come forward with beyond a shadow of a doubt proof it would mean the end of the world as we know it. This is why it cannot happen. It will never be allowed. If it did happen by some mistake or freak happenstance (drones?) it would be very possible that history itself would need to be fixed and that is likely what would happen.

Quote:
Since we do not have any of the myriad of witnesses, all we can do is to check the stories against the photos… which have been done. What do we discover? Deception.
I believe this is very true, but for a good reason, anonymity. When you have dangerous information why stick your neck out? How will it profit you?

Quote:
Chad claimed he took his photos in Bakersfield… as supported by the DRT, the photos were actual taken near San Jose (near the Big Basin area). That is deception.
False. Chad never claimed to have taken the pics in Bakersfield.

Quote:
Raj claimed to have taken his photos in Capitola… but the street light in one of the photos does not exist in Capitola. Hmmm, another deception.
False again. There is no proof it does not exist in Capitola.

Quote:
Ty claims the Drone he and his bicycle friends watched (and photographed) just basically hovered in one spot, even as he took photos. But on examination of the photos, there is a point where the Drone appears to quickly approach him (it did not just stay on one spot). How could he not remember that? More deception? The list goes on and on.
False again. From the Ty letter: Quote:
It might have been moving a little too, but it was hard to tell from our location. For the most part it was stationary.
That was before the pics were taken. Then when the 12 pics were taken: Quote:
It was moving very slowly as well but not much activity.





Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Nov 22nd, 2008, 4:59pm

I believe this is very true, but for a good reason, anonymity. When you have dangerous information why stick your neck out? How will it profit you?
THE IDEA MAY BE "DANGEROUS, ANALYSIS OF THE NARRATIVES AND PIX SHOWED NOTHING DANGEROUS..THATS YOUR OPINION UNLESS YOU KNOW SOMETHING WE DON'T
False. Chad never claimed to have taken the pics in Bakersfield.
No Linda Did, where is Linda


False again. There is no proof it does not exist in Capitola.Yes there is, pi stated at DRT they could not find it, this SEASONED PIS WITH CONNECTIONS with even Tom Vance, a PSE&G Man..and months of searching.MISLEADING AND DECEPTIVE.
False again. From the Ty letter:That was before the pics were taken. Then when the 12 pics were taken:
AGAIN, LINDAS PIX WOULKD REVEAL THAT WOULD IT NOT? WE HAVE ONE AND IT MOVED BIG TIME BUT ONE WAS ENOUGH TO TRASH THEMDECEPTION AND DISTORTION OF FACTS

User Image

HECK EVEN THE WEBMASTER OF TK LIVES IN SAME AREA OUTLINED.
RAJMAN LEAD WAS TRACED TO BETWEEN C AND E ON THE MAP at Elan Village again, San Jose
User Image
NICE COINCIDENCE THERE TOO, NOTHING EVER WAS AGAIN AFTER I GAVE THE PHONE NUMBER TO A DRT MEMBER

From a little higher up to include Lake tahoe,
it looks even more comical
User Image

WHO IS KIDDING WHO HERE!
and as you were named by a reliable source, as the person suggesting on a skype call with your DRT colleagues to hog the Drone matter and make it a DRT exclusive , as things were not going well at OMF, it doesn't surprise me in the least you are here now.just .like Rutter is at OM tryng to rejuvenate the "DR"Reed hoax , the same sorry story. Whether for money, glory, or just something to do,
Your suggestion was well taken, the DRT does have the market cornered on this..and thats the way it should be,
when wishes come true.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Nov 23rd, 2008, 12:36pm

on Nov 22nd, 2008, 2:35pm, Latitude wrote:
Yes but one thing we have learned through not only the drone case but almost all of ufology is that only one side is the safe and provable... and for a good reason. If a photo witness did come forward with beyond a shadow of a doubt proof it would mean the end of the world as we know it. This is why it cannot happen. It will never be allowed. If it did happen by some mistake or freak happenstance (drones?) it would be very possible that history itself would need to be fixed and that is likely what would happen.

I believe this is very true, but for a good reason, anonymity. When you have dangerous information why stick your neck out? How will it profit you?

False. Chad never claimed to have taken the pics in Bakersfield.

False again. There is no proof it does not exist in Capitola.


I believe Teacher’s Pet has addressed these…

on May 10th, 2007, 2:13pm, oljack666 wrote:
PREVIOUS DRONE ACCOUNTS

Chronological Order


Bakersfield California – May 6, 2007 - Chad and multiple witnesses
http://www.ufocasebook.com/strangecraftphotos.html



The location was later given to LMH by Chad as being Bakersfield… you know that Lat. And your debate would be with her… Unless you some how you know Linda is not telling the truth… the burden of “proof” is in your court now.


on Nov 22nd, 2008, 2:35pm, Latitude wrote:
False again. There is no proof it does not exist in Capitola.


Research has shown this type of street light is not used by Capitola… again, the burden of proof is in your “court” to disprove the evidence that has been reported.

on Nov 22nd, 2008, 2:35pm, Latitude wrote:
False again. From the Ty letter:That was before the pics were taken. Then when the 12 pics were taken:

“It might have been moving a little too, but it was hard to tell from our location. For the most part it was stationary.”
“It was moving very slowly as well but not much activity.”


Yes, Ty says it all…

“For the most part it was stationary.”
“It was moving very slowly as well but not much activity.”

To me this suggest (For the most part it was stationary… but not much activity) it did not move very much… and it does not suggest that the Drone charged right at him as suggest by his photos:

User Image

Noticed what happens in LL... and Lat, you are the one to say it came right at him... it would be a frightening experience.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Nov 23rd, 2008, 1:43pm

Hi Marvin,

Even though I disagree with your tack of attempting to prove the drone case false I think you are personally a nice guy. Maybe someone I could even call a friend.

The problem with your conclusions are that too much is being read into the evidence that simply is not there. Take the pole for instance. Sure the PI did look for it as did 11A and I. Just because we did not find it does not prove it never existed. We never even looked for the lamp. To assume the lamp is for street lighting is jumping to an unwarranted conclusion.

Ty talks about the movement of the object. He never goes into detail about camera movement or operation. To make conclusions based on our attempts to piece together photos is is only speculation.

Linda never lied. The whole Chad thing is a real gray area with way too much room for interpretation. It may be that Chad, even though he was much maligned, was actually the smartest of the photo witnesses. The most important lesson to come out of the entire drone saga is how would we handle being a photo witness of this type? Put yourself in their shoes. What would you have done differently?



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Nov 23rd, 2008, 2:16pm

on Nov 23rd, 2008, 1:43pm, Latitude wrote:
Hi Marvin,

Linda never lied. The whole Chad thing is a real gray area with way too much room for interpretation. It may be that Chad, even though he was much maligned, was actually the smartest of the photo witnesses. The most important lesson to come out of the entire drone saga is how would we handle being a photo witness of this type? Put yourself in their shoes. What would you have done differently?





I am not sure that I understand the gray area...

But I would either report the incident or not... I would not have just placed it out there and disappear.

But there is zero evidence to support the reality of the BB Drones... or you would place it here (and not just opinion).

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Nov 23rd, 2008, 3:51pm

on Nov 23rd, 2008, 1:43pm, Latitude wrote:
Linda never lied. The whole Chad thing is a real gray area with way too much room for interpretation.

Hi Lat,

Linda wrote the following in a (now archived) web page on March 21st (2008).

Quote:
Earthfiles • 05/16/2007 — Updated: Odd Aerial “Drones”?
Over Lake Tahoe and Central California

Bakersfield, California, region, May 6, 2007:
But the next day on May 6, 2007, the man calling himself “Chad” took several clear, digital camera images of a dragonfly-shaped drone\ that was more complicated than the Lake Tahoe craft. Numbers, letters and symbols can be seen extending along the tail. I have corresponded several times with Chad and know his full name.

And your fellow DRT member and the person whom visited and documented the REAL Chad location with you wrote the following on September 18th (2008).

User Image

So what’s the gray area?

Seems as if Chad is a pathological liar who tricked Linda as I feel it’s highly unlikely that Chad gave Linda his real name when he obviously lied to her repeatedly about his location….

on Nov 23rd, 2008, 1:43pm, Latitude wrote:
The problem with your conclusions are that too much is being read into the evidence that simply is not there.

So relying JUST on the evidence what makes you believe Chad didn’t lie abut everything?

Cheers.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Nov 23rd, 2008, 4:05pm

Hi DrDil,

It seems like that you forgot to quote my full post on OMF, so just to be fair....

User Image
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Nov 23rd, 2008, 4:40pm

on Nov 23rd, 2008, 4:05pm, elevenaugust wrote:
Hi DrDil,

It seems like that you forgot to quote my full post on OMF, so just to be fair....

User Image

Heh, heh, Hi 11!! grin

So you are talking to me then?! wink

I didn't really forget as such, it's really because it's no more than supposition, conjecture and opinion which I have and can indeed proffer more than enough of myself!! So rather than excuse and explain away possible discrepancies I try to stick with the KNOWN facts, besides which the ONLY reference I was making was in reply to what was KNOWN about LMH and Chad’s location.

Not what we can guess, hypothesise, fantasise etc.

But seeing as you’re answering for Lat and relying entirely on what is KNOWN then allow me to address you with the same question.

What gray area?

(And of course just in case you’d forgot, my last sentence was as follows):

on Nov 23rd, 2008, 3:51pm, DrDil wrote:
So relying JUST on the evidence what makes you believe Chad didn’t lie abut everything?

It’s genuinely good to see you posting again and I hope you’re well.

Cheers. smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Nov 23rd, 2008, 4:46pm

Hmm you are not 100 percent sure, but based on the context of everything, we can be reasonably sure he did give anything but the truth.. The evidence is already there
to expect 100 percent ABSOLUTE certainty is unreasonable , because some have kept some of the infromation to yourselves, not just Linda.
Whats worse than witnesses not being forthcoming is researchers/investigators not being forthcoming with what they have in their possession or being misleading with descriptions of of the actual event site, to literally point away from the site, such as the Restaurant.

To not release the content of the cam witnes boyfriend stating she lied..yet walters email they did,

or the role of Tom Vance, who did the PI work for them..
and later is found to be an old friend/acquaintence of one of the PI..when the PI was working as a cop..and he in hauling service..

shows them being highly selective..not open ..and dishonest
Its not only worse, and biased, its irresponsible and unethical and makes you liars too.

Of that we can also be reasonably sure.
To dispell mistrust you must be transparent..
open let the chips fall where they may.
That was not done.why?
because ..
If it had then we can be perhaps even closer to that one hundred percent certainty of hoax, perhaps even 110 % wink

we like to make excuses for witnesses, pure speculation., he scared, flipped images, normal, tampering, normal and explainable..thats not speculation..thats fabrication!











Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Nov 23rd, 2008, 7:10pm

on Nov 22nd, 2008, 10:34am, Marvin wrote:
Truth is a funny thing. What one culture holds to be true, maybe discarded by another culture as erroneous. Individual people and believes are not much different and can vary due to personal experience and the like.

What I am interested in, is fact and object evidence. They are the foundations of “Western thought” when describing the concept of truth.

This maybe an insight into the divisions you are seeing when “camps” are seeking the “truth.”



Personally, I think we need to move beyond this blame game. It is a side track to the “truth.”

We have enough objective evidence and investigation to draw a conclusion. More anonymous photos, more anonymous explanations by phone, email or on a forum has not and will not add credence to the Drone case. The only missing piece to the evidence “story” is a witness.

You cannot take photographs and a story to court, you need a “body” or person. Without the person (in this case, the witnesses)… you don’t have a case. One can debate fake photos all day long as being real... to the uninformed, it is just an endless debate that has tempting arguments on both sides. But without the person who took the photos, in today’s world of CGI and Photoshop, the photos alone are meaningless.

Since we do not have any of the myriad of witnesses, all we can do is to check the stories against the photos… which have been done. What do we discover? Deception.

Chad claimed he took his photos in Bakersfield… as supported by the DRT, the photos were actual taken near San Jose (near the Big Basin area). That is deception.

Raj claimed to have taken his photos in Capitola… but the street light in one of the photos does not exist in Capitola. Hmmm, another deception.

Ty claims the Drone he and his bicycle friends watched (and photographed) just basically hovered in one spot, even as he took photos. But on examination of the photos, there is a point where the Drone appears to quickly approach him (it did not just stay on one spot). How could he not remember that? More deception? The list goes on and on.

With the lack of history for the line of custody of all photos, Photoshop tags, evidence of tampering and CGI… How does one sustain the “truth” and veracity of the Big Basin Drone as the only solution in the face of the known facts and evidence?

It would seem to me, the burden of proof solely falls on anyone claiming reality in this case... but without a witness, LOL.


Peace




I still stand on the facts and evidence, which are foundation of my above statements.

I am still waiting (and have been for many months now) for any objective evidence of this being a real event. Any objective evidence that demonstrates any fault with the evidence pointing toward hoax.

Let me say the Chad debate can rage on only if you give the benefit of the doubt to “Chad” about his “Bakersfield” statement… but the bottom line in that conversation between Linda and Chad, Linda came out with the belief the photos were taken in Bakersfield (I assume she did her jobs asking the right questions). Since Chad was not clear about the situation (or at least in your mind... and how would you really know how to apply any benefit of the doubt to Chad?), it does not change the fact that it is deception… you say it is innocent and explain it away… but the fact remains, it is a clear and deliberate case of deception to move the location of the photos to Bakersfield. Chad has had plenty of time to rectify that statement or misunderstanding. Yet the location still stands in the record… so I will make it easy and spell it out… DECEPTION.

To date, all we have seen is take my word for it, and it is all things can be true type argument for any reality in the BB Drone case. But all we really need, is simple objective evidence. And the evidence we have in each case point to deception.

Without the witnesses, you have no case for reality (even if nothing were found wrong with the photos).

A photo can not be a plaintiff, a photo can not give testimony as to the intent of the photographer (although, the drone photos do testify as to being fake), and a photo can not be cross examined or questioned. We need the witness for that… and in today’s world of Photoshop and CGI, a photo can not stand on its own accord... especially in any extraordinary case such as the Drones.


Still waiting for evidence,

Marvin

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Nov 25th, 2008, 07:08am

As a follow up on the Chad debate, let’s listen to Chad’s own words:

“Thank you so much for posting my photos! I hope someone can help identify this… First of all, I see this thing VERY often. Since it first appeared, I have probably seen this thing maybe 8 different times since the first appearance. My friend and I went out the next day after I first saw it to get the photos, but it was not there. Then we tried again the next day, and we found it within like 30 minutes and followed it for a while. Most of the time I see it out of windows in my house, in the distance, but I would say almost half of the hikes I have gone on in my area, I have seen it very close. It is very easy to photograph and many neighbors aside from my friend have also seen it."


"Most of the time I see it out of windows in my house..."

With Chad’s explanation of Bakersfield to Linda, how can this not be deception (especially if you assume he lives in Bakersfield and visited the Big Basin area)? If he wanted anonymity, he would have just continued to refuse to say where the photos were taken… or where he lived.

Either way one argues this, Chad lives where the photos were taken and did not tell the truth about Bakersfield… or Chad lives in Bakersfield and was visiting where he took the photos… his story does work out as being truthful.

By his own words, he lives where he took the photos… and we know that ain’t Bakersfield.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Nov 25th, 2008, 10:13am

on Nov 23rd, 2008, 3:51pm, DrDil wrote:
So what’s the gray area?

The gray area is Chad never claimed to live in Bakersfield or have taken the pictures in Bakersfield. All he said was "I am about 10 miles outside of Bakersfield". Who knows if this was correct strictly speaking. Evasive? Yes, no doubt about it because he knew darn well what Linda was asking. A liar? Maybe.

Quote:
Seems as if Chad is a pathological liar who tricked Linda as I feel it’s highly unlikely that Chad gave Linda his real name when he obviously lied to her repeatedly about his location….

Probably true. You need to understand and get into the mind of Chad and people like him. How many UFO sightings a made each year where witnesses simply blow it off? What purpose did Chad have for coming forward? He never sought to be a UFO witness. That much is sure.

Quote:
So relying JUST on the evidence what makes you believe Chad didn’t lie abut everything?

We have absolutely no proof that he did lie about everything. My guess is he either lied or was deliberately evasive about anything that could identify him or his location. That seems totally understandable to me. We still have high quality pics taken on private property that have stood up to scrutiny. Identifying the locations only strengthened their legitimacy.

The main thing that the debunkers always try to avoid is that the Chad episode is obviously linked to the rest of the drone case with multiple witnesses and multiple high rez and up close pictures. With good supporting reports a from all the witnesses and even a witness signing up at OMF and answering questions, all the emails behind the scenes and even a supposed government employee explaining the entire thing, it's very hard to discount. To deny all of it is simply closed minded.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Nov 25th, 2008, 12:43pm

on Nov 23rd, 2008, 7:10pm, Marvin wrote:
I still stand on the facts and evidence, which are foundation of my above statements.

I am still waiting (and have been for many months now) for any objective evidence of this being a real event. Any objective evidence that demonstrates any fault with the evidence pointing toward hoax.

Let me say the Chad debate can rage on only if you give the benefit of the doubt to “Chad” about his “Bakersfield” statement… but the bottom line in that conversation between Linda and Chad, Linda came out with the belief the photos were taken in Bakersfield (I assume she did her jobs asking the right questions). Since Chad was not clear about the situation (or at least in your mind... and how would you really know how to apply any benefit of the doubt to Chad?), it does not change the fact that it is deception… you say it is innocent and explain it away… but the fact remains, it is a clear and deliberate case of deception to move the location of the photos to Bakersfield. Chad has had plenty of time to rectify that statement or misunderstanding. Yet the location still stands in the record… so I will make it easy and spell it out… DECEPTION.

To date, all we have seen is take my word for it, and it is all things can be true type argument for any reality in the BB Drone case. But all we really need, is simple objective evidence. And the evidence we have in each case point to deception.

Without the witnesses, you have no case for reality (even if nothing were found wrong with the photos).

A photo can not be a plaintiff, a photo can not give testimony as to the intent of the photographer (although, the drone photos do testify as to being fake), and a photo can not be cross examined or questioned. We need the witness for that… and in today’s world of Photoshop and CGI, a photo can not stand on its own accord... especially in any extraordinary case such as the Drones.


Still waiting for evidence,

Marvin


Outstanding, simply outstanding..
and by all means please do not hold your breath waiting for their proof either or your lungs will burst.

The Following is an ARC ALERT, you remember, those horrible people with the closed minds and in a virtual state denial, the exiled debunkers, (which by the way you were unceremoniously inducted into some time ago smiley) Well continuing to believe in those archaic and outmoded conceps of truth, honesty, and transparency, we continue the tradtion of ...
just "Lettin it all hang out"..
an alert at ATS for upcoming program .
enjoy !
Posted by Klatu..
RC MUST WATCH ALERT:
GREAT UFO ANALYSIS PROGRAM with a hidden DRONE SURPRISE
___________________________________________________

ARC members, I just now finished watching the 2 a.m. Pacific Time feed of the "Mass Sightings in Mexico" episode of UFO'S OVER EARTH on the Discovery Channel and was shocked.

During the first 2 to 4 minutes of the program it was announced that the drone photos - which they showed on screen and while being analyzed by MUFON researchers - were a "hoax" and had been "proved to be a hoax on the Internet." Other drone photo details were depicted with a brief commentary as to some of the features that made them not real photographs.

James Carrion and a crew of MUFON investigators and independent experts then conduct three professional onsite UFO investigations that put any similar efforts and wannabe UFO investigation programs to shame. Also a neat surprise ending experiment you don't want to miss.

If anyone has DVR'd this program or know if it's online elsewhere please let us know.


UFO's Over Earth - Mass Sightings in Mexico
Nov 24, 10:00 pm/Nov 25, 2:00 am
(60 minutes) TV-14

MUFON struggles to separate fact from fiction as they travel to three cities in Mexico. Analysis of UFO photos and videos brings them face-to-face with potential fraud, half-truths and cover-ups.

Source: dsc.discovery.com...

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Nov 25th, 2008, 1:16pm

Quote:
Still waiting for evidence,

Marvin


Yes, Marvin...I'm sure we all are..

I would like to "zoom out" a bit, and see what will happen if real true evidence is presented to the public here, to the readers of UFO Casebook, and elsewhere:

On one hand we want it to be true, because we see it as a great breakthru in Ufology, and some sort of satisfaction, saying "we were right the whole time".

On the other hand, we would be scared, as it really sinks in that extraterrestrials really are present here at Our Planet...(we heard astronauts saying so, but nah..)

When true evidence of extraterrestrial interference of Our Planet is implemented as something we have to deal with in real life, a giant snowball effect of the psyke is unleashed, once it becomes known to the masses.

It will change all, and the view of Our World will never be the same. It will change our consciousness.

Inside our consciousness we are not prepared for something like this, and it will take some time to consume.

So, is it better to "leave things as they were" or venture into a very unknown world, opening our eyes for things we never even knew could happen?

Maybe a new and more reliable sighting of "The Dragonfly Drone" will make a change. Or maybe not.

I sure hope we will be able to "handle the truth" when it comes.....if it comes.

Cheers,

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Nov 25th, 2008, 1:22pm

While we all sing and holding hands singing "Come by here Lord and My genes..they needs a changin again...."
here is that working link to that discovery channel, in the ARC alert.
http://dsc.discovery.com/space/ufos-over-earth/

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Nov 25th, 2008, 1:50pm

on Nov 25th, 2008, 10:13am, Latitude wrote:
The gray area is Chad never claimed to live in Bakersfield or have taken the pictures in Bakersfield. All he said was "I am about 10 miles outside of Bakersfield". Who knows if this was correct strictly speaking. Evasive? Yes, no doubt about it because he knew darn well what Linda was asking. A liar? Maybe.


Probably true. You need to understand and get into the mind of Chad and people like him. How many UFO sightings a made each year where witnesses simply blow it off? What purpose did Chad have for coming forward? He never sought to be a UFO witness. That much is sure.


We have absolutely no proof that he did lie about everything. My guess is he either lied or was deliberately evasive about anything that could identify him or his location. That seems totally understandable to me. We still have high quality pics taken on private property that have stood up to scrutiny. Identifying the locations only strengthened their legitimacy.

The main thing that the debunkers always try to avoid is that the Chad episode is obviously linked to the rest of the drone case with multiple witnesses and multiple high rez and up close pictures. With good supporting reports a from all the witnesses and even a witness signing up at OMF and answering questions, all the emails behind the scenes and even a supposed government employee explaining the entire thing, it's very hard to discount. To deny all of it is simply closed minded.




Lat… “throw us a bone” here.


Quote:
We have absolutely no proof that he did lie about everything. My guess is…


While you are absolutely correct, we do not know if Chad is being untruthful about everything… we do know that he is being untruthful. The question is why? Since Chad could have avoided being untruthful, but choose not to, what other things is Chad being untruthful about? There is a thing call “reasonable doubt.” With all of the deception, it is my opinion that we have “reasonable doubt” to disbelieve anything we have been told (without any objective evidence to back it up). Clearly, there is wishful thinking, and people helping folks like Chad to “fill in the blanks” and to “connect the dots” are not supplying evidence.

Reasonable people should be asking, why does someone need to “fill in the blanks” and to “connect the dots” for Chad or any of the other “witnesses?”

So instead of turning Chad’s story into someone else’s words… why don’t we simple product the evidence to back up Chad’s story?

Unfortunately, the answer has been very simple… no one has been able to do it. There are flaws and issues that cannot be over come by “what ifs,” “fill in the blanks” and “connect the dots.” It is a house of cards that can only stand if someone is seriously trying to prop it up.

Guessing is not evidence.

And let us take a close look at:

Quote:
The main thing that the debunkers always try to avoid is that the Chad episode is obviously linked to the rest of the drone case with multiple witnesses and multiple high rez and up close pictures. With good supporting reports a from all the witnesses and even a witness signing up at OMF and answering questions, all the emails behind the scenes and even a supposed government employee explaining the entire thing, it's very hard to discount. To deny all of it is simply closed minded.


I do not avoid the issue of multiple witnesses. I say, show me one of the 40 plus people that are claimed to be a witness. No one has been able to find one of the people in over a year. These people are hidden better than Sarah Palin during the last campaign and can keep a secret better than the Obama transition team.

Any anonymous person (government or otherwise) can sign up for emails and forums (have a web site)… you do not know who you are communicating with (and so much for the fear for not being anonymous). rolleyes

The photos have been demonstrated to be fakes, but you can keep hope alive.

To deny that it can be a hoax or disinformation is more than just being helpful to keeping the myth alive, isn’t it?

So, instead of wasting time with these silly debates... should someone be busy digging up proof?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Nov 25th, 2008, 1:59pm

on Nov 25th, 2008, 1:22pm, TeachersPet wrote:
While we all sing and holding hands singing "Come by here Lord and My genes..they needs a changin again...."
here is that working link to that discovery channel, in the ARC alert.
http://dsc.discovery.com/space/ufos-over-earth/



Looks like I have missed the Mexico one.

ARC Research Consultant – it looks like I live in infamy. wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Nov 25th, 2008, 2:05pm

on Nov 25th, 2008, 1:16pm, DrStern wrote:
Yes, Marvin...I'm sure we all are..

I would like to "zoom out" a bit, and see what will happen if real true evidence is presented to the public here, to the readers of UFO Casebook, and elsewhere:

On one hand we want it to be true, because we see it as a great breakthru in Ufology, and some sort of satisfaction, saying "we were right the whole time".

On the other hand, we would be scared, as it really sinks in that extraterrestrials really are present here at Our Planet...(we heard astronauts saying so, but nah..)

When true evidence of extraterrestrial interference of Our Planet is implemented as something we have to deal with in real life, a giant snowball effect of the psyke is unleashed, once it becomes known to the masses.

It will change all, and the view of Our World will never be the same. It will change Our consiousness.

Inside our consiousness we are not prepared for something like this, and it will take some time to consume.

So, is it better to "leave things as they were" or venture into a very unknown world, opening our eyes for things we never even knew could happen?

Maybe a new and more reliable sighting of "The Dragonfly Drone" will make a change. Or maybe not.

I sure hope we will be able to "handle the truth" when it comes.....if it comes.

Cheers,

DrStern



Hi Doc,


I have my own experience and reason to accept UFOs.

But, I do not have to believe a lie to see the truth.

Let each judge for themselves... and who knows what the future holds?

Best regards,

Marvin

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Nov 25th, 2008, 3:28pm

on Nov 25th, 2008, 1:59pm, Marvin wrote:
ARC Research Consultant – it looks like I live in infamy. wink

You’d better believe it!! grin

Cheers.


(Infamy, Infamy, they’ve all got it ‘infamy’!! wink)
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Nov 25th, 2008, 4:30pm

Hi DRDil, and Marvin, yes..infamy, I remember when we were called armchair researchers and every other name in the book..mostly from very same person here. The same person who stated in this very forum he hesitated saying anything in The Jeremy case that would prove it Hoax. And the same Behaviour on the sight descriptions , stating about attack dogs, drug runners, and Dirty dangerous paths,, when Arials show the place looking like it was cloroxed. When asked why, he deferred, and disingenuously asked about it said, what question? and subsequently banned.
Ultimately even if this were a 50 50 which it is not, it boils down to who you trust.
There is nothing that inspires trust or confidence from those quarters.


We took each attempt at belittlement, and turned it right around.
we can expect that and more, especially after the hosing down they got with the Golden Dew of Knowledge in this case.

To say we are in denial from someone who will self admittedly, not only withold proof, but mislead as he did with the Restaurant, , as opposed to Chad , who we reasonably assume lied, ..is outrageous and laughable.
I will be happy to give Chad chance an audience should he ever choose to do so..
But this one, my brothers and sisters, Imo, based on observations not exclusive to myself, should be trusted even less than Lev, and as about as far as you can lift and throw a V Hummer across a parking lot.





Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Nov 28th, 2008, 2:39pm

Now, Marvin...you're a good guy, no question about that, and the evidence you present at http://www.dronehoax.com/analysis/marvin.htm

are good evidence that you have thought this drone enigma out, and come to a conclusion.

Very good investigation, Marvin.

And fulfilling the sceptics word in this investigation.

If what is presented on your site is true, you must realize that you are calling every witness a liar, and in my book this is perhaps some kind of arrogance as it is not yet proved that what the witnesses saw are untrue.

Unless you are calling every witness a liar?

Or you stand by your statement, that no witnesses had the courage to surface?

Maybe there are a reason for that..but let's not dwell on that.

Maybe this whole "Drone" issue is part of a detailed "measurement gauge" implemented into the the entire "UFO" community, to serve as a gauge as what will happen if the "real truth" may be exposed to a much wider masses.

DrDil, I would appreciate to see your take on this, as I understand you have made a considerable work on the debunking of "The California Drones" ....As I as a new member hasn't had the chance to read through the entire thread.... grin

Best regards, Marvin

And DrDil..show me some real evidence of this "HOAX".

DrStern

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Nov 28th, 2008, 4:36pm

on Nov 28th, 2008, 2:39pm, DrStern wrote:
Now, Marvin...you're a good guy, no question about that, and the evidence you present at http://www.dronehoax.com/analysis/marvin.htm

are good evidence that you have thought this drone enigma out, and come to a conclusion.

Very good investigation, Marvin.

And fulfilling the sceptics word in this investigation.

If what is presented on your site is true, you must realize that you are calling every witness a liar, and in my book this is perhaps some kind of arrogance as it is not yet proved that what the witnesses saw are untrue.

Unless you are calling every witness a liar?


Hi DrStern!!

It’s my site and Marvin originally posted his excellent analysis to OMF. If you’re genuinely looking for image analysis may I suggest you also check out Torvald’s (here) & 1111’s (1st here & 2nd here).

Not really "liars" per se, (and not necessarily plural!!) more like immersive artists!! grin

Or perhaps akin to someone dabbling in science-fiction writing or telling an embellished story to his friends. If you accept the accounts as true then you are in a better position to say whether it’s blatant lies or not, things like, “Bakersfield/I see this thing VERY often/Most of the time I see it out of the windows of my house/It’s very easy to photograph/Most of my neighbours have seen it” etc. etc. etc. And that’s just Chad..... Actually, on second thoughts and if I were pushed to hazard an opinion, then yes I believe EVERY one of the original Drone reports (5 with images & Isaac) had no foundation whatsoever in reality (as I know and accept it). smiley

on Nov 28th, 2008, 2:39pm, DrStern wrote:
DrDil, I would appreciate to see your take on this, as I understand you have made a considerable work on the debunking of "The California Drones"

I’m having that as a compliment!! laugh

on Nov 28th, 2008, 2:39pm, DrStern wrote:
And DrDil..show me some real evidence of this "HOAX".

DrStern

It’s not really my intention to sway your belief one way or the other DrStern, all I’m doing is collecting and presenting the information that I think is relevant (and presenting it exactly as I found it). It’s down to the individual to qualify and quantify the available information for themselves, apparently you have done so and found it wanting, when I did I found it was indicative of a deliberate internet hoax.

Still, we can’t all look at things the same way and whether that’s down to personal perception or simply the ‘will to believe’ it’s not my call to make…..

Incidentally I’ve just posted a brief clip of Mufon’s analyst Marc D’Antonio on why he believes that the Drones are hoaxed, I’m sure you remember he was one of the first ‘experts’ to weigh in with his conclusion that the Drones were indeed a hoax in the Mufon/Reichmuth email (further information on the Reichmuth & Mufon connection here).

Marc is the owner/president of fxmodels.com and was asked by Mufon for his expert opinion on the Drone images, in the clip Marc briefly elaborates on the reasoning behind his conclusion that they are hoaxed, recently Marc presented his analysis and evidence of hoax at a Mufon conference. The video clip is here.

Cheers. smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Nov 28th, 2008, 4:56pm

on Nov 28th, 2008, 4:36pm, DrDil wrote:
Hi DrStern!!

It’s my site and Marvin originally posted his excellent analysis to OMF. If you’re genuinely looking for image analysis may I suggest you also check out Torvald’s (here) & 1111’s (1st here & 2nd here).

Not really "liars" per se, (and not necessarily plural!!) more like immersive artists!! grin

Or perhaps akin to someone dabbling in science-fiction writing or telling an embellished story to his friends. If you accept the accounts as true then you are in a better position to say whether it’s blatant lies or not, things like, “Bakersfield/I see this thing VERY often/Most of the time I see it out of the windows of my house/It’s very easy to photograph/Most of my neighbours have seen it” etc. etc. etc. And that’s just Chad..... Actually, on second thoughts and if I were pushed to hazard an opinion, then yes I believe EVERY one of the original Drone reports (5 with images & Isaac) had no foundation whatsoever in reality (as I know and accept it). smiley


I’m having that as a compliment!! laugh


It’s not really my intention to sway your belief one way or the other DrStern, all I’m doing is collecting and presenting the information that I think is relevant (and presenting it exactly as I found it). It’s down to the individual to qualify and quantify the available information for themselves, apparently you have done so and found it wanting, when I did I found it was indicative of a deliberate internet hoax.

Still, we can’t all look at things the same way and whether that’s down to personal perception or simply the ‘will to believe’ it’s not my call to make…..

Incidentally I’ve just posted a brief clip of Mufon’s analyst Marc D’Antonio on why he believes that the Drones are hoaxed, I’m sure you remember he was one of the first ‘experts’ to weigh in with his conclusion that the Drones were indeed a hoax in the Mufon/Reichmuth email (further information on the Reichmuth & Mufon connection here).

Marc is the owner/president of fxmodels.com and was asked by Mufon for his expert opinion on the Drone images, in the clip Marc briefly elaborates on the reasoning behind his conclusion that they are hoaxed, recently Marc presented his analysis and evidence of hoax at a Mufon conference. The video clip is here.

Cheers. smiley


DrDil,

I am very glad that you responded so quickly to my post.

And the evidence is overwhelming. I see that you have done severe research on this issue.

Whether or not it's true, you certainly have done your homework. Kudos to you.

What remains, was this "disinformation" or just a childs play on "the UFO Community"?

Do you hold evidence to secure this was just a "prank" or is it inconclusive?

I'm sure we are many here that would like to know the real truth.

DrDil, do you acknowledge the witnesses of the "Dragonfly Drones"?

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Nov 28th, 2008, 5:21pm

on Nov 28th, 2008, 4:56pm, DrStern wrote:
What remains, was this "disinformation" or just a childs play on "the UFO Community"?

Do you hold evidence to secure this was just a "prank" or is it inconclusive?

I'm sure we are many here that would like to know the real truth.

DrDil, do you acknowledge the witnesses of the "Dragonfly Drones"?

DrStern

I’m not sure what you mean. “Acknowledge” as in accept something exists, is true or is real?

I thought I’d just answered that:

on Nov 28th, 2008, 4:36pm, DrDil wrote:
I believe EVERY one of the original Drone reports (5 with images & Isaac) had no foundation whatsoever in reality (as I know and accept it). smiley

Honestly though, it means nothing to me what others believe, I arrived at my own conclusion/s and urge everyone else to do the same and as such it doesn’t matter what I personally believe.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Nov 28th, 2008, 5:25pm

on Today at 17:36:31, DrDil wrote:I believe EVERY one of the original Drone reports (5 with images & Isaac) had no foundation whatsoever in reality (as I know and accept it).


But you don't know..Really! Proof please!

EVS

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Nov 28th, 2008, 5:27pm

on Nov 28th, 2008, 5:17pm, DrStern wrote:
Now that it is shown by the elite of UFOCasebook, that we now know this is a hoax, please come forward.

There is no, “Elite” here at Casebook we’re all in this together (well, nearly all of us).

I find it confusing why you are acting how you are, what does my belief on anything matter to you?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Nov 28th, 2008, 5:30pm

See, we sure can have fun establishing this "Drone Hoax"... grin

If you were so sure of yourself this is a hoax, we wouldn't have this conversation..hehe

DrStern

Ps. Let's ask Marvin, or is he your protegé?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Nov 28th, 2008, 5:42pm

on Nov 28th, 2008, 5:25pm, DrStern wrote:
on Today at 17:36:31, DrDil wrote:I believe EVERY one of the original Drone reports (5 with images & Isaac) had no foundation whatsoever in reality (as I know and accept it).


But you don't know..Really! Proof please!

EVS

M’kay where did I write that I *knew* they were anything? You actually copied my text where I said *believe*. I don’t care what you think of my beliefs and due mainly to your recent comments I have no intention whatsoever on elaborating on them.

Perhaps you should try arriving at your own conclusions rather than publicly demanding justifications from others for theirs?

on Nov 28th, 2008, 5:30pm, DrStern wrote:
See, we sure can have fun establishing this "Drone Hoax"... grin

If you were so sure of yourself this is a hoax, we wouldn't have this conversation..hehe

DrStern

Ps. Let's ask Marvin, or is he your protegé?


Likewise if you were so sure it wasn’t a hoax we wouldn’t be having this conversation…..

Fill your boots establishing whatever you please, I hope you have a smashing time and lashings & lashings of jolly good fun.

P.s. No, I’m his, are you Lev’s?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Nov 28th, 2008, 5:50pm

Dear DrDil,

Why bring in third party?

Lev can speak for themselves...

I'm still just plainly asking if you have dismissed ALL witnesses of the "Dragonfly Drones"?

DrStern

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Nov 28th, 2008, 5:59pm

on Nov 28th, 2008, 5:50pm, DrStern wrote:
Dear DrDil,

Why bring in third party?

Lev can speak for themselves...

Dear DrStern,

So in your mind you asking me if Marvin is my protégé and me asking you if you are Lev’s is different how? I didn't want Lev's answer I wanted yours, just as you didn't want Marvins you wanted mine.

on Nov 28th, 2008, 5:50pm, DrStern wrote:
I'm still just plainly asking if you have dismissed ALL witnesses of the "Dragonfly Drones"?

DrStern

Are we having fun yet? kiss
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Nov 28th, 2008, 6:05pm

on Nov 28th, 2008, 5:59pm, DrDil wrote:
Dear DrStern,

So in your mind you asking me if Marvin is my protégé and me asking you if you are Lev’s is different how? I didn't want Lev's answer I wanted yours, just as you didn't want Marvins you wanted mine.


Are we having fun yet? kiss


Oh yeah! We're having great fun! Only we miss the honored member RoH...he knew to tease this board! All the best to you, RoH...

Yep, Dr. Dil...we're having fun, and I know YOU know...just teasing oneanother, no need to get freaked out...just plain Friday Fun, Happy Thanksgiving by the way...

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Nov 28th, 2008, 6:08pm

You are an angry and bitter man for your age. Dr Stern.
I really thought you were wiser than this.
So angry that the plans for your Academy and connections to the drones you wanted to make did not pan out. On one hand you say we have overwhelming evidence, we did our homework, and then turn around talk utter rubbish and twisting words.

Was their some grand scheme to guage the ufo community? who knows, thats speculation.
We are gauged all the time, not just by Gov, but profiteers and marketeers..Its a business too you know well.
And it did not take long for them to gauge an opportunity for the Circus ringmasters like LMH and Whitley and Even Sherwood , to hitch a ride , and you too.. like kids on skatebords latching on to the back of a truck.
It failed, and some of the kids have not let go of the truck soon enough, and are caught in the middle of traffic, they dare not let go. We can't do anything for them.

Dr Dil I posted that most excellent video
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=AjmG0uU4lWQ

Thank you, and ufology is beholding to you sir and this forum for being there for all of us.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Nov 28th, 2008, 6:24pm

on Nov 28th, 2008, 6:08pm, TeachersPet wrote:
You are an angry and bitter man for your age. Dr Stern.
I really thought you were wiser than this.
So angry that the plans for your Academy and connections to the drones you wanted to make did not pan out. On one hand you say we have overwhelming evidence, we did our homework, and then turn around talk utter rubbish and twisting words.

Was their some grand scheme to guage the ufo community? who knows, thats speculation.
We are gauged all the time, not just by Gov, but profiteers and marketeers..Its a business too you know well.
And it did not take long for them to gauge an opportunity for the Circus ringmasters like LMH and Whitley and Even Sherwood , to hitch a ride , and you too.. like kids on skatebords latching on to the back of a truck.
It failed, and some of the kids have not let go of the truck soon enough, and are caught in the middle of traffic, they dare not let go. We can't do anything for them.

Dr Dil I posted that most excellent video
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=AjmG0uU4lWQ

Thank you, and ufology is beholding to you sir and this forum for being there for all of us.



Mr. [MOD EDIT],

I can assure you, that I'm not an angry man, just a friendly guy telling you, that not all what is presented you are the truth!

I know you once felt letdown by me, but I assure you that if I wanted your knowledge as appointed to me, I would respond.

I just felt that your input was too biased to enter a scientific study, that I denied it at the time.

I apologize for my less judgement.

Best regards,

DrStern

[MOD EDIT TO REMOVE PERSONAL DETAILS]
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Nov 28th, 2008, 6:37pm

Posting TP's real name was uncalled for DrStern, TP only addressed you by your screen name.

Let's all try and keep it civil and cordial.....
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Nov 28th, 2008, 7:03pm

I misbehaved, so sorry DrDil!

I wasn't thinking right, being friday and all..

I hope you all bare with me... smiley

I think you guys should take a look on this drone thing once again, why would anyone pull a prank as massive as this, and not take the benefit of it all?

It's been going on for more than a year, do you really think a prank would last this long?

I know that the honoured member Marvin has come up with a solution, but do all in here trust that?

Please come forward, if you have another solution, maybe the first one has some faults?

Marvin, you have done some outstanding job, please let it be tested by the readers of the UFO Casebook.

Happy Thanksgiving,

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Nov 28th, 2008, 7:11pm

Thank you for the kind words and invitation, however as you say at the time, and perhaps even now I am too unscientific..to accept..
However, i find it odd that the statements of experts , as one would take that of a doctor are not proof, as they are accepted all the time in the legal and scientific community. Thats why someone with my limited skills, Turns to people like that.
That was done here, but you who do not claim to be an expert don't like what they say.
The analysts all posted their credentials, skills, hypothesis , methodology and conclusions, and made it available. As scientific protocol requires, including replication as by HPO which in effect strengthened the argument of hoax.

If you wish to file an appeal, it seems better that you submit the pix to a professional forrensic person who will sign off his name to their authenticity.
Then we might have something to talk about except this endless banter you are not happy or meet your standards.
I don't see you clamoring over at DRT for that.. That would be my first priority to cut to the chase. Have you asked? after all, they have a moneybags financing their so called investigation.

You wont because it will most certainly end these contrite arguments from your quarters once and for all.

Have a great day.



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Nov 28th, 2008, 7:28pm

on Nov 28th, 2008, 7:11pm, TeachersPet wrote:
Thank you for the kind words and invitation, however as you say at the time, and perhaps even now I am too unscientific..to accept..
However, i find it odd that the statements of experts , as one would take that of a doctor are not proof, as they are accepted all the time in the legal and scientific community. Thats why someone with my limited skills, Turns to people like that.
That was done here, but you who do not claim to be an expert don't like what they say.
The analysts all posted their credentials, skills, hypothesis , methodology and conclusions, and made it available. As scientific protocol requires, including replication as by HPO which in effect strengthened the argument of hoax.

If you wish to file an appeal, it seems better that you submit the pix to a professional forrensic person who will sign off his name to their authenticity.
Then we might have something to talk about except this endless banter you are not happy or meet your standards.
I don't see you clamoring over at DRT for that.. That would be my first priority to cut to the chase. Have you asked? after all, they have a moneybags financing their so called investigation.

You wont because it will most certainly end these contrite arguments from your quarters once and for all.

Have a great day.




I'm happy that we are not fighting eachother on the reality of the "Drones".

As I stated earlier, I'm not "pro" nor "con", until substantial evidence is presented to me, and this has not occured until this very moment. If and when it does, I'll adjust to just that, and I suggest all to do so.

To keep an open mind, and judge for yourselves (As DrDil says) is a must if we are to believe in any of the sightings and testamonys brought to the table here.

DrStern

TeachersPet, I apologize if I let you down, but as I see it, we all was let down in this issue.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Nov 28th, 2008, 7:36pm

Peace be with you Dr.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Nov 29th, 2008, 3:14pm

on Sep 29th, 2008, 4:28pm, hjdelight wrote:
No one understands Lat. You either accept him or argue with him. It doesn't matter to him which one. Lol! rolleyes

HJ

Hi HjDelight!! smiley,

I know you’re busy and so I’m unsure if you’ll see this but I just noticed the above which you wrote a few weeks ago (I must have missed it at the time).
Are you suggesting we understand Lat to the depths that you do? User Image

on Jul 6th, 2007, 11:50am, hjdelight wrote:
latitude wrote:
<snip> Why is it so hard to stay focused? Is it because no new info has come in the last couple of weeks? So what do we do? We start grasping for anything that is no relation to the subject at hand. Get real people. Don't lose touch with your reasoning. This is how the Transformers connection started.

hjdelight wrote:
<snip> I would prefer you not respond to my postings. smiley

HJ

Heh, heh, "accept him or argue with him" or perhaps we just ask him to ignore us completely?!User Image

Don’t be a stranger HJ as it’s getting longer and longer between your already fleeting visits!!

Cheers. wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Nov 29th, 2008, 5:11pm

on Nov 28th, 2008, 5:50pm, DrStern wrote:
Dear DrDil,

I'm still just plainly asking if you have dismissed ALL witnesses of the "Dragonfly Drones"?

DrStern




Hi DrS,

I have to ask, if you believe there are any witness to the Big Basin Drone Event?

On last count, there must be over 40 people involved in seeing and photographing BB Drones. When is the last time anyone has talked face to face with any of them? The fact is, it has never happened. Not a single witness.

The DRT can not find one. We are being told by the DRT, the reason for this, is they are afraid to go public… I have to ask, how do they know that? Have they spoken with a witness? How do they know the intent of the so called witness they have never met? Or is it easier to believe there are frightened witnesses and conspiracies based on anonymously submitted fake photos and faulty and deceptive stories?

I think the burden of evidence fall to anyone claiming reality to this Drone case. LOL.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by john12345 on Nov 30th, 2008, 2:13pm

arguments such as previous are not good for any forum.
they belittle the subjest discussed and tend to put off new posters to the forum who may just have that little gem of info that everyone is looking for.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Nov 30th, 2008, 4:51pm

I agree John, and we certainly have gotten some real "gems", thruout the almost 6 thousand posts.
It reminded me of the Ranchfarmer who told his son if he believed hard,enough wishes come true. One day he came upon his boy digging feverishly thru a large pile of horse manure.
What in tarnation is ya doing son? The little boy responded ..well Dad, You know I wanna horse and If I dig long enough , I know can find a pony somewhere in there !
cheesy
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Nov 30th, 2008, 8:51pm

I would encourage everyone here to use phrases "I think it's [a hoax/real]" or "I believe it's [a hoax/real]" instead of "it is a hoax" or"it is real". Big difference.

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Nov 30th, 2008, 9:21pm

I see what you are saying ABC, Actually Most of us are more engaged in looking for the hoaxters, and looking at other new subject matter, as opposed to proving real or hoax. Those that are here , like Marvin and Dr. Dil, myself, Kris, etc..have both in form and context established a more than reasonable case for hoax.
The analysis is now everywhere. It would be rather onerous to re state continually ad ifinitum, I believe its hoax, because of such and such..Simply, because the studies were done. We need only direct newbies unfamiliar where to find that rather than restate the case over and over.

Respectfully, Now,Someone who believes its real is in a very very unique position, however, and they should state why they thinks its real and add or offer their new proof.not rehash what was already done...because none is to be had anywhere save doctored pictures, thats whether its someone here the longest, or just got off the boat so to speak.

I am sure thing will get back on track..they usually do at this forum..
Cheers

.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 1st, 2008, 12:53pm

User Image

ABC,

Maybe the above example will give you some insight as to why we not longer use phrases like "I think it's a hoax" or "I believe it's a hoax."

Two suns do not exist in nature, but they can exist on hoax photos. wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 1st, 2008, 8:13pm

Marvin,

All of your light direction arrows are incorrect.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 1st, 2008, 10:29pm

on Dec 1st, 2008, 8:13pm, Latitude wrote:
Marvin,

All of your light direction arrows are incorrect.



All of them?

Would you be kind enough to support that with evidence?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 2nd, 2008, 07:27am

His is the evidence for the photo I posted:

If we look at the Pole…

User Image

The shadow from the sun cuts the pole in half, so that the cross bars on the top point “directly” to the sun , which is on the right. Therefore, the yellow line and arrow for its light source is correct… as in this example:


User Image


Now, if we look at the Drone:


User Image


This is the shadow in question. How do we create this shadow?


User Image


Which of these solar angles are casting the shadow?

1

2

Or

3?


There is only one that works for the whole Drone.

I am sorry for the mess this makes...

User Image

As you can see, the top bright green arrow does point to the light source. It is important to note: the top green arrow can not point lower to the right. The main body of the Drone (torus) would be in the way and the area that is in sunlight, would have to be in shadow.

3 is the answer to the cause of the shadows on the Drone... in order for 2 or 1 to be the cause, the light source would have to be "lower" in the photo (toward the light source of the pole)... which are unworkable solutions. They go below the lower green line.

These are the solutions in the first picture.

The light blue lines that are created by the shadow/light direction show convergence a little distance out from the boom or wing. This is an "artificial" light source and not the sun that is lighting the pole... therefore, the most logical solution is this photo is produced by using CGI/Photoshop.

Add to this the different direction of lighting for the pole... there is no longer any doubt this is CGI/Photoshop generated.


Maybe this is helpful in understanding the lighting issue.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 2nd, 2008, 08:33am

He can't , he messed up, and Spf argument was also defective , the former had his cardinal directions directions flipped, and the latter, Spf33 put something out with mesurements 4 days apart. 11 11 was kind enough to point Both of them in the right direction before the ink on their argument had time to dry.


http://lucianarchy.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=cali1&action=display&thread=4526&page=1




Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 2nd, 2008, 09:07am

on Dec 2nd, 2008, 08:33am, TeachersPet wrote:
He can't , he messed up, and Spf argument was also defective , the former had his cardinal directions directions flipped, and the latter, Spf33 put something out with mesurements 4 days apart. 11 11 was kind enough to point Both of them in the right direction before the ink on their argument had time to dry.


http://lucianarchy.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=cali1&action=display&thread=4526&page=1






Their demo only lights the Drone, but does not account for the lighting of the pole:



User Image


As long as one only looks critically at the Drone or the pole... then I guess having two suns is okay.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 2nd, 2008, 09:37am

on Dec 2nd, 2008, 08:33am, TeachersPet wrote:
He can't , he messed up, and Spf argument was also defective , the former had his cardinal directions directions flipped, and the latter, Spf33 put something out with mesurements 4 days apart. 11 11 was kind enough to point Both of them in the right direction before the ink on their argument had time to dry.


http://lucianarchy.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=cali1&action=display&thread=4526&page=1

This is hilarious. I'm just sitting back watching buffoons make spectacles of themselves. I see you just joined the group. Ha ha grin I really need to thank 1111. He has with one post, vindicated me when I told him he did not know what he was talking about.

@ Marvin
http://droneteam.com/drt/index.php?topic=133.0/

User Image User Image




Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 2nd, 2008, 10:34am

Maybe 3D will help ya...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYqyP5bHBrs


LOL wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 2nd, 2008, 10:55am

on Dec 2nd, 2008, 09:37am, Latitude wrote:
This is hilarious. I'm just sitting back watching buffoons make spectacles of themselves. I see you just joined the group. Ha ha grin I really need to thank 1111. He has with one post, vindicated me when I told him he did not know what he was talking about.

@ Marvin
http://droneteam.com/drt/index.php?topic=133.0/

User Image User Image






You need to go back to the drawing board and try again...

User Image
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 2nd, 2008, 12:59pm

Might be off by a hair but very close. The corner shadow on the opposite fin is caused by the point where the fin attaches to the torus not the lower tip of the fin as you have indicated. A simple mistake on your part.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 2nd, 2008, 5:02pm

on Dec 2nd, 2008, 12:59pm, Latitude wrote:
Might be off by a hair but very close. The corner shadow on the opposite fin is caused by the point where the fin attaches to the torus not the lower tip of the fin as you have indicated. A simple mistake on your part.



Odd…

User Image


My #3 is not off. It would point towards the light source (on the right side).


If you are off by a "hair" maybe you need to correct it and see how it looks then? wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 2nd, 2008, 5:06pm

Marvin: the pig who built his house from straw, replied to the wolf, not by the hair of my chinny chin chin..

Lattitude:This is hilarious. I'm just sitting back watching buffoons make spectacles of themselves.
I remember in a post at OM you called LMH that..now you are all sweethearts. interesting..
What we had there and here , I think , someone was a little hasty or premature in not double checking and putting up someone elses results,
and as a result of that , I now have a ringside box seat here watching this spectacle .

Lattitude:Lets see what you're talking about, since 11 11 in your opinion doesn't know what he is talking about with the lighting sources, or that Marvin is incorrect, I know you will make everything right.
Someone pass me the popcorn smiley

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 3rd, 2008, 07:13am

on Dec 2nd, 2008, 5:06pm, TeachersPet wrote:
Marvin: the pig who built his house from straw, replied to the wolf, not by the hair of my chinny chin chin..

Lattitude:This is hilarious. I'm just sitting back watching buffoons make spectacles of themselves.
I remember in a post at OM you called LMH that..now you are all sweethearts. interesting..
What we had there and here , I think , someone was a little hasty or premature in not double checking and putting up someone elses results,
and as a result of that , I now have a ringside box seat here watching this spectacle .

Lattitude:Lets see what you're talking about, since 11 11 in your opinion doesn't know what he is talking about with the lighting sources, or that Marvin is incorrect, I know you will make everything right.
Someone pass me the popcorn smiley



The issue will be, Lat can not create the same lines that go through the Drone and the pole as being from the same light source.

Kris has done a great job of showing what the Drone and Pole shadows would look like… based on the shadow angles of each.

Look on the bottom right to see the label that describes what you are seeing… it moves along fairly quickly so watch it loop a few times.


User Image


The important issue here is... Kris’s angle for the sun on the pole (based on the Drone) is not as far as what Lat is suggesting. As you can see, the shadow on the pole almost “disappears” from view (actually it just rotates away from our view, with the change in location of the light source). If what Lat suggests is true, then the shadow should be smaller yet than Kris’s example (based on the Drone's shadow). You can not ignore physics… and, as you know, this has been independently confirmed by a number of CGI artists.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 3rd, 2008, 10:05am

It's something like this:

User Image

Also, it's very obvious to me that Kris's cgi pole has an incorrect light angle. But this is to be expected because a) it's very hard to get it exactly correct and b) he has no motivation to even try to. It's contrary to his point of view.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 3rd, 2008, 12:16pm

Lat Also, it's very obvious to me that Kris's cgi pole has an incorrect light angle. But this is to be expected because a) it's very hard to get it exactly correct and b) he has no motivation to even try to. It's contrary to his point of view.

Only someone with a myopic, tunnel vision viewpoint would say something like that, as the evidence,, from a variety of sources speaks contrary to what you stated. Kris, like Fx models, Wiggins, with Kris in particular had from the beginning devoted considerable effort, time, and skill in doing the very initial videos, with the sole purpose of dispelling the myth if not lie that many were pushing out of sheer ignorance that the the drone could not be duplicated. That was the goal and not that drones were impossible. It certainly fooled LMH , a veteran in this strange paranormal matters. HPOs model certainly showed where the light should be.
To say that all these peoples agenda was to debunk is ludicrous.
Post upon post of his establishes his extreme effort to let us know that was what the intent was.








Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 3rd, 2008, 12:20pm

on Dec 3rd, 2008, 10:05am, Latitude wrote:
It's something like this:

User Image

Also, it's very obvious to me that Kris's cgi pole has an incorrect light angle. But this is to be expected because a) it's very hard to get it exactly correct and b) he has no motivation to even try to. It's contrary to his point of view.





Better Lat... now, connect the dots (draw the lines) to the pole as you did in your original post below.



User Image


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 3rd, 2008, 5:21pm

Are you kidding me? It's a 3D environment. It's not as simple as connecting dots and drawing lines in two dimensions. It's much more complicated. Maybe that concept is too much for you?

HPO's model is probably going to be the closest we can come to simulating what is actually in the photos. Even then the scale may be a problem.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 3rd, 2008, 6:12pm

Surely you Latitude, don't lack the motivation, you accused others of lacking, to do that . Marvin is here at your prompting.
Certainly with those skills of yours and dedication to the cause, and recent celebration, you can finish what you started\ and show up all those Bufoons right here.
And Marvin is an excellent teacher.
After all, 3d is closest to real life, as we said about HPO's.
Please Don't fail us now., everyone is looking foward to this and seeing the errors made by the analysts.
This is a most auspicuious moment. Rise to the occasion.
And Good Luck!
smiley

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Dec 3rd, 2008, 8:53pm

on Dec 3rd, 2008, 12:16pm, TeachersPet wrote:
with the sole purpose of dispelling the myth if not lie that many were pushing out of sheer ignorance that the the drone could not be duplicated.


Read my lips: "Very difficult, nearly impossible to be created FROM SCRATCH".

I support Latitude 100% (and I have 20/20 vision)

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 3rd, 2008, 11:48pm

Well with the combined laser like focus of the DRT behind him, nothing is impossible. But you may be right abc ..it might be a burden on the poor lad, ..
Of course, why not just send the best of the pics to a certified specialist, as theyhave spent thousands of someone's money on PIs ,who have yielding nothing of substance, and are still "investigating", thousands more. personally I would have asked for a partial refund, yet isn't it odd they refuse to send them to independent analysis? And they have the burden of proof. Why that would be the perfect counter to the Analysis thus far done..Think what it might reveal..Cut right to the chase..free of pre=bias..no axe to grind as you see already
or...then again.. the perfect corroboration for the analysis that still stands. It would take less than a week to complete, in correspondence I recieved, from the last Specialist.
Sounds simple and very do-able to me or is someone afraid of what a certified analyst would determine.

Why that raises the bar..the standards..we could have something real to talk about then., I would think.
What do you think is an alternative that doesn't lower standards and would be acceptable across the board?

regards





Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 4th, 2008, 07:27am

on Dec 3rd, 2008, 5:21pm, Latitude wrote:
Are you kidding me? It's a 3D environment. It's not as simple as connecting dots and drawing lines in two dimensions. It's much more complicated. Maybe that concept is too much for you?

HPO's model is probably going to be the closest we can come to simulating what is actually in the photos. Even then the scale may be a problem.




So let me understand what you are saying…


User Image

You are suggesting from your above example, using your words… “Are you kidding me? It's a 3D environment. It's not as simple as connecting dots and drawing lines in two dimensions. It's much more complicated. Maybe that concept is too much for you?”…that your example of proof there is nothing wrong with Raj’s photo is misleading (since it seems you are suggesting it can not be done)? That it is much more complicated than that?

Or is this an admission that you do not understand how to do it?

Solar angle based on compass type directions is very do-able in photographs. Your lines should be parallel to point back to the light source. It is complicated in this case because they do not point to a single light source… actually that means there are more than one light source (or there is more than one sun, and each sun acts independently on each object, the pole and the Drone). Therefore, the Drone was not in photo with the pole when the photo was taken of the pole. It is not that complicated Latitude. wink

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 4th, 2008, 07:35am

on Dec 3rd, 2008, 8:53pm, ABCStore wrote:
Read my lips: "Very difficult, nearly impossible to be created FROM SCRATCH".

I support Latitude 100% (and I have 20/20 vision)

ABC



It may take some effort (anything done well always does)... but it is not impossible, even from scratch:

*Click Here/On Image For Full-size
User Image




The above is HPO's model (from scratch) Photoshopped in a photo. If you do a little fine tuning for lightness (gamma or brightness)... it is very impressive. This is HPO's "raw" image.


[*Mod Edit To reduce image size]
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 4th, 2008, 08:01am

Marvin, that is a perfect example of
Success comes in Cans, Failure comes in Can'ts

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 4th, 2008, 10:56am

on Dec 4th, 2008, 07:27am, Marvin wrote:
You are suggesting from your above example, using your words… “Are you kidding me? It's a 3D environment. It's not as simple as connecting dots and drawing lines in two dimensions. It's much more complicated. Maybe that concept is too much for you?”…that your example of proof there is nothing wrong with Raj’s photo is misleading (since it seems you are suggesting it can not be done)? That it is much more complicated than that?

Or is this an admission that you do not understand how to do it?


My illustrations are only suggested possibilities and will never be proof of anything. Conversely, your diagrams and anybody else's are the same.

I might be able to work out the 3 dimensional aspects involved but it would be a very time consuming endeavor. I cannot devote the necessary hours at this time. Sorry but I am only a man with a full time day job and a family.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 4th, 2008, 12:02pm

on Dec 4th, 2008, 10:56am, Latitude wrote:
My illustrations are only suggested possibilities and will never be proof of anything. Conversely, your diagrams and anybody else's are the same.

I might be able to work out the 3 dimensional aspects involved but it would be a very time consuming endeavor. I cannot devote the necessary hours at this time. Sorry but I am only a man with a full time day job and a family.



Latitude,

I'm a family man too, and has limits...but I'll sure help finding the truth.
I think we need to think "out of the box" to determine this enigma being a hoax or not.
Just to catch up on the case:
"Isaac" saw evidence that triggered him to "explain" the presented photo's. Period.
No further evidence, but 2 emails to LMH was the only base of the entire investigation, that was presented here, by "Isaac".
AS it is evident, is that the photo's of "Ty" holds the connection to the "Primer"...HAS to be of realavance to the way this whole case was built.
IF this evidence has realavance to the other sightings, it is relavant to establish which of these were the first sighting?
I might be wrong, but the sighting of the Drone has to be the trigger for "Isaac" to come forward...right?
Which one came first?
Now, if you determine that, we're somewhat closer to the truth that we've ever been..
Now, I'm not at all an "angry man", I really would like new members to come forward with experiences that can help in this case, as I see it still has some unanswered questions.
DrDil and Marvin has done an outstanding job trying to make a view of how this "hoax" has been engineered.
Only, it has to be verified by the "hoaxter".
I know this whole endavour could have been handled better on my side. I apologize for my blunt posting. It will never happen again, as I carry deep respect of the UFO Casebook.

Merry Christmas,

DrStern

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 4th, 2008, 12:02pm

on Dec 4th, 2008, 07:35am, Marvin wrote:
The above is HPO's model (from scratch) Photoshopped in to a photo. If you do a little fine tuning for lightness (gamma or brightness)... it is very impressive. This is HPO's "raw" image.


Ha ha! This proves you cannot recognize a real photo when you see it. The model has not been photoshopped in. Only the wires have been removed. It's actually there and this comes straight from HPO.

This is the problem with those whose minds are, shall we say, openness impaired? They see a photo which contains something that their brain does not accept so it tells them subconsciously that the photo is fake.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Radi on Dec 4th, 2008, 12:16pm

on Dec 4th, 2008, 12:02pm, Latitude wrote:
Ha ha! This proves you cannot recognize a real photo when you see it. The model has not been photoshopped in. Only the wires have been removed. It's actually there and this comes straight from HPO.

This is the problem with those whose minds are, shall we say, openness impaired? They see a photo which contains something that their brain does not accept so it tells them subconsciously that the photo is fake.



Sorry Lat This is what HPO says about the photo at the Drt site.....He also uses the word Photoshopped...

"This is the photo by the way, it's not at the right angle of light and still hanging on a single boom so I couldn't adjust anything, but I photo shopped the wires out of the picture."

So it was in effect Photoshopped in by erasing the wires...


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 4th, 2008, 12:22pm

on Dec 4th, 2008, 10:56am, Latitude wrote:
My illustrations are only suggested possibilities and will never be proof of anything. Conversely, your diagrams and anybody else's are the same.

I might be able to work out the 3 dimensional aspects involved but it would be a very time consuming endeavor. I cannot devote the necessary hours at this time. Sorry but I am only a man with a full time day job and a family.




Law Enforcement, FBI and photo experts do not seem to agree with you Lat on this statement: "My illustrations are only suggested possibilities and will never be proof of anything. Conversely, your diagrams and anybody else's are the same. "


Let's see what they say:


Q. Is there a way a casual viewer can tell what is real from what may have been fixed?

A. While a good forgery can be very difficult to detect visually, there are certain clues that a viewer can look for. Lighting, in particular, is a powerful cue. When creating a forgery of two people, for example, it is often very difficult to perfectly match the lighting. Differences in shadow direction and softness, and lighting gradients can be a good cue. Similarly, a person's eye often contains a small white specularity which is a reflection of the light in their surroundings. Differences in the shape and color of this specularity can reveal tampering. A popular, but in my opinion unreliable, visual analysis is to magnify an image by several hundred percent and then posit about the source of small pixel artifacts. Many of these artifacts are due to compression or noise, so care must be taken when undergoing any type of visual inspection.

http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/press/digitaljournalist08.html



Other techniques include looking for inconsistencies in lighting and shadows. A human still must make a final determination, and Farid admits he can never be certain. His techniques got challenged in one criminal case, and prosecutors withdrew him as an expert witness. "If we don't find traces of tampering, we don't say it's real," Farid said. "We say we find no traces of tampering. That's the best we can say.

http://www.kuwaittimes.net/read_news.php?newsid=NTM3MTg0MjI=



Brugioni (1999) realizes that image forgery is a long-existed problem that goes back to the birth of photography. He describes various traditional forgery techniques in different fields: political campaign, delivering false military information, falsifying proofs in lawsuit cases, and UFO and ghost pictures. He also includes several methods for spotting those fakery: examining lights and shadows, perspective, depth of field, discontinuous lines, and physically impossible contents of the scene.

http://www.dfrws.org/2006/proceedings/9-Lee.pdf



There are certain clues photo monitors look for. According to experts, the most common signs are differences in color or shadows, variations in graininess or pixilation, blurred images or elements in the photo that are too bright or much sharper than the rest.
http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=4383



BF: At the end of the day, a digital image is just 1s and 0s, right? How much are you looking for visual clues, and how much is an analysis of the file’s source data?

HF: We have many different forensic tools. Some looking for lighting or shadow inconsistencies, while others directly analyze the underlying pixel values. There are many ways to tamper with an image, so we need lots of different ways of analyzing images. Each case that I work on is different, and in each case I need to draw on a different approach, and sometimes create entirely new tools.

http://www.bountyfishing.com/blog/fishing/forensics-software/




A good article from the FBI:

http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/2005/dec2005/dec05leb.htm



It is detectable... the inconsistency has been scientifically demonstrated to you. The only question left is why you are pushing misinformation on those who do not understand?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 4th, 2008, 12:59pm

on Dec 4th, 2008, 12:02pm, Latitude wrote:
Ha ha! This proves you cannot recognize a real photo when you see it. The model has not been photoshopped in. Only the wires have been removed. It's actually there and this comes straight from HPO.




My apologies Lat, I did not mean to have the word "to" in there (or I would have written - into), so I removed it for you.

As to recognizing a real photo... I think that misses the point doesn't it? It is the object in the "real" photo that is the question. But if the realism of the photo is the issue… HPO's photo carries a "IJG-based editor" tag. wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 4th, 2008, 1:18pm

on Dec 4th, 2008, 12:22pm, Marvin wrote:
It is detectable... the inconsistency has been scientifically demonstrated to you.

Scientific? Hardly.

Quote:
The only question left is why you are pushing misinformation on those who do not understand?
You left out the "IMO". I could say the same about you. We can both post our opinions and let the reader be the judge.

BTW, in the future would you trim your images down. You made a mess of this page.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 4th, 2008, 1:22pm

on Dec 4th, 2008, 1:18pm, Latitude wrote:
BTW, in the future would you trim your images down. You made a mess of this page.

Great minds think alike..... wink

Interesting discussion everyone, perhaps the discrepancies can finally be resolved?

(And of course dismissed if necessary).

Cheers!!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 4th, 2008, 2:09pm

I posted HPO's photo from his source... so sorry, I can not control the size.

Thanks Doc for fixing the photo thing.

Peace.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 4th, 2008, 2:31pm

User Image

Red = Drone angle of illumination
Yellow = Pole angle of illumination


Here are the differences in illumination between the pole and the Drone. If anyone has evidence to show a significant error to make up for the 25 degree angle in difference, I am interested in seeing it.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 4th, 2008, 3:04pm

I was just leaving for Christmas Holiday, but Marvin, if you look up the pole, the shade narrows, telling that the pole might not be in "upright position", as it might be "leaning". I just discovered that, and I think that the position of the pole would change the shadows, right? Maybe this was overseen, maybe not.

If the pole "slants" I'm sure the shade changes.

Has anyone here thought of that possibility?

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 4th, 2008, 3:43pm

on Dec 4th, 2008, 3:04pm, DrStern wrote:
I was just leaving for christmas holiday, but Marvin, if you look up the pole, the shade narrows, telling that the pole might not be in "upright position", as it might be "leaning". I just discovered that, and I think that the position of the pole would change the shadows, right? Maybe this was overseen, maybe not.

If the pole "slants" I'm sure the shade changes.

Has anyone here thought of that possibility?

DrStern



Hi Doc and happy Holidays!

The only shadow I am interested in (at this point) the pole cylinder itself (the main body)… so that I know what “compass” direction (or azimuth) the sun is coming from. To determine the “height of the sun” (or angle from the horizon to the zenith) by using the pole, then a leaning pole can become problematic.

The same is true for the Drone of course.

In Raj's Photo we are using as an example, the light sources are not even close, nor are they interacting with both the pole and the drone at the same time (each have their own independent light sources by compass direction).



But to show this, you can try this experiment at home with a lamp as the only light source.

Grab any available cylinder, a pencil or a writing pen can work.

Remove the lamp shade (turn on the lamp and turn off all other lights - it will work best a night). Hold your pencil “even” in elevation with the bulb and hold the pencil so the point goes straight up to the ceiling. Examine the shadow from all “angles.”

Now, lean the pencil in any direction you like and examine the shadow from all angles.

The only time “something different” will happen is when you “lean it towards the light source or away from the light source. The only change that will occur is that the illuminated side will not be as bright, but the shadow compared to the “lit” side will be the same (unless you basically point the pencil at the light source - so try not to lean it more than 45 degrees unless you think the pole in Raj's photo is almost laying on the ground).

You see, depending on the time of day (and the month) the sun will illuminate any pole you see at a different angle… or basically, you are leaning the pole and keeping the sun in the same place. Do the shadows change on the vertical part of the pole?

I hope this is helpful.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 4th, 2008, 3:43pm

Whoops, different object/shadow!! grin

(Removed anomalous shadow/segmented paddle images)

Cheers.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 4th, 2008, 3:46pm

on Dec 4th, 2008, 2:31pm, Marvin wrote:
User Image

Red = Drone angle of illumination
Yellow = Pole angle of illumination

Here are the differences in illumination between the pole and the Drone. If anyone has evidence to show a significant error to make up for the 25 degree angle in difference, I am interested in seeing it.

on Dec 4th, 2008, 2:09pm, Marvin wrote:
Thanks Doc for fixing the photo thing.

Pleasure Marv & keep up the good work!! wink

Cheers. smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 5th, 2008, 3:22pm

on Dec 4th, 2008, 3:04pm, DrStern wrote:
I was just leaving for Christmas Holiday, but Marvin, if you look up the pole, the shade narrows...



One other thing I forgot to point out... do you know the difference between a pipe and a pole?

A pipe is the same diameter along its entire length.

A pole tapers (or gets narrower in diameter) towards the top (or far) end.

Due to the shape of the pole (as it narrows), yes the shadow will become “smaller” as the diameter becomes smaller.

Wood poles are notorious for not being perfectly straight… so there is a change of some (minor) deformity with this pole. But there is not enough of an issue that we cannot determine the compass direction of the sun on the pole.

The shadow’s edge goes through the bolt that secures the cross bars at the very top of the pole (therefore the cross bar basically points to the light source, to the right). That is how we know the follow diagram is correct:

User Image


User Image

Ignore the red circles on this.

I hope this is helpful.




Edit to add:

I can see there is still some confusion for those who do not work with this.

User Image

The pole can be used like a sun dial... but:

1. We are not looking at the shadow on the ground, we are looking at the shadow on the vertical pole.

2. We are only looking at what “compass” direction the light is coming from (so we are only looking at it two dimensionally) and how it illuminates the vertical pole.


Then we can also apply this same reasoning to the Drone as well.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 6th, 2008, 11:54am

Here's what I'm talking about:

User Image

You see the light cast on the side of the fin (yellow)?

Do you see the light on the second fin (blue)?

Do you see the shade (from the fin with the yellow marking) on the second fin? (blue)

(Still ignoring the red circles)

If you focus on that, it seems to be excactly the same angle as the shadow on the (leaning) pole.

I'm on vacation, guys! grin

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 6th, 2008, 12:02pm

To make it obvious:

User Image

Check the angle of the shadow (blue) (on the Drone)
and (black) on the pole.

(Edit to add: you even see the shadow on the anchor wire!)

Merry Christmas,

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 6th, 2008, 1:46pm

on Dec 6th, 2008, 12:02pm, DrStern wrote:
To make it obvious:

User Image

Check the angle of the shadow (blue) (on the Drone)
and (black) on the pole.

(Edit to add: you even see the shadow on the anchor wire!)

Merry Christmas,

DrStern




Happy Holidays Doc


*Click Here/On Image For Full-size
User Image





In order to understand the shadow issue, one must examine the whole object and not just focus where one can connect the dots just one time (but it does not work anywhere else).

There is no solution to bring these two light sources together.

Hopefully this will be more helpful.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 6th, 2008, 5:48pm

Thank you Marvin.

You are so much smarter than me.

Happy Holidays,

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Dec 6th, 2008, 11:09pm

Marvin,

following your logic, these photos are fake as well...

User Image

User Image

Shadows are all wrong!

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 7th, 2008, 12:11am

Nice Picture ABC, absent info who knows.Cape Cod is quite lovely, But I don't see what your point is, however maybe if you supplied a little more information the pic came with it would be helpful..the same way Rajs pic came with.
I have taken the liberty of retrieving it for you.
User Image
info cut off :cape cod; east coast; new england; beach; fence; sand; evening; dusk; outside

http://www.fisheyegallery.com

Although camera says 1200am noon,,
the picture was taken at dusk, evening meaning there is light left, but the sun has fallen below horizon. Getting diffuse light you might say..

Whereas in Raj there were more specific times given and much prior to sunset. Allowing for more accurate measurements via the known positions.
With that information, along with everything else it would seem like Marvins line reasoning is quite..reasonable if not compelling.
smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 7th, 2008, 10:07am

on Dec 6th, 2008, 11:09pm, ABCStore wrote:
Marvin,

following your logic, these photos are fake as well...

User Image

User Image

Shadows are all wrong!

ABC




ABC,

Can you explain why you think the shadows are wrong? And how does it apply to what I have said about cylinders... to these rectangles?

Take a look at the poles in the photo... wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 7th, 2008, 12:53pm

Marvin,

Your yellow arrow showing the sunlight direction on the pole is totally wrong. You evidently are confused when looking at a 2 dimensional representation of a 3 dimensional scene. Either that or you are purposely misrepresenting it to further your agenda. Actually, I think it's a lttle of both. wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 7th, 2008, 1:56pm

on Dec 7th, 2008, 12:53pm, Latitude wrote:
Marvin,

Your yellow arrow showing the sunlight direction on the pole is totally wrong. You evidently are confused when looking at a 2 dimensional representation of a 3 dimensional scene. Either that or you are purposely misrepresenting it to further your agenda. Actually, I think it's a lttle of both. wink




Unfortunately Lat, I have offered objective evidence demonstrating my point. What do you have to offer besides retracted/changed evidence and opinion?

But to give you the benefit of the doubt and to assume you do not understand…



User Image

The black line on the pole shows the shadow's edge... created by lighting in the direction of the yellow line.

User Image

The pole is shown here from the top... which shows the direction of the sun to create the shadow's edge (its location).


The pole shadow is well demonstrated and understood, except for those who wish to deceive.


In order for the lighting on the Drone to be correct on the pole, one would have to rotate the shadow on the pole about 25 degrees clockwise.

Also, to assume the lighting on the Drone is correct for both objects... then the direction of the sunlight would make it impossible for the Drone to cast a shadow on the pole.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 7th, 2008, 2:16pm

Read that Marvin, you are with your proof part of The Agenda, How contrite can anyone get?, shades of Odisea and Rutter, the same pablum spewed on and on when faced with facts and evidence. This coming from a known Liar.
Unfortunately They don't have ignore buttons here.
But this is intended at provoking not discovery, but endless chatter over issues settled long ago. If you tattooed it on his forehead he would not admit it.
No, he presents it like the Emperors clothes, nothing to wear home.. His agenda is quite clear.
Nothing to do with Truth.
even his own team mate Tomi defended him at every corner, was ostracized, and demoted from an admin.., when she wanted to prompt cooperation, to discover the truth at the DRT. accused of consorting with the enemy.
He is still an admin..so what agenda can we surmise here?
In her PM to me, it describes what is really happening here, and who has The agenda
tomi01uk
New Member
member is offline

Posts: 11
« message sent on: 09/27/2008 at 08:56:06 »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh dear,

It's hard to explain at this stage, wish I could, but it was lat/numb nuts who pushed things to close off to begin with.. that's why I'm out now, because I kept associations, now he comes back trying to get ppl to talk again. I told them you can't think enemies and war, you must be open and debate.. now he comes back wanting to open up threads.. aaaugh!!


end of quote..
but not an end to this Fraud
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 7th, 2008, 8:47pm

on Dec 7th, 2008, 1:56pm, Marvin wrote:
Unfortunately Lat, I have offered objective evidence demonstrating my point. What do you have to offer besides retracted/changed evidence and opinion?

Well, this for starters:
User Image

Your black line on the pole is not in the correct place either. You can see daylight on the back side of it.

To TP,

Your attempts to start a fight on the forum will have no effect on me. Yes, I do believe the Reed Alien case to be another one where the debunkers beat it down prematurely without giving it a fair hearing just like the drones. But that is why you and your kind are here on these boards, to scoff at and ridicule those with open minds who only want to give these sighting and reports a fair shake. You people drum up so called "evidence" and "facts" and anybody who dares question is ganged up on by forum bullies.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 7th, 2008, 8:58pm

Maybe this will help you Lat, here is another look at the shadows that was made by 1111 (as shown in 3DS max):

It rotates the light source 360 degrees around the pole…


User Image



Here are the two angles of interest:


User Image


Note: the arrow points towards the light source.

The top view, is the solar illumination of the pole. This is what we see in Raj's photo.

The bottom view, is the solar illumination of the Drone. You can now more easily see the the difference in how the pole should look if the lighting on the Drone is correct.

But of course, you have seen this all before.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 7th, 2008, 9:28pm

The bottom view is the one that is closest to correct.

The thing that explains why (and conveniently left out by the debunking crowd) the shadow at the top of the pole looks different is because the insulators on top of the crossbars were not a part of the 3D illustration and came from the Raj photo with the drone in it. These two were superimposed for illustration purposes. If the insulators at the top were included the 3D would show a shadow closer to what is in the photo.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 8th, 2008, 04:55am

on Dec 7th, 2008, 2:16pm, TeachersPet wrote:
end of quote..
but not an end to this Fraud


Sad to say, but IMO, the driving force that has been most harmful to having any positive debate or outcome about the drones has been your influence. You have just validated the character judgement made about you that I unfortunately took too long to accept.

Perhaps we all need a bit more of:

http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=Cbk980jV7Ao
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 8th, 2008, 07:51am

I am about done playing your games Lat, you have yet to provide any evidence to demonstrate one light source.

User Image
This is the way the pole is illuminated, notice the top of the pole in not in complete shadow… I assume the partial shadow on the top of the pole is due to the hardware (insulators) sitting on top.

User Image
This is Raj’s Photo

User Image
If what you are suggesting is true, the top of the pole should be in shadow (as in this example, which you say is the closest to being correct). As anyone can see in Raj’s photo, it is not. That alone rules out your idea as being wrong.

User Image

You had to change your sun direction on the Drone from your red lines to the green line (in the above picture, which now agrees with me). Looks like you need to take a closer look at the pole too.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 8th, 2008, 09:46am

on Dec 8th, 2008, 07:51am, Marvin wrote:
Iyou have yet to provide any evidence to demonstrate one light source.


Marvin, not to take any side here, but speaking independently.. over the past 3 days I've been looking really hard for any evidence that the sun is not elevated over the side postion you have it on. Forget time stamp.. just going on all the shadows I've studied on this pic combination for 1.5 years now.. I still can not see any substance showing why the sun could not be at a 2 or 2.5 oclock position over the horizon.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 8th, 2008, 10:12am

on Dec 8th, 2008, 07:51am, Marvin wrote:
I am about done playing your games Lat, you have yet to provide any evidence to demonstrate one light source.

User Image
If what you are suggesting is true, the top of the pole should be in shadow (as in this example, which you say is the closest to being correct). As anyone can see in Raj’s photo, it is not. That alone rules out your idea as being wrong.


You keep forgetting that this photo is a 2 dimensional representation of a 3D scene. Not only does the inclusion of insulators make the shadow but also the black arrow should be pointing away from the camera. The sun angle is slightly above the crossbars. This cannot be shown in the Raj pic with arrows. Here is my crude illustration.
User Image

Also, you are cheating with your green lines. That's not where I drew them.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 8th, 2008, 11:26am

on Dec 8th, 2008, 10:12am, Latitude wrote:
You keep forgetting that this photo is a 2 dimensional representation of a 3D scene. Not only does the inclusion of insulators make the shadow but also the black arrow should be pointing away from the camera. The sun angle is slightly above the crossbars. This cannot be shown in the Raj pic with arrows. Here is my crude illustration.
User Image





I want to be sure I understand what you are showing… the red line is the direction of the sunlight? And the Drone is in its approximate location to the pole?


BTW... I think it is a very good drawing Lat. I just want to be sure you have things lined up the way you think it works.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 8th, 2008, 12:09pm

on Dec 8th, 2008, 09:46am, tomi01uk wrote:
Marvin, not to take any side here, but speaking independently.. over the past 3 days I've been looking really hard for any evidence that the sun is not elevated over the side postion you have it on. Forget time stamp.. just going on all the shadows I've studied on this pic combination for 1.5 years now.. I still can not see any substance showing why the sun could not be at a 2 or 2.5 oclock position over the horizon.




Hi Tomi,

Glad to have you aboard.

You ask a good question, but if I understand what you are saying (about the suns distance above the horizon), then I think you maybe misunderstanding my argument. Here is what I have said:



on Dec 5th, 2008, 3:22pm, Marvin wrote:
One other thing I forgot to point out... do you know the difference between a pipe and a pole?

A pipe is the same diameter along its entire length.

A pole tapers (or gets narrower in diameter) towards the top (or far) end.

Due to the shape of the pole (as it narrows), yes the shadow will become “smaller” as the diameter becomes smaller.

Wood poles are notorious for not being perfectly straight… so there is a change of some (minor) deformity with this pole. But there is not enough of an issue that we cannot determine the compass direction of the sun on the pole.

The shadow’s edge goes through the bolt that secures the cross bars at the very top of the pole (therefore the cross bar basically points to the light source, to the right). That is how we know the follow diagram is correct:

User Image


User Image

Ignore the red circles on this.

I hope this is helpful.




Edit to add:

I can see there is still some confusion for those who do not work with this.

User Image

The pole can be used like a sun dial... but:

1. We are not looking at the shadow on the ground, we are looking at the shadow on the vertical pole.

2. We are only looking at what “compass” direction the light is coming from (so we are only looking at it two dimensionally) and how it illuminates the vertical pole.


Then we can also apply this same reasoning to the Drone as well.




Specifically, I want to point out this statement:

“Wood poles are notorious for not being perfectly straight… so there is a change of some (minor) deformity with this pole. But there is not enough of an issue that we cannot determine the compass direction of the sun on the pole.”

“2. We are only looking at what “compass” direction the light is coming from (so we are only looking at it two dimensionally) and how it illuminates the vertical pole.”

So I am not even addressing the difference in elevation of the sun between the two objects (the Drone and the pole… although that has been done by Kris)… I am just looking at the difference in “compass” directions… in other words, if we had a view from directly above the scene (its zenith) and were looking down on it… I am talking about the difference in direction we would see the two light source coming from (as if they were only horizontal to the objects. And in this case, it is not far from where there light sources are coming from. See below:

User Image

I hope this is more helpful.



Edit to add:

The sun has to be coming from the same direction on all objects (all of the lines for the source of the sun must be parallel and come from the same "compass" direction... or you have a big problem like this one).

If you look at the direction of the sun on the pole and the location of the Drone... which is on the wrong side of the pole to cast a shadow on it for either sun location, there can be no shadows cast on the pole from the Drone, even if the sun were high enough in the sky to do this... which would be closer to 1:30 PM and not at 5:42PM. LOL.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 8th, 2008, 12:36pm

Marvin, thanks for putting so many examples out, but it is that pole example that persuaded me that the lines as indicated by Lat are as I have thought all along and I call that the 2:00 to 2 1/2 oclock position.

If you stop the animated gif that Kris made at a point that comes from that direction, I find the shadows on the pole to be much closer to the photo example.

The curve of that crossbar shadow is indicative imo of a more elevated sun.
Cheers smiley


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 8th, 2008, 1:12pm

Do you mean the GIF Kris did:

on Dec 3rd, 2008, 07:13am, Marvin wrote:
User Image




Or the one by 1111:

on Dec 7th, 2008, 8:58pm, Marvin wrote:
Maybe this will help you Lat, here is another look at the shadows that was made by 1111 (as shown in 3DS max):

It rotates the light source 360 degrees around the pole…


User Image



Here are the two angles of interest:


User Image


Note: the arrow points towards the light source.

The top view, is the solar illumination of the pole. This is what we see in Raj's photo.

The bottom view, is the solar illumination of the Drone. You can now more easily see the the difference in how the pole should look if the lighting on the Drone is correct.

But of course, you have seen this all before.




On 1111’s GIF, I provided the two locations the best I could.


Personally, I think Kris put more time and fine tuning/accuracy into his GIF overlay where 1111 was just trying to get the idea across... but in my opinion, they both did a great job.

I hope this is helpful.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 8th, 2008, 1:37pm

There are many mistakes in both of those gifs. Mistakes compounding mistakes. There are so many I don't have time to point them all out.

But no matter. The truth of this will likely one day be proved just for you Marvin.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 8th, 2008, 1:54pm

on Dec 8th, 2008, 11:26am, Marvin wrote:
[quote author=Latitude link=board=drone&num=1223123924&start=141#9 date=1228752748]

You keep forgetting that this photo is a 2 dimensional representation of a 3D scene. Not only does the inclusion of insulators make the shadow but also the black arrow should be pointing away from the camera. The sun angle is slightly above the crossbars. This cannot be shown in the Raj pic with arrows. Here is my crude illustration.
User Image


I want to be sure I understand what you are showing… the red line is the direction of the sunlight? And the Drone is in its approximate location to the pole?


BTW... I think it is a very good drawing Lat. I just want to be sure you have things lined up the way you think it works.




You did not respond to my question Lat.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 8th, 2008, 2:04pm

Because Marvin.. its just as Torvald said..on this last July..
This reminds me so much of the conversation Torvald had at with these same folx..at OM..
I cannot link as I was just banned from there.
.However I
found this there anyway...

Your example of ambient light is lacking so much realism that it's hardly an example of the natural conditions occuring at the time.

Light scatters and reflects. Yours is flat and unnatural. There was a high sun at the time, no clouds to speak of, light was bright in the conditions of the photo, your example shows nothing of this. [/quote]

now. you want more you do work for self. i read many comment but nobody show work. tomi say this number say that spf33 say other, he say she say whatever. say many things signify nothing. do not even know why subsurface scattering used for! but pretend to sound important. go grab something else off internet and be five minute expert. not mean to sound offend but tired or going over and over same ground same results many times calculate result same.

photographs are hoax. accept it or not nothing i can do to help you. some of you like closed book and will not accept fact data. you excuse and misdirect and talk on things you know little or nothing about. maybe you see this comment as insult. sorry but it just factual like data. if you no accept it fine but not insulting to say. i put many many hours into study. i careful to not to be inaccurate. i try to listen to RELEVANT argument. very little of that! mostly see the monkey!

so final word. photograph vanishing point accurate. simulation scene geomentry accurate. photograph perspective study accurate. evidence given. solution calculated. results accurate. sun angle azimuth solution good. lighting solution good. bounces reflection everything there for tomi. i am being tired. long day and this on top of. i will write better summary for other thread later.


Which Torvald.. did..and still stands..
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 8th, 2008, 2:04pm

on Dec 8th, 2008, 11:26am, Marvin wrote:
I want to be sure I understand what you are showing… the red line is the direction of the sunlight? And the Drone is in its approximate location to the pole?

Yes and yes. Approximate. There are some scale differences but you get the general idea. There was much calculation done about the sun angle that fateful day in Capitola. Don't make me rehash all that but it basically agrees with my crude drawing.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 8th, 2008, 3:19pm

on Dec 8th, 2008, 2:04pm, Latitude wrote:

Yes and yes. Approximate. There are some scale differences but you get the general idea. There was much calculation done about the sun angle that fateful day in Capitola. Don't make me rehash all that but it basically agrees with my crude drawing.





User Image




If this shows the path of the sun light, can you show me where the shadow of the Drone will strike (be seen on) the pole?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 8th, 2008, 4:08pm

Hi guys, sorry for blending in, but Marvin I think you (and Kris) actually have a serious problem here.

Notice the shadow (in black circle) as it seem to actually never move, or only slightly. How do you explain that, if the rest of the shadows seem to move in the .gif presented?

Furthermore is it still hard to determine if the Drone is "leaning" as well, so the compass thing will not be of use here, only if you are absolutely certain of the pole's position, and as I understand, no one are.

User Image

User Image

In my opinion, the shadows of the drone cannot be more than estimates, as there simply aren't any other reference points. (exept for the pole)

Therefor, the consistant of the "tiny" shadow I just pointed out, might show that you actually proved that the drone reacts "as it should" in your research?

And therefor maybe is more likely to be true than the power/telephone pole shown in the original image. Maybe it's the pole that's manipulated....

Have a real good time working this out, and remember: Small evidence sometimes are the most true.

DrStern




Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 8th, 2008, 4:44pm

on Dec 8th, 2008, 4:08pm, DrStern wrote:
Hi guys, sorry for blending in, but Marvin I think you (and Kris) actually have a serious problem here.

Notice the shadow (in black circle) as it seem to actually never move, or only slightly. How do you explain that, if the rest of the shadows seem to move in the .gif presented?

Furthermore is it still hard to determine if the Drone is "leaning" as well, so the compass thing will not be of use here, only if you are absolutely certain of the pole's position, and as I understand, no one are.

User Image

User Image

In my opinion, the shadows of the drone cannot be more than estimates, as there simply aren't any other reference points. (exept for the pole)

Therefor, the consistance of the "tiny" shadow I just pointed out, might show that you actually proved that the drone reacts "as it should" in your research?

And therefor maybe is more likely to be true than the power/telephone pole shown in the original image. Maybe it's the pole that's manipulated....

Have a real good time working this out, and remember: Small evidence sometimes are the most true.

DrStern







Hi Doc,

I hope you are having a great holiday!

I do not know have all of the info on how Kris calculated the Drones position... I think if you have a question on that, he would be the best one to answer it.

Besides, I was using his pole example.

As to “compass” direction (have you noticed I have been using the word in quotes)... I have not introduced that actual azimuth (compass direction) from which the sun light is coming from.

Is it impossible to do? Actually, since we know the time, date and approximate location (assuming near Capitola)… we can look it up in a table. This has already been done.

But to introduce that now would cause utter confusion for a number of folks. I am simply showing the difference in lighting directions as if using a 360 degree compass (rather than North or South).


Is the Drone leaning? That can be determined by placing a mathematical model of it in a 3D software as a number of others have done. So with effort and software, that can be done.


But the debate here seems to be looking for the mice and are over looking the elephant I am trying to point out. The angle of the sun, in order for the Drone lighting to be correct, has to be from almost 2 hours earlier in the day… closer to 4PM than to 5:42PM.

I think I am about done with this… my best advice Doc, is if you do not think I am correct… do the research or take it to someone who understands and show it to them.

Best regards,

Marvin



Oh and BTW... Lat's sketch:

User Image

It is physically impossible for the Drone to cast a shadow on the pole. Take the red line (that is the sun's direction) and draw one though the Drone, parallel to the original red line. That is where the shadow will be cast. wink

There is no way for the Drone to cast a shadow on the pole using either the “Drone lighting” or the “pole lighting,” with the Drone located where it is in the photo (and without a third light source). Play with it… it will become glaring obvious to you.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 8th, 2008, 5:01pm

Thanks, Marvin, and for your reply.

Quote:
But the debate here seems to be looking for the mice and are over looking the elephant I am trying to point out.


Remember David and Goliath:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goliath

I'll hereby step down, and not bother you again, please enjoy a merry Christmas,

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 8th, 2008, 5:10pm

Much of this if not all, was gone over in the folowing thread, which included the analysis by multiple people.

That is a good suggestion, Marvin, to have to take it up with them, assuming the the Doctor, did his homework and and understood the analysis done that had explanations attached for every diagram done.
http://lucianarchy.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=cali1&action=display&thread=2037&page=5
http://lucianarchy.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=cali1&action=display&thread=3544

Perhaps we can import that entire thread right here for their reference.
Torvald said it was ok to use his work, it is in the public domain, so long as diagram and information were kept together. I am sure Kris, 11 11, Radi, and the others wont mind either.

I would not humor simply rehashing something that has been resolved already.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 8th, 2008, 5:19pm

on Dec 5th, 2008, 3:22pm, Marvin wrote:
User Image


Hi Marvin, Tuna here. I'm glad you posted this diagram and the pic that followed. This is what I have always seen to be the reason why there isn't 2 separate light sources:

User Image

The halfway point for the shadow on the drone seems to follow the yellow arrows you have for the pole sunlight, does it not?

Tuna smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 8th, 2008, 5:46pm

on Dec 8th, 2008, 5:01pm, DrStern wrote:
Thanks, Marvin, and for your reply.



Remember David and Goliath:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goliath

I'll hereby step down, and not bother you again, please enjoy a merry Christmas,

DrStern



There is no reason to step down Doc and you are not a bother. smiley I am always happy to explain anything or debate any issue... sometime it is become a bit overwhelming during these tag team “challenges.” I hope you and yours will have a Merry Christmas as well.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 8th, 2008, 5:53pm

on Dec 8th, 2008, 5:19pm, newtothis wrote:
Hi Marvin, Tuna here. I'm glad you posted this diagram and the pic that followed. This is what I have always seen to be the reason why there isn't 2 separate light sources:

The halfway point for the shadow on the drone seems to follow the yellow arrows you have for the pole sunlight, does it not?

Tuna smiley


Hi Newtothis (one needs a program to keep up wink )


Here is the reason why the appearance of the shadow on the Drone's outer body maybe a bit misleading (I beleive the gamma/brightness has been played with):


User Image


If the Drone was illuminated from that angle, the circled "tooth" (that hangs down) should be illuminated... but it is in complete shadow. Therefore, the sun cannot be coming from that direction (on the Drone).
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 8th, 2008, 9:04pm

on Dec 8th, 2008, 5:53pm, Marvin wrote:
Hi Newtothis (one needs a program to keep up wink )


Here is the reason why the appearance of the shadow on the Drone's outer body maybe a bit misleading (I beleive the gamma/brightness has been played with):


While the black line I drew is far from exact, I believe it is a lot closer to the halfway point than the red arrows you have drawn. If the lighting was changed, wouldn't it have been changed for the whole photo and not just part of the drone?

I wish I had the skills that some of you have to break down that halfway point and where it more than likely starts, but alas, I'm a fish outta water wink

Tuna
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 9th, 2008, 06:56am

on Dec 8th, 2008, 9:04pm, newtothis wrote:
While the black line I drew is far from exact, I believe it is a lot closer to the halfway point than the red arrows you have drawn. If the lighting was changed, wouldn't it have been changed for the whole photo and not just part of the drone?

I wish I had the skills that some of you have to break down that halfway point and where it more than likely starts, but alas, I'm a fish outta water wink

Tuna



Hi Tuna,

The red lines and yellow lines are the directions of light sources. If you go the opposite direction of the arrows, then you would find the light source for that line. The lines point in the “line of travel” of the light (in order to cast a shadow). I did not try to show the terminus between light and shadow (that can be a little more involved for non-flat or multi-directional curved surfaces). It is also “tricky” to do when a photo has been modified ( it can be unworkable). It is much easier to follow the “line of travel” of the light to the shadow it creates.

For the Pole, it was fairly easy to find the shadow terminus… it is “even” with the bolts that attach the top cross bars. I am working from the assumption the pole lighting is correct (that it is legitimate) and the lighting angle I am using is correct. The Drone… has issues. That is never a good sign.

If you think the light source angle for the pole is the correct light source angle for the Drone, then simply draw parallel line of that light source through the openings on the bottom of the Drone and look to see if the shadows are correct for that light source angle. Let us know if you can get them to match. Also, let us know if you can get the Drone to cast a shadow on the pole.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 9th, 2008, 09:47am

on Dec 8th, 2008, 3:19pm, Marvin wrote:
User Image

If this shows the path of the sun light, can you show me where the shadow of the Drone will strike (be seen on) the pole?

There would be no drone shadow on the pole. The red line is the sun angle. Maybe you misunderstood my drawing but I cannot understand why you would think a shadow from the drone would hit the pole. huh

PS: Trim those images, again!


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 9th, 2008, 11:26am

on Dec 9th, 2008, 09:47am, Latitude wrote:
There would be no drone shadow on the pole. The red line is the sun angle. Maybe you misunderstood my drawing but I cannot understand why you would think a shadow from the drone would hit the pole. huh





I just want to be sure we are in agreement. wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 9th, 2008, 11:45am

on Dec 9th, 2008, 11:26am, Marvin wrote:
I just want to be sure we are in agreement. wink

So I guess it was some kind of a trick question?


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 9th, 2008, 1:04pm

on Dec 9th, 2008, 11:45am, Latitude wrote:
So I guess it was some kind of a trick question?





Ya mean like "sit up," or "roll over?"

Naw.

It just shows we can find agreement. smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 9th, 2008, 3:53pm

I don't know if you've seen this one before. It's one I did to illustrate the sun angle consistency between two pics that
were taken 4 seconds apart according to the exif data. Notice the clouds and how they correlate with that time frame.

User Image
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 9th, 2008, 4:53pm

on Dec 9th, 2008, 3:53pm, Latitude wrote:
I don't know if you've seen this one before. It's one I did to illustrate the sun angle consistency between two pics that
were taken 4 seconds apart according to the exif data. Notice the clouds and how they correlate with that time frame.

User Image




Yes, the orientation of the drone is maintained.


User Image


But, if that is the correct direction for the sun on the pole, the shadow (circled) should go across the upright pole (the cross bar would block the light from hitting it)... yet there a small amount of light on the right in both photo 16 and 17 in this location. So, you need to rotation the light source back in the direction were I show it in order to work.

Been there, done that. grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 10th, 2008, 03:12am

Thank you Marvin for reaffirming the laws of Physics.
User Image

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=x7tLByWzJSc

I will return now to my Christmas Shopping.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=EYtYw5neWCQ


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 10th, 2008, 09:28am

on Dec 9th, 2008, 4:53pm, Marvin wrote:
But, if that is the correct direction for the sun on the pole, the shadow (circled) should go across the upright pole (the cross bar would block the light from hitting it)... yet there a small amount of light on the right in both photo 16 and 17 in this location. So, you need to rotation the light source back in the direction were I show it in order to work.


So if I understand correctly, your entire beef is about that shadow at the top of the pole under the crossbar and that it could not be made from light that is consistent on the drone. OK. We should find out soon.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Dec 10th, 2008, 09:38am

On these photos sunlight should not be represented as straight lines, it should be slightly curved.

IMHO

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 10th, 2008, 2:15pm

on Dec 10th, 2008, 09:38am, ABCStore wrote:
On these photos sunlight should not be represented as straight lines, it should be slightly curved.

IMHO

ABC




Light always travels the “shortest path.” While it is true, the shortest path may not be a “straight line,” depending on refractive index variations (or differences) and gravity (and the like)… but for short distances (as in these photographs), a straight line path will be accurate.

For further reading:

http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~dmw/ast203/Lectures/Lect_04.pdf

http://serc.carleton.edu/sp/mnstep/activities/20128.html

http://www.fhsst.org/?q=node/7811

http://alex.edfac.usyd.edu.au/blp/Sample%20lessons/reasoning_light.htm

http://www.le.ac.uk/se/centres/sci/selfstudy/lac1.htm

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Does_light_travel_in_a_straight_line_or_does_it_spread_out

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Dec 10th, 2008, 7:07pm

2D photo is a projection of a 3D reality. Therefore it is distorted. An example

User Image

Parallel on the ground but not in the picture. You can not show the sun rays by drawing a straight line.

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 10th, 2008, 8:00pm

on Dec 10th, 2008, 7:07pm, ABCStore wrote:
2D photo is a projection of a 3D reality. Therefore it is distorted. An example


Beautiful, ABC. That's exactly what I was trying to tell him a few pages back. Precisely why a 2D representation of a 3D scenery is not always accurate.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 11th, 2008, 06:54am

on Dec 10th, 2008, 7:07pm, ABCStore wrote:
2D photo is a projection of a 3D reality. Therefore it is distorted. An example

User Image

Parallel on the ground but not in the picture. You can not show the sun rays by drawing a straight line.

ABC


on Dec 10th, 2008, 8:00pm, Latitude wrote:
Beautiful, ABC. That's exactly what I was trying to tell him a few pages back. Precisely why a 2D representation of a 3D scenery is not always accurate.




Okay gentlemen, I give up… what is distorted and inaccurate with this photo?

It has been Photoshopped, but I will assume it was done to provide the framing and adjustments.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 11th, 2008, 08:16am

Wow,

I'm surprised the Sun angle is still being debated. There have already been multiple 3D simulations showing the exact position of the Sun.

When recreating the Raj PIC0016 in a simulation, you can use the telephone pole as the main measuring device to create the scene. Once you make the primitive shapes of the telephone pole, you can add a light source and that will create the direct shadows. You can then move the light source until the direct shadows on the pole match the image. Once this is done you have successfully found the direction of the Sun.

Here is an image that proves we already know the direction of the Sun:

User Image

There is only 1 possible Sun direction that can create the shadows you see above to match Raj's image. This means we have the telephone pole and Sun position correct. There is no debate about it.

User Image

The red line is the REAL Sun direction, which matches the pole. There is no debate about this.

For those that are hilariously saying 3D can not be accurately represented in 2D, all I have to say is that you couldn't be more wrong.

By showing 3 different views in 2D, you can represent a 3D scene. You need a top view, like above, and you need a side view, and a front or back view. This is how it works in 3D modeling software.

So here are the other views that show the Sun direction in 2D. They can be used together to represent the 3D scene:

User Image

User Image

User Image

User Image

Please note: The red line is the REAL Sun direction, and is proven to be 100% correct. There is no other direction the Sun can be in, or it would not match the Raj image.

Once you have the telephone pole modeled, and the shadows perfectly match the image, you can place the drone in the 3D scene to match the position of the image. When you do that, you can see the MAJOR differences in lighting. These are NOT "ambient light differences" these are "DIRECT LIGHT" differences. All the DIRECT SHADOWS, are WRONG on the drone.

The green line in the images above represent the only possible direction the Sun must be in, in order to make the direct shadows on the drone match the image.

This is case closed. Nothing can disprove this.





Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 11th, 2008, 08:28am

Welcome to the fray 11. wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 11th, 2008, 08:34am

This following animation is made in 3D. The arrow is an actual 3D arrow made of a cylinder and a cone, in a 3D scene.

User Image

The animation above was designed with the thought in mind that it is hard to represent a direction in 3D on a 2D image. This is why THE ARROW IS ONLY SHOWING THE COMPASS DIRECTION IN X/Y (2D) FORMAT. This means the arrow is not pointing at the Sun, it is only pointing in the compass direction of the Sun.

User Image
The black arrow in the image above is representing this red arrow in the image below:
User Image

Once again, the black arrow is representing the Azimuth, and not the Altitude. The red line in the image below is representing BOTH the Azimuth AND Altitude:
User Image

All the images above are made of actual 3D objects, and are not 2D.





Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 11th, 2008, 08:49am

on Dec 11th, 2008, 08:28am, Marvin wrote:
Welcome to the fray 11. wink


Hey thanks Marvin. I'm looking forward to ending this hoax. wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 11th, 2008, 09:39am

on Dec 11th, 2008, 06:54am, Marvin wrote:
Okay gentlemen, I give up… what is distorted and inaccurate with this photo?


Marvin, they are trying to insist that our Sun calculations are wrong because of "perspective", which is incorrect.

They are using "one-point perspective" images to disprove the Raj image that is NOT a "one-point perspective"...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_(graphical)

It seems to me they need to learn how perspectives work, and the different types of perspective.

Then they need to learn how our 3D programs handle perspective, and that all the 3D calculations of the Sun direction include perspective.

Quote:
Computer graphics
3-D computer games and ray-tracers often use a modified version of perspective. Like the painter, the computer program is generally not concerned with every ray of light that is in a scene. Instead, the program simulates rays of light traveling backwards from the monitor (one for every pixel), and checks to see what it hits. In this way, the program does not have to compute the trajectories of millions of rays of light that pass from a light source, hit an object, and miss the viewer.

CAD software, and some computer games (especially games using 3-D polygons) use linear algebra, and in particular matrix multiplication, to create a sense of perspective. The scene is a set of points, and these points are projected to a plane (computer screen) in front of the view point (the viewer's eye). The problem of perspective is simply finding the corresponding coordinates on the plane corresponding to the points in the scene. By the theories of linear algebra, a matrix multiplication directly computes the desired coordinates, thus bypassing any descriptive geometry theorems used in perspective drawing.



They are completely wrong, I can easily show the rays of light with straight lines in that image:

User Image


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 11th, 2008, 10:22am

1111,

I know you like to fight and argue but I only come here for discussion and civil debate.

The point was made that A (singular) 2D representation cannot depict a 3D scene. It's true that 3 different views (x,y,z) can give a basic representation. But the point was made that perspective (camera lense) can distort the view.

We are doing some additional shadow analysis and are finding that there are likely errors on both sides of this issue. We hope to soon put this to bed once and for all. Stay tuned.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 11th, 2008, 10:55am

Excellent posts, 11! Like Marvin, I welcome you to the forum. wink

@ Latitude

There have been many issues debated and discussed concerning the drone photos. There have been many experts to expose the photos as fake. My question is have any experts in photography and/or CGI actually declared the photos as legitimate? With the money spent on employing Private Investigators for the better part of a year, have any funds been spent on acquiring a professional analysis to refute the claims of fakery?

Is there at least one expert in a pertinent field that has labeled these photos as authentic? It seems that any investigative research would first and foremost have the photos professionally analyzed to determine authenticity before spending thousands of dollars looking for anonymous witnesses and telephone poles.

Plenty of heavyweights have offered their analysis on these photos and all concluded fakery. Have any heavyweights declared the photos authentic? If no, why not?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 11th, 2008, 11:12am

on Dec 11th, 2008, 10:22am, Latitude wrote:
1111,

I know you like to fight and argue but I only come here for discussion and civil debate.


Nobody is fighting, only debating. But when you LIE, and make FALSE CLAIMS, and then IGNORE EVIDENCE, or straight PLAY DUMB, that's when things heat up.

You can believe in fake UFO's, but can you believe there are people in this world that can detect the b.s.?

on Dec 11th, 2008, 10:22am, Latitude wrote:
The point was made that A (singular) 2D representation cannot depict a 3D scene. It's true that 3 different views (x,y,z) can give a basic representation.


Your point is wrong, because it IS possible to represent 3D on a 2D surface. It all depends though on your definition of 3D. Obviously since everything is on a computer screen it is 2D, but why then is it called 3D modeling when you create CGI models? Its because the objects themselves are converted from 3D to 2D, so they are 2D representations of 3D.

What you are arguing about is a total distraction, and shows a complete lack of understanding about perspective.

Quote:
Perspective in the graphic arts, such as drawing, is an approximate representation, on a flat surface (such as paper)(2D), of an image as it is perceived by the eye. (3D)



on Dec 11th, 2008, 10:22am, Latitude wrote:
But the point was made that perspective (camera lense) can distort the view.


Luckily there are mathematical equations that can simulate camera lens distortion, and they are available in the 3D simulations. You can actually choose to simulate the curvature of lenses, and the FOV of the camera lens using the lensmakers equation. Actually in all of the 3D renders made to show the Sun direction, they all used a "simulated camera" to create the render. These simulated cameras already have lens curvature, but its so small you don't see it.


on Dec 11th, 2008, 10:22am, Latitude wrote:
We are doing some additional shadow analysis and are finding that there are likely errors on both sides of this issue. We hope to soon put this to bed once and for all. Stay tuned.


Stay tuned for what? It's already a proven hoax.

JUST ASK YOURSELF, HOW COME THE TELEPHONE WIRES, AND POWER LINES IN THE IMAGE DON'T CURVE? THE SUN RAYS RUN THE SAME AS THE WIRES, BUT NOT IN THE SAME DIRECTION. SO YOU ARE WRONG, THE SUN RAYS SHOULD NOT BE CURVED.

So you have nothing... if the wires are straight, the sun rays should be straight. heh


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 11th, 2008, 11:16am

Thank you Marv and welcome NewEleven, for areally clearing that up.
Now, as I understand, 2d can't be used to do something in 3d..or something like that..well..from my 'perspective'
2d 3d representations are used ALL the time in court, as when an airliner crashes and experts have to explain to a jury what may have gone down in causing a crash. Enitire scenes a re recreated from just the scattering of debris, known prior flight paths, and other information, direct and indirect, It may be just a "basic" representation of events, to some, but its a perfectly valid and extremely tool there and here, especially in this kind of case, to determine the most probable cause of an event or an objects behavior. In this case, the most probable conclusion being manipulation, and just as fatal to the drone case as a pilot error is in a plane crash.
I believe everyone knows about the lens distortions, from Raj camera, the same minolta model Numbers/Latitude has, and even ironically, I believe Tom. The level of lens distortion would already be a known variable, and factored in..
Its like saying we can't accept as real nor fake.because there is distortion of lens effect. like to make it, ok, inconclusive, and it has equal chance of being real..
Hmm... How disingenuous can one get?
Wrong!Those werent the only effects looked at, just by referring to Torvalds and all the other analysts like 11 11 there was also witness motion which violated physics, not just shadows, as I understood.
Its not just the shadow, its the entire scenario!
I want to see exactly..this error or alleged mishandling of any the analysis by Marvin, or kris, or Torvald, or 1111 , the whole crew.. done with input from both camps, not just one...that keeps being put forth, that is supposed to give the drone a new lease on life. rolleyes
I still see a corpse.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 11th, 2008, 11:27am

on Dec 11th, 2008, 10:22am, Latitude wrote:
1111,

The point was made that A (singular) 2D representation cannot depict a 3D scene. It's true that 3 different views (x,y,z) can give a basic representation. But the point was made that perspective (camera lense) can distort the view.

We are doing some additional shadow analysis and are finding that there are likely errors on both sides of this issue. We hope to soon put this to bed once and for all. Stay tuned.




Okay, let’s take this one step at a time:

Quote:
The point was made that A (singular) 2D representation cannot depict a 3D scene.


If you believe this to be true, then I do not think you understand issues of perception and appearance.

Try this experiment.

Look at something near you. I assume you have normal vision in both eyes and that you would agree you are seeing in 3D.

Continue to look… but cover one eye and do not move. You have just simulated a photo of the scene since you are now observing in “2D.” Did the laws of physics just change? Are things distorted, such as the “line of travel” for light sources? Did your sight just become inaccurate when seeing shadows? They look the same to me. grin

Lat, for some reason I just continue to not be able to follow your logic:

Quote:
We are doing some additional shadow analysis and are finding that there are likely errors on both sides of this issue.


To say (in the same statement) that a 2D image cannot depict a 3D scene and yet you can do shadow analysis from 2D images… yet, this is what has been done. But I do look forward to any analysis you come up with.



By the way 11, nice work!


Hi Jedd! It is great to have you here, welcome aboard!

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 11th, 2008, 11:44am

Hey Jed,

Do you know of any photo analysts who use an unbiased, fool proof and scientific method? One that does not depend on judgement calls and guesses? The truth is there are none. Technology is progressing in that area. I did have an email exchange with a high level forensic scientist in the field who has been part of a leading edge development of a software program that does what we want but he informed me that it is still a work in progress and nowhere near complete. I did ask him if he could check the drone photos but he declined saying that at this point the tech does not exist to give a definite answer. His personal opinion? They could be real.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 11th, 2008, 11:50am

on Dec 11th, 2008, 11:12am, neveleeleven wrote:
Nobody is fighting, only debating. But when you LIE, and make FALSE CLAIMS, and then IGNORE EVIDENCE, or straight PLAY DUMB, that's when things heat up.


I can't have a civil discussion with you. It's out of the question. You are abrasive and insulting. Maybe you don't mean it but that is the way it comes across.




Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 11th, 2008, 12:17pm

on Dec 11th, 2008, 11:50am, Latitude wrote:
I can't have a civil discussion with you. It's out of the question.


Basically that means you lost the debate because you forfeit. Thanks for trying. rolleyes



on Dec 10th, 2008, 09:38am, ABCStore wrote:
On these photos sunlight should not be represented as straight lines, it should be slightly curved.

IMHO

ABC


Then why are the power lines and telephone wires so straight in the image? That pretty much proves your opinion wrong.

Are you trying to say that electrical wires are more straight then sun rays?

-edit add-

Hey Jedd! Hey TeachersPet! Thanks.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 11th, 2008, 12:38pm

on Dec 11th, 2008, 11:44am, Latitude wrote:
Hey Jed,

Do you know of any photo analysts who use an unbiased, fool proof and scientific method? One that does not depend on judgement calls and guesses? The truth is there are none.


That kind of sounds like refusal to accept the verdict. The truth is that numerous experts have condemned the photos as fake and gave reasons why. Even the Ufo Hunters had their doubts as to authenticity. I simply want to know how the lack of at least one expert that validates the photos is explained away. The lack of such expert testimony should be viewed as a huge hole in any claim or thought of a drone reality.

Quote:
Technology is progressing in that area. I did have an email exchange with a high level forensic scientist in the field who has been part of a leading edge development of a software program that does what we want but he informed me that it is still a work in progress and nowhere near complete. I did ask him if he could check the drone photos but he declined saying that at this point the tech does not exist to give a definite answer.


Are you speaking of Hany Farid? He charges $200 an hour for his analysis.


Quote:
His personal opinion? They could be real.


Which is your second hand testimony. "They could be real" is a pale offering to the numerous expert opinion and analysis that has been given on the drone subject.

Why not pay for expert image analysis which would be much cheaper than having two men explore central California. Or maybe offer the photos to a local University for examination? Is the possibility of not being able to find a supporting analysis preventing these measures from be undertaken? Surely, if the drone photos have any merit, then at least one expert can go on record as supporting their authenticity. This would be a huge step forward in support of the drones being real. The lack of supporting expert testimony has been a knife in the heart of the drone case since day one. It causes those that doubt the drone case to wonder why those that support it do not ask for, or need any outside independent analysis to confirm authenticity. It is almost as if the photos, which are sharp and clear, do not need authentication just because they are sharp and clear. wink


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Radi on Dec 11th, 2008, 1:00pm

[quote author=Latitude link=board=drone&num=1223123924&start=183#12 date=1229017469 His personal opinion? They could be real.

[/quote]

Is this on record somewhere? Do you have a name of this expert or is this just hearsay from another person that does not exsist?
Did the PIs ever have an expert look at the photos?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 11th, 2008, 1:08pm

laughLOL, he knows of one guy that said "It could be real". A guy who needs software to test images...

...that's comedy.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Radi on Dec 11th, 2008, 1:20pm

on Dec 11th, 2008, 11:44am, Latitude wrote:
Hey Jed,

Do you know of any photo analysts who use an unbiased, fool proof and scientific method? One that does not depend on judgement calls and guesses? The truth is there are none. Technology is progressing in that area. I did have an email exchange with a high level forensic scientist in the field who has been part of a leading edge development of a software program that does what we want but he informed me that it is still a work in progress and nowhere near complete. I did ask him if he could check the drone photos but he declined saying that at this point the tech does not exist to give a definite answer. His personal opinion? They could be real.



Heres another expert service, maybe the PIs know these people since they are in California...
http://www.forimag.com/
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 11th, 2008, 1:29pm

Hi Radi.

I'm not sure that expert forensic imaging consultants are wanted or needed by those that push a drone reality. The resulting conclusion by such a firm may be contradictory to a drone reality. Therefore undesireable by the pro-drone crowd.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 11th, 2008, 2:31pm

Welcome Jeddy!, Precisely the point. They will not take it to anyone like that, and yet that is the very type of person required in matters of proof, particularly the one with the burden.
I am confused here though, since when was Lat assigned as the go between between Farid and Drt.
I can see 11A, or SPF, OTF..but why the least"expert" of them all?, no offense intended.
It was I who made contact with Farid and they have had the info since april or may of 2008.
They will not do it. Repeat, they will not do it.And this expert can work with scans. I even suggested a collection among ALL of us, to help get the truth..at OMF..it fell on deaf ears, but it was DOABLE
I don't think for one second Farid ever said it could be real.
I want to see that. I havent seen that mentioned anywhere.Nothing was ever said about that.
So it could be real (leaving out I guess..it might not)without an analysis is what he ran with? This is just unbelievable..
User Image

Something is amiss and troublesome..here, as the DRT has never said anything about a shortage of money, yet it is said the PIs are on the case ad Lat is right in the area. Maybe he can tell us how much has been paid out so far, but not where a reasonable person would take it, before they even touch or hire a PI.

But he , Lat, is here, ready and willing to discuss civilly, but dishonestly if not just crazilly..
A civil discussion involves honesty on both sides, and the willingness to accept..that you can be wrong.
I am sure We are get everything but that here.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 11th, 2008, 3:05pm

Bugs and Daffy... debate on the Drones - click on me
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 11th, 2008, 3:08pm

Hi TP!

I also contacted Mr. Farid earlier this year, seeking information on special plugins for ImageJ. I was taken aback by his prices but thought that the DRT, already spending money on PI's, would possibly get this analysis if only to help further the possibility of a drone reality. They never did.

I find it a bit odd that the DRT, or more specifically whoever is funding the PI's, would pay out that kind of money to private detectives without first seeking a professional analysis and determination on the drone photos. A seal of approval that the photos appear to be legitimate would be quite a feather in the drone cap. And a justification that Private Investigators are indeed warranted.

If I had the monetary resources and the same inclination to investigate this case as deeply as the DRT, I certainly would have sought justification to hire PI's before hiring them. Unless I was seeking to use the PI's strictly for sensationalism.

Farid's quote of 20 hours at $200 an hour is $4000. I wonder how much the PI's have been paid?




Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by nekitamo on Dec 11th, 2008, 3:20pm

Let's assume for a moment that wider angle situation around pic16 looks like this:

User Image

Would you still use parallel lines to represent rays of light from the sun in PIC0016 in this case?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 11th, 2008, 3:21pm

Welcome to the forum 11 and a couple of great points/posts!! smiley

Hi Jedd, good to see you posting under your old name again wink (and of course Tuna, Radi, Marv, TP etc..... grin)

on Dec 11th, 2008, 11:44am, Latitude wrote:
Do you know of any photo analysts who use an unbiased, fool proof and scientific method? One that does not depend on judgement calls and guesses? The truth is there are none.

Hi lat, do you believe such a method will ever exist that would be recognised as beyond reproach?

As far as I know then for such a method to be implemented in this case would require many, many things so as to be deemed ‘conclusive’ or even admissible in a court of law. As unfortunately due to the (intentionally) evasive nature of the photographers a, “Fool proof, scientific method” could never be suitably reconciled with (what is currently accepted as) standard operating procedure as it apples to digital imaging forensics, i.e. post-capture processing, documentation (of image processing), verification of original and/or processed images, chain of custody, calibration etc. etc.

The current practices if someone were to submit a digital image/photograph as evidence of anything dictates that:

Quote:
The principal requirements to admit a photograph (digital or film-based) into evidence are relevance and authentication. Unless the photograph is admitted by the stipulation of both parties, the party attempting to admit the photograph into evidence must be prepared to offer testimony that the photograph is an accurate representation of the scene. This usually means someone must testify that the photograph accurately portrays the scene as viewed by that witness.

Hasn't this been the underlying point all along, i.e. the non-repudiation of EVERY witness? It's been a major hurdle (leap of faith?) as many who are now involved in this discussion have stated since the outset. However, this wasn’t enough to dissuade claims regarding the authenticity of the images so then those experienced in CGI added their (often expert) opinions.

So now you saying that apart from the various forum members who have shown that they are well-versed in CGI and stated that it’s a hoax that you can also readily dismiss the digital imaging experts who willingly stake their names and reputations on the fact? (For FREE!!) And of course contrary to what is often espoused about these experts, many of them are UFO believers and some have even personally experienced CE’s!!

So surely ‘debunking’ doesn’t enter into it?

And of all those who have stated their opinion (of hoax) then surely the chances of every single one of them having a ‘hidden agenda’ (as is often claimed) is about as likely as Chad’s ludicrous account being based in any kind of reality?

Cheers.....
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 11th, 2008, 3:43pm

on Dec 11th, 2008, 3:20pm, nekitamo wrote:
Let's assume for a moment that wider angle situation around pic16 looks like this:

User Image


Nekitamo, is this more than likely what the photo would look like at this wide angle? If so, doesn't the base of the telephone pole have a very similar shadow halfway point as the drone? If it does, does it matter any when it comes to determining if there are 2 separate light sources?

Thanks,
Tuna smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 11th, 2008, 4:45pm

on Dec 11th, 2008, 3:20pm, nekitamo wrote:
Let's assume for a moment that wider angle situation around pic16 looks like this:

User Image

Would you still use parallel lines to represent rays of light from the sun in PIC0016 in this case?




Nekitamo,

First, isn't that a huge assumption? At 5:42PM, the sun is getting close to the horizon... this “view” gives the illusion of the sun being in the location for 1:30 to 2:00PM. But let's accept the sun location and not question the shadows for the example.

Second, to answer your question, yes… light will be parallel, but shadows may not appear to be parallel depending on the direction of the shadows relative to the observer (to include perspective), and the shape of the object the shadow is cast on (you may include other factors if you are using a camera, such as barrel distortion). But in each case, they will indicate or point back to the light source.



The light source in question when compared to the earth...

User Image
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by nekitamo on Dec 12th, 2008, 04:04am

on Dec 11th, 2008, 4:45pm, Marvin wrote:
First, isn't that a huge assumption? At 5:42PM, the sun is getting close to the horizon... this “view” gives the illusion of the sun being in the location for 1:30 to 2:00PM. But let's accept the sun location and not question the shadows for the example.

The image I used is from one of my old perspective studies (that explains those lines in various colors) and although objects in inset pic are indeed lit by the "artifical" sun in the indicated position, it is only an experiment.
Quote:
Second, to answer your question, yes… light will be parallel, but shadows may not appear to be parallel depending on the direction of the shadows relative to the observer (to include perspective), and the shape of the object the shadow is cast on (you may include other factors if you are using a camera, such as barrel distortion). But in each case, they will indicate or point back to the light source.

I'm glad to hear that we agree about this. Although sunlight can always be considered parallel per se, when dealing with 2D images things are a bit more complicated and we have to pay attention to perspective, relative position of the sun and orientations of the observer (camera) and objects in the scene in order to be able to represent it correctly.

So, while talking about huge assumptions: how come everyone is using simple parallel lines to represent sunlight in pict0016?



But what I really wanted to say is this: IMO, we can't figure out what really happens with light in pic0016 without some kind of 3D analysis, either using CG or - even better - real models. Why do we still discuss some "lines" drawn on 2D images over and over again when we already have results of advanced 3D analysis from multiple independent sources? If I remember correctly, practically everyone who did 3D computer analysis (including myself) noted the following "problems":

1. There's a significant misalignment of shadows on the drone and the pole. Here's an illustration using two drones with the one on top tilted and rotated to achieve similar shadows as in Raj's image:

User Image

2. Even thus tilted and rotated, shadows on the top drone in previous example still don't quite fit those in Raj's images. In order to reproduce them correctly, we have to use a local (or "point") light source, like this:

User Image

3. Feel free to add other problems I forgot to mention here.

Please excuse my simple 3D models, but you can also find similar results from other 3D analysts in other forums with much better quality. As for problems I discovered using other methods of analysis, I'd also like to point out this thread at the DRT forum. Now, could we please move on from discussing "crude" 2D analysis methods and some reappearing issues that IMO seem irrelevant in light of the above mentioned research and continue our analysis from the (IMO) already achieved, much more advanced point where we left it?

Btw, note that I'm not offering any kind of conclusion here, just presenting facts as I see them.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 12th, 2008, 06:35am

Everybody wants to talk about shadows and light sources but nobody wants to talk about why there is not one expert in any pertinent field, not one heavyweight in CGI or photo analysis that endorses these photos as authentic?

Instead of hiring PI's to drag the Drone case on and on, why is there no professional examination of these photos declaring that they are the real deal?

The lack of such an endorsement makes all other arguments a moot point, doesn't it. Its like two kids arguing over a ball that has already been lost....what is the point?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Radi on Dec 12th, 2008, 06:44am

on Dec 12th, 2008, 06:35am, Jeddyhi wrote:
Everybody wants to talk about shadows and light sources but nobody wants to talk about why there is not one expert in any pertinent field, not one heavyweight in CGI or photo analysis that endorses these photos as authentic?

Instead of hiring PI's to drag the Drone case on and on, why is there no professional examination of these photos declaring that they are the real deal?

The lack of such an endorsement makes all other arguments a moot point, doesn't it. Its like two kids arguing over a ball that has already been lost....what is the point?


I agree 100% Jedd.. After all this time and after hiring the PIs did they even submit and subject the photos to a professional analysts to declare these photos real or a composite image...They can be discussed all they want but they still remain HOAXED photos....
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 12th, 2008, 07:50am

on Dec 12th, 2008, 04:04am, nekitamo wrote:
I'm glad to hear that we agree about this. Although sunlight can always be considered parallel per se, when dealing with 2D images things are a bit more complicated and we have to pay attention to perspective, relative position of the sun and orientations of the observer (camera) and objects in the scene in order to be able to represent it correctly.

So, while talking about huge assumptions: how come everyone is using simple parallel lines to represent sunlight in pict0016?

But what I really wanted to say is this: IMO, we can't figure out what really happens with light in pic0016 without some kind of 3D analysis, either using CG or - even better - real models. Why do we still discuss some "lines" drawn on 2D images over and over again when we already have results of advanced 3D analysis from multiple independent sources? If I remember correctly, practically everyone who did 3D computer analysis (including myself) noted the following "problems":

1. There's a significant misalignment of shadows on the drone and the pole.

2. Even thus tilted and rotated, shadows on the top drone in previous example still don't quite fit those in Raj's images. In order to reproduce them correctly….

3. Feel free to add other problems I forgot to mention here.

As for problems I discovered using other methods of analysis, I'd also like to point out this thread at the DRT forum. Now, could we please move on from discussing "crude" 2D analysis methods and some reappearing issues that IMO seem irrelevant in light of the above mentioned research and continue our analysis from the (IMO) already achieved, much more advanced point where we left it?

Btw, note that I'm not offering any kind of conclusion here, just presenting facts as I see them.



Hi Nekitmamo,

I have no real debate with what you are saying. I do want to add that one must use basic assumptions with certain tools.

When working in 2D, in the absence of enough data in quantifying an exact light source location, one must fall back on the physical behavior of the known medium (in this case, light) and point towards a basic direction (as in a compass direction). If one is able to draw non-parallel lines back to the source, then they must converge or intersect on the source.


*Click Here/On Image For Full-size
User Image



In the above example, I was not seeing convergence.

All one can do in a 2D environment is to follow the light source by “light and shadow” and draw a line through them.

In a CGI (3D) environment, you have much more advanced abilities. So I hope you are not admonishing me for not having the same type of tools you have. One must use what they have at hand, no?

In the end, is the analysis of two separate and non-interacting light sources correct? Are the basic directions indicated in the 2D analysis correct (plus or minus a degree or two)? Isn’t that what’s truly a stake here?

I am happy to drop out, if the criteria for the debate is the degree of technology applied in the argument (and logic has no merit). Then you good folks may carry on.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 12th, 2008, 07:57am

Thanks, Radi.

My point is that the only ones who think the photos may be real are the ones who have been pushing this case for over a year....the DRT. There has been excellent research put into these photos including shadow and light source anomolies, depth of field anomolies, expert analysis from some big names and they all conclude the photos are fake. So the only ones that need convincing are the ones still proclaiming the photos as possibly real...the DRT.

Are they worth the trouble? It does make for interesting discussion but the endless debate of trying to convince them of hoax is falling on deaf ears.

Until the DRT presents some kind of professional analysis by a credible expert that these photos are the real deal, the drone case is just a wishful thinking case.

I could list the names of professional CGI artists that label these photos as hogwash but we all know who they are. The DRT needs to start their list of credible experts that endorse these photos. Until that happens, this case is a bust that has dragged on for way to long.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 12th, 2008, 08:04am


Enough to make one go like that Santa Cruz group, absolutely "Crackers".
smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by nekitamo on Dec 12th, 2008, 10:00am

on Dec 12th, 2008, 07:50am, Marvin wrote:
In a CGI (3D) environment, you have much more advanced abilities. So I hope you are not admonishing me for not having the same type of tools you have. One must use what they have at hand, no?

I'm sorry if it looks like I was addressing just you due to the quotes at the beginning of my post - the rest of it was intended for general public. As for the tools I used - it was just an (11 years!) old, free version of trueSpace, nothing special.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 12th, 2008, 10:56am

on Dec 12th, 2008, 10:00am, nekitamo wrote:
I'm sorry if it looks like I was addressing just you due to the quotes at the beginning of my post - the rest of it was intended for general public. As for the tools I used - it was just an (11 years!) old, free version of trueSpace, nothing special.




I would love to learn CGI... just have not had the time to do it.

Maybe, some day in my free time (somewhere between 2 to 4AM maybe). wink


Do you have any issues with the basic directions of the two light sources in the 2D analysis?

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 12th, 2008, 12:46pm

Guys, please calm down! wink

I asked a somewhat simple question...

And I never thought it to escalate in this way.

As I see it, the attack on the "believers" has now reached levels of almost horrifying levels.

Am I wrong?

I find, that the recent posts are biased as to whether this issue is true or not?

Is this not the thread of "investigation of the Drones" , and research of the "California Drones"?

I'm truly ashamed as posters here claim to "know" how this enigma has it's merits...and to see how it's introduced to new possible witnesses...

I truly think you believe in your findings, and I would be so more likely to believe it, if you present real evidence.

I know it takes some kind of funds, and as Latitude remarked, unbiased real (paid) investigation has to show irreversible evidence of a substantial reliable investigation, otherwise it will not satisfy your somewhat amateur investigation.

What makes you think, that this investigation wasn't applied before the detectives was engaged? Do you know the exact premises for starting a real scientific investigation?

I find it remarkable, that my simple question spawned these many posts, if you are so 100 % sure this is a hoax, if you all are sure, why not close this whole thread?

As I see it, the believers of this issue has lost their rightful say in here.

DrStern (Still on Christmas vacation)


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 12th, 2008, 1:03pm

on Dec 12th, 2008, 12:46pm, DrStern wrote:
Guys, please calm down! wink

I asked a somewhat simple question...

And I never thought it to escalate in this way.

As I see it, the attack on the "believers" has now reached levels of almost "not excistant".

Am I wrong?

I find, that the recent posts are biased as to whether this issue is true or not?

Is this not the thread of "investigation of the Drones , and research of the "California Drones"?

I'm truly ashamed as posters here claim to "know" how this enigma has it's merits...and to see how it's introduced to new possible witnesses...

I truly think you believe in your findings, and I would be so more likely to believe it, if you present real evidence.

I know it takes some kind of funds, and as Latitude remarked, unbiased real (paid) investigation has to show irrreversible evidence of a substantial reliable investigation, otherwise it will not satisfy your somewhat amateur investigation.

What makes you think, that this investigation wasn't applied before the detectives was engaged? Do you know the exact premises for starting a real scientific investigation?

I find it remarkable, that my simple question spawned these many posts, if you are so 100 % sure this is a hoax, if you all are sure, why not close this whole thread?

As I see it, the believers of this issue has lost.

DrStern (Still on Christmas vacation)



Hello Stern.

The simple fact of the matter is that there are numerous experts in pertinent fields that have labeled the drone photos as fake.Two big names that come to mind are:

Marc D' Antonio, president of FX Models has examined the photos. Result- fake

David Beidney, President & Technical Director of IDIG, Inc has examined the photos. Result-Fake

Also Kris Avery of Kaptive Studios, UK examined the photos. Result-Fake

Has any big name CGI expert labeled the pics as real?

When you combine a lack of an offical endorsement of authenticity with the anonymous photo witnesses who will not go on record or help any investigative effort, what you have is an internet hoax. And a small group desperate to keep the hoax afloat. Why is that?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 12th, 2008, 1:13pm

Mr Jeddyhi,

The investigaton is still going on, and I just pointed out that there still might be an alternate solution to this enigma.

I still need an answer to my question about the shadow, but if you can verify this to be a true hoax, I ask you to admit that you find the witnesses as true liars, and I suggest you to do it here:

earthfiles@earthfiles.com

Dr. Erik von Stern

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 12th, 2008, 1:37pm

Mr. Stern

May I ask just what the investigation is trying to determine? If it is trying to determine that the drone case is a real event sighting, then why will no photography experts or CGI experts endorse the photos as real, thereby justifying an investigation. If the photos are fake, then all that follows the photos is fake as well. The photo witness, Chad, lied about location. How can things like this be swept under a rug.

Is there anyone outside of the DRT forum that is willing to endorse these photos as legitimate? If the DRT submitted these photos for verification and the results were that they appear to be real photos, that endorsement would have been plastered all over a few different forums over the last year. That has not transpired. The drone case is a hoax in the sense that it is not based in reality. Whether or not it is a sanctioned dis-info campaign remains to be seen.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 12th, 2008, 1:52pm

on Dec 12th, 2008, 1:37pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
Mr. Stern

May I ask just what the investigation is trying to determine? If it is trying to determine that the drone case is a real event sighting, then why will no photography experts or CGI experts endorse the photos as real, thereby justifying an investigation. If the photos are fake, then all that follows the photos is fake as well. The photo witness, Chad, lied about location. How can things like this be swept under a rug.

Is there anyone outside of the DRT forum that is willing to endorse these photos as legitimate? If the DRT submitted these photos for verification and the results were that they appear to be real photos, that endorsement would have been plastered all over a few different forums over the last year. That has not transpired. The drone case is a hoax in the sense that it is not based in reality. Whether or not it is a sanctioned dis-info campaign remains to be seen.


Mr. Jeddyhi

Why would I reveal my (or the DRT) investigations here? To be ridiculed and shown my inferior intelligence?

No, you have your mind made up, and no one here can change that.

Merry Christmas, and may your God be with you,

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 12th, 2008, 2:03pm

on Dec 12th, 2008, 1:13pm, DrStern wrote:
Mr Jeddyhi,

The investigaton is still going on, and I just pointed out that there still might be an alternate solution to this enigma.

I still need an answer to my question about the shadow, but if you can verify this to be a true hoax, I ask you to admit that you find the witnesses as true liars, and I suggest you to do it here:

earthfiles@earthfiles.com

Dr. Erik von Stern

No, you give us a break..
Dr. ,
You go and ask your experts, maybe they can answer,
and since when does presenting objective analysis constitute an attack on believers. May I point out that it DRT that went out and formed its own organization, to corner the anticipated "market" as you did yours, by their and your own volition. They were not run out, as you once alluded to, saying we" took over.".WE were always here, and at ATS, and OMF.., and other sites that came to the same conclusion. Hoax
Thats just inflaming , inciting, as you did with one of your commentaries or epithet about DrDil

The burden is yours..You claim to be scientific, but you are just a speculator , ignoring the science. Not one iota of "proof" or a real problem with the analysis, after dozens of posts

True Liars?, is their a category of untrue liars? almost Liars, teeny Liars, great Liars.. That is laughable!
Tampering pictures, false addresses, "teeny" lies? then it must be a "teeny" Hoax..
But hoax it is..!!
You cannot change those facts.
You are deliberately ignoring whats been done

You sir , imo, are less than honest, you just want to provoke empty chatter under guise of "dialogue" out of sheer desperation for the lack of proof.
No proof, not even an informed opinion.

Some people lost jobs, and rank, others expelled, by mass bannings, unethical behavior of cross forum moderators, who are the vanguard advocates of this farce. Telling an esteemed fellow member, Reader , if he left , then others , I assume believers". might come.

Even with the bannings by the king of the castle, droves of believers are not puring in, much less proof of THAT drones existence. The Bishops and Cardinals of Ufology marketing , have gone silent as well on the matter. Not a very good Omen.


Old colleague, We will do whatever is necessary to prevent this hoax from growing legs while "Our God", as you call him, gives us the strength to, and hopefully from making a dime, or even a farthing.
Its been quite succesful so far , don't you think?
Whatever DVDs, or tapes, you all had in mind, you can use them as coasters and bookends, or let the other charlatans along with Dr.Rutter/Reed, sell them at commission for you, or sell it to each other amongst yourselves.

Have a good day.














Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 12th, 2008, 2:09pm

@ Stern

My mind is made up based on logic and facts. It is not hard to differentiate a real event and a non-real event.

Do you know why nobody is calling the Stephenville, Texas case a hoax? Or why nobody is calling Rendlesham a hoax? Or Shag Harbor? It is because these events were reported by multiple witnesses that didn't hide behind the internet. They came forward and helped the investigation. They contacted authorities (instead of the internet) to document their sightings. And amazingly, these famous cases didn't even include photos. Yet they are real events with real people on record. Do you see the difference? The drone case is full of fluff designed to keep the easily intrigued busy while real cases come and go. It is an internet meme that has succeeded on a select few.

Happy Holidays to you as well!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 12th, 2008, 2:35pm

Hi Doc,

I have a few questions (and responses) to your post:

on Dec 12th, 2008, 12:46pm, DrStern wrote:
I truly think you believe in your findings, and I would be so more likely to believe it, if you present real evidence.


In any investigation, the level of evidence is critical.

What is your criteria for “real evidence?”


on Dec 12th, 2008, 12:46pm, DrStern wrote:
I know it takes some kind of funds, and as Latitude remarked, unbiased real (paid) investigation has to show irreversible evidence of a substantial reliable investigation, otherwise it will not satisfy your somewhat amateur investigation.

Do you know the exact premises for starting a real scientific investigation?


I have spent most of my adult life working in R&D (in an R&D Lab). I have written white papers and I have been published in a major trade journal. I believe I have some concept of what a scientific investigation is… or I would not be able to collect a paycheck. wink


on Dec 12th, 2008, 12:46pm, DrStern wrote:
As I see it, the believers of this issue has lost their rightful say in here.



I sincerely hope you honestly do not feel this way. I know some folks here (on both sides of the issue) can get a little “testy.” Any “attacks” should not be personal, but solely aimed at the “supportive evidence” (or lack of it) to “uphold” a point.

They should be intellectually honest and fact based. No one should “attack” someone’s belief no matter what their belief is (although there are plenty to blame with unsupported attacks here).

If someone wants to believe that pigs fly in cannon b a l ls to Mars and back, then peace be with them. But they do not have a right to force everyone else into believing that it is factual without legitimate objective evidence to substantiate it. It is a two way street.

Show me the evidence.


on Dec 12th, 2008, 1:13pm, DrStern wrote:
The investigaton is still going on, and I just pointed out that there still might be an alternate solution to this enigma.


While some people are keeping the investigation alive, what is the justification and what is the criteria for a conclusion?


on Dec 12th, 2008, 1:13pm, DrStern wrote:
… but if you can verify this to be a true hoax, I ask you to admit that you find the witnesses as true liars….


Let me ask another question, don’t you first need a witness to be able to do that? Without any witnesses, you cannot call anyone anything. No one has been able to demonstrate there are any witnesses (that exist), much less multiple witnesses.


on Dec 12th, 2008, 12:46pm, DrStern wrote:
DrStern (Still on Christmas vacation)


Merry Christmas to you and yours… may the jolly fat man be good to you!

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 12th, 2008, 3:22pm

Ok, I am seriously overwhelmed by the evidence here, and I shut my case.

You prevail!

I'll close my case here, and assume that this is all a hoax.

Question is, are you sure? If I go away, who will you press to go away?

I'm sure I believe in your testamony, we all were led "beyond" the vail..

Sure, I'll follow your lead..I'm joining your course.. cheesy

Nah, you enjoy an opposite reaction, and you have to get it from someone else,,

I'm still not convinced, so keep hammering me..I can take it, but whomever considered joining the UFO Casebook revealing new evidence, not much luck, as it is now established that the "California Drones" only was a clever prank, only produced to make us all look like idiots...

That's why we spent more than a year to determine this.

It's arrogance to think we're the only one "thinking ape" in this great Universe...

And please excuse us for believing that.

This question have been asked by so many thinkers of past times, and still it is unheard of, even if the Drones are real or not. It has roots in mankind, to ask questions about our origin, and maybe we won't get some answers in our lifetime, but it certainly aren't a crime to search for it!

So, the Drones might not be real, but for some it is a hope..please don't take that away.

What I'm saying, maybe some new endavour is to come, maybe it's the restart of the Great Hadron Collider, maybe it's something else that occupy our mind.

Please don't take away our belief, that there might be some sort of intelligence out there that will help us in need, because I fear that we are not capable to do so if it comes to that...

I thank you all for the good wishes, and I return it all by wishing all here a Merry Christmas, or whatever God unto you pray,

DrStern

Ps: This is for Marvin: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-JrgiWDgmI
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 12th, 2008, 4:05pm

I do have hope DrStern, that there is life out there and I pray they don't look like us, or are as stupid as we are.
In fact just today I read a report that the basic RNA prevcursor, sugar, has been detected in the middlle of the milky way, and is now suspected of being more common than was thought. with 400 or so sightings a month, worldwide, at least This one fairly well established triste by hoaxers does not affect my beliefs at all, but does distract from the possible real thing.
http://www.nrao.edu/pr/2004/coldsugar/
Hope springs eternal.


Back to Eath, ..The world's economies are being humbled and forced to their knees with no answers..
They have no choice, in that position, but to acknowledge and pray to a higher authority for them.

Have a great Christmas with you and yours.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 12th, 2008, 5:01pm

on Dec 12th, 2008, 3:22pm, DrStern wrote:
It's arrogance to think we're the only one "thinking ape" in this great Universe...

And please excuse us for believing that.



I fully agree with you here.


on Dec 12th, 2008, 3:22pm, DrStern wrote:
This question have been asked by so many thinkers of past times, and still it is unheard of, even if the Drones are real or not. It has roots in mankind, to ask questions about our origin, and maybe we won't get some answers in our lifetime, but it certainly aren't a crime to search for it!


I agree again.


on Dec 12th, 2008, 3:22pm, DrStern wrote:
So, the Drones might not be real, but for some it is a hope..please don't take that away.


This is where I have to ask what your motivation is… is it a belief, or knowledge in the true?

I too entered this adventure wide eyed and hopeful until faced with the facts. Jedd mentioned a number of cases to have “hope” in (you missed Roswell). The facts support legimaticy in those cases… you can speak with witnesses in those cases (but many are slipping away due to Old Man Time). If you take an honest look at the BB Drone case, what do we really have that is tangible and undisputable proof for the Drones? Everywhere you look, there is deceit, and that is a poor foundation for fact.


on Dec 12th, 2008, 3:22pm, DrStern wrote:
Please don't take away our belief, that there might be some sort of intelligence out there that will help us in need, because I fear that we are not capable to do so if it comes to that...


No one here is trying to take away belief. A number of us have had “experiences” ourselves (maybe that is why we get so indignant at hoaxers). I would hate to see you get taken and buy a “bill of goods.”

But someone is trying to sale you a bill of goods here. They are working it hard. There is zero evidence that they can stand on to demonstrate reality in the BB Drone case. Zero. Nekitamo knows there is something wrong with the Raj photos… enough to warrant them to be excluded as proof of real. If you have no real proof, you have no real investigation. Someone is just delaying judgment in hope of “further” investigation. But an investigation without any set standards or goals will last as long as somebody wants it to (there is no end in sight). I wish you luck in the on going investigation.


on Dec 12th, 2008, 3:22pm, DrStern wrote:
I thank you all for the good wishes, and I return it all by wishing all here a Merry Christmas, or whatever God unto you pray,

DrStern


I hope you find Peace this Christmas.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 12th, 2008, 5:27pm

Thank you Marvin, you're a good guy for sure, and you simply have to understand that there are opposite opinions in this case.

As much as you believe your ideas, I believe in my ideas..

Not that any of them are wrong..until proven right!

That's what a real debate is all about, and I know you master that! wink

So, I tend to want to believe in your research, if you prove it to me. And you try very hard, and that is appreciated, believe me!

If we were to believe anything, as charted, the world would be flat!

I just want to see an equasion proving that the Drone issue is bogus...

Show me that, and I'll believe...

I know it's hard to find a program that once and for all shows this whole enigma to be true or false...but I will work hard to do so in the New Year 2009, because I now want to know.

I will let you know the outcome... grin

Again, and for the last time,

Merry Christmas to you all here at the UFO Casebook,

DrStern

Ps: A small Christmas present from me to you to help you to stay happy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3PBmPORUog
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 12th, 2008, 10:24pm

on Dec 12th, 2008, 3:22pm, DrStern wrote:
It's arrogance to think we're the only one "thinking ape" in this great Universe...

And please excuse us for believing that.


DrStern, I gather from this quote above that you are taking the opposing viewpoint completely the wrong way. Please understand that most of here believe in "other Life". I personally believe it would be presumptuous to think that life on Earth is the only life when the Universe seems endless. Our own galaxy is probably teeming with life. Everything is just very far apart. Very far. To think some have crossed the vastness and visited Earth is as likely as there are stars in my opinion.

I believe in UFO's though I haven't witnessed one myself. So the argument or topic of debate is not about "are we alone in the universe", its strictly about the evidence and credibility that this particular case has or doesn't have.

When I first started reading Ufology and following sighting reports online, I found a wealth of information on current sightings and famous sightings from history. I always approached a sighting report in the same manner, whether it was a new sighting or one from the 1950's. I looked at credibility first and foremost.

The witness almost always makes the case. Photos are a bonus. These amazing people see something otherworldly and report it. They go on record. They say

"This is my name. This is where I live. I was standing right here when I witnessed it.".

Now I realize some people like anonymity but... everyone of the drone photo witnesses? What are the chances?

Every drone photo witness not only remained anonymous but they also reported their sightings only to the internet and not to any authorities. So the first and simplest form of authentication and credibility is already a struggle when dealing with the drones. The photos makes it worse. They are very few in number and look posed. If I had a drone in the viewfinder, I would have snapped as many pics as possible. Click, click, click, click. I could snap at least 30 pics in 30 seconds. And I would have. But we have very few.
Its the case itself, DrStern. It has issues!

Sorry for any misunderstanding. wink

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 13th, 2008, 01:47am

on Dec 12th, 2008, 10:24pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
The witness almost always makes the case. Photos are a bonus. These amazing people see something otherworldly and report it. They go on record. They say

"This is my name. This is where I live. I was standing right here when I witnessed it.".


I'm sorry, but I bet 95% of the population would not do that! You have to have NOTHING to lose to do that, IMO...

Tuna
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 13th, 2008, 03:47am

on Dec 13th, 2008, 01:47am, newtothis wrote:
I'm sorry, but I bet 95% of the population would not do that! You have to have NOTHING to lose to do that, IMO...

Tuna

I think you just lost that bet sad
.according to mufon in its final report on the drone..
UFOs are sighted daily by average everyday citizens and it is more likely than not that they WILL come forward and forgo their anonymity especially when such extraordinary evidence is at stake. If we examine UFO History, every extraordinary photo of a UFO has a real person behind it—Ed Walters at Gulf Breeze, the Trents in McMinnville and Rex Heflin in Santa Anna. Of the thousands of cases reported to MUFON CMS, 54% of the witnesses (a majority) did not request anonymity while 46% did request anonymity.
Witnesses also come forward despite the possibility of public ridicule, as evidenced by the recent January 2008 sightings in Stephenville, Texas, where numerous real citizens who experienced an anomalous event came forward to publicly disclose their sightings. Of the many Stephenville witnesses, some did request anonymity but still agreed to in-person interviews and their identities could be established

In either case there is a safeguard in place for anonymity. Even for Linda and whitley who wont come foward with what they claimed was analysis..or proof.

Or even "The indians in the cupboard" from the "underground" at Cropcirclexplorers, aka
Rajon.com , remember them? They claimed to have the answer to translating the "Zebra code" or alien letters. That was Sherwoods site..they took that page down..never heard about drones again..Fear of PTB or fear of embarrasment..like Arthur Reyes.
These witnesses did it on line, and gave names..and addresses and locations to a radio station..all unverifiable..and just as unreachable..

I think we can learn a lot from Chris Kenworthy the film artist who hoaxed the Aussie wave, and was even accused of being a disinfo operator himself.


One FX artist pointed out to me the tell-tale motion blur trails. But she was the only one that got in touch. If you look on the web, there are many CGI forums and FX forums, where people who work in TV, film and FX say there's nothing to indicate that these are fakes. That surprised me. There are also other places where FX artists see straight through the facade. I think UFO researchers should send every clip they receive to experienced FX artists, straight away.
That certainly was done here by Mufon, and everything after was gravy. smiley

Interestingly, he is also....a believer..what he had to say was quite revealing.
http://www.ufowatchdog.com/aussieufo3.html
http://www.ufowatchdog.com/aussieufo4.html

Regards




Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 13th, 2008, 07:02am

on Dec 13th, 2008, 01:47am, newtothis wrote:
I'm sorry, but I bet 95% of the population would not do that! You have to have NOTHING to lose to do that, IMO...

Tuna


Hi Tuna,

You sound as if your using that kind of thinking as a justification for all the photo witnesses being anonymous. Every great, believable case in Ufology has a witness. Not always a photo but at least one witness on record. Thats just the way it is....sorry Tuna!

TP, thanks for supplying the info! I'm glad Stephenville, Texas doesn't fall into Tuna's 95%. If I remember correctly, Project Blue book covered about 12,000 cases with over 700 listed as unexplained. 12,000 cases with witness testimony.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 13th, 2008, 10:22am

Quote:
onthefence wrote:
I have noticed some bad science postings on one of the hoax believers forums here.

Hi OTF, I hope (if you see it) this finds you well and pleased to see you’re still fighting the good fight!! smiley

How long have you differentiated between forums in this manner? Wouldn’t it be easier to just say, “Another forum”? Unless of course you’re aware of (m)any forums which aren’t, “Hoax believers”? (Naturally excepting the DRT). As there’s still a hardcore of members that are advocates of the Drone reality it’s just that over time the momentum seems to have shifted towards the majority of members (on the majority of forums) believing the exact opposite, but that doesn’t really justify labelling the entire forum as such, does it?

Personally speaking I’d still be more than happy to hold my hands up and say that I was mistaken in my appraisal of the Drones if that was ever proved to be the case, but I suspect that similar to the pro-real believers that if evidence contrary to my personal viewpoint was going to be produced and accepted as such then it would have materialised (declacked? wink) by now.

I also suspect that the only way I can ever see such a resolve being reached is if either the hoaxers admitted and produced proof of such, or if Isaac is what he purports then he (or at least one of the other witnesses) were to waive their anonymity.

I sincerely hope you (all) have a happy holiday season and best wishes…..

Cheers. smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 13th, 2008, 1:32pm

on Dec 13th, 2008, 03:47am, TeachersPet wrote:
I think you just lost that bet sad


Hmm, from http://www.mufon.com/faq.htm, MUFON FAQs:

"What should I do if I see a UFO?

Ten Things You Should Do if You Encounter a UFO
(C) Copyright 1994 by Michael Curta. All Rights Reserved.

Every year over 70,000 reports of UFO sightings come into UFO Research Organizations around the world. While it is true that 9 out of 10 sightings are explainable, it is also true that only 1 in 10 is ever reported and each year the number of reports increase. "

Well, that means 90% aren't reported, and if only 46% requested anonymity, I guess we are at about 95%, like I said...

Tuna
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 13th, 2008, 1:36pm

on Dec 13th, 2008, 07:02am, Jeddyhi wrote:
Hi Tuna,

You sound as if your using that kind of thinking as a justification for all the photo witnesses being anonymous.


Not at all. It is just far fetched to believe that most people want the attention that comes along with seeing a UFO...

Stephenville is obviously one of the exceptions. I wonder how many people would have reported what they saw if the Constable had not come out with his story? Just a thought...

Tuna
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Gort on Dec 13th, 2008, 3:22pm

A witness may request anonymity, but the MUFON field investigator, would know the witness. The public would not. This is what MUFON calls maintaining anonymity if requested by the witness. Mufon would not “waste time” with an anonymous (unknown even to MUFON) witness when there are too many credible cases to investigate.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 13th, 2008, 5:04pm

Spot on Gort,
and we arent mixing this group we have , with enough to conclude are unreliable, with the "95" percent who see a flash pan across the sky and don't what it is and assume a meteor or odd. heck just about a 100 percent of us see that.
No, this is a clever group, that Linda has shielded, and if she had anything, she would have come foward hand in hand with whitley, or interviwed Sherwoods people, especially as she more resources than anyone here, [even mufon, who consults more than one expert for its analysis].and .had access to people who could analyze the hi rez fotos, Real Evidence, she does have, and kept for herself, not intended for her, but all of us. Where I am from some might call that a Thief.,
or a larceny after trust..sooo
Who is she and her lying puppet clowns kidding?
She is the one we need to concentrate, not DRT and its BS...
She is the stage master..Drt isa sales department, for all sakes and purposes, and the PIs just like those cute cigarette girls of the old days , peddling free samples of camels and marlboro on the sidewalk, where the real goal is to hook the audience.
Only they used lovable grandfather faces instead..
And its a bogus bill of goods my friends...Thats a fact..not on just say so..but crude yet effective analysis, not including the real pros.and they cannot weasel out of it.Thats their problem, not ours.
^They come instead hoping someone like marvin, says, I messed up..or alter his findings to the contrary.
Grasping straws, scouring and scampering back and forth..like little crumbsnatchers..
Why should we engage and help THEM with THEIR problem?
As for OTF he should go back to that blog and pick up all those little blue and red pills he assigned to each one of us, and take them all at one time with a big glass of milk. Milk is good for you you know. wink

Reflecting, We should just not even give these guys the time of day, like they do us with pis , and demand they get somebody in here in charge and with with some ballz that can talk with some real sense and transparency , and real information, and stop playing patticake patticake 123.

I'll take a page from Numbers, they rolled "snake eyes" and we shouldn't let them forget it, since they seem to be in a betting mood, and don't have a pot to piss in, as proof , to make any kind of wager or barter with.
Thats a fact Jack...
angry




Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 13th, 2008, 6:54pm

on Dec 13th, 2008, 1:36pm, newtothis wrote:
Not at all. It is just far fetched to believe that most people want the attention that comes along with seeing a UFO...

Stephenville is obviously one of the exceptions. I wonder how many people would have reported what they saw if the Constable had not come out with his story? Just a thought...

Tuna


But when you really see something, something out of the ordinary, something otherworldly, is ridicule the first thought? I would be snapping photos and reporting my sighting to someone! Cops would be the first thought, then the nearest Air Force Base. I guess I am different than the average joe in how I would react to a major daytime sighting with a digital camera in my hand. smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 14th, 2008, 02:26am

I just stumbled across a nice ufo researchers starter pack written by Isaackoi, pseudonym of course, a British Barrister.
http://hubpages.com/hub/UFOs-and-Lawyers
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread305942/pg1

Has a plethora of great links and free downloads by some of the greats
A tremendous amount of effort was obviously put into this to aid us in our quests..

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 14th, 2008, 09:50am

on Dec 14th, 2008, 02:26am, TeachersPet wrote:
I just stumbled across a nice ufo researchers starter pack written by Isaackoi, pseudonym of course, a British Barrister.
http://hubpages.com/hub/UFOs-and-Lawyers
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread305942/pg1

Has a plethora of great links and free downloads by some of the greats
A tremendous amount of effort was obviously put into this to aid us in our quests..

Thanks TeachersPet smiley,

“IssacKoi” ranks up there among some of the most knowledgeable ‘authorities’ on UK-Ufology and is no slouch when it comes to the broader study of Ufology either. He has again just returned to the subject (literally in the last few days) as he often does after many months away from it, just yesterday I was reading one of his new posts over at the Reality-Uncovered Forums (not for the faint-hearted!!) regarding the betterment of ATS.

He has always been courteous and happy to help in my past experience and the last time was for an, “IFO” piece I wrote a couple of months ago. The main reason for this post though was to point oput that as well as the thread at ATS that you linked to he also started a Blog which considering the few poists it does have also has a significant amount of information relating to researching the UFO phenomenon in general and is still online at: http://ufoinquiry.blogspot.com/

(He also posts here at Casebook although he hasn’t for several months now).

Cheers. smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 14th, 2008, 12:47pm

First, my apologies DrStern,

In having short periods of time to respond, I sometimes am too brief and should put in a little more explanation into my position. I think Jedd has done a great job of this and we see to be like minded.


on Dec 12th, 2008, 5:27pm, DrStern wrote:
Thank you Marvin, you're a good guy for sure, and you simply have to understand that there are opposite opinions in this case.

As much as you believe your ideas, I believe in my ideas..

Not that any of them are wrong..until proven right!

That's what a real debate is all about, and I know you master that! wink


I completely agree with your point and if I have left you with the impression that I am debating your “believes,” then again I apologize.

I, like Jedd, come from the view point that some UFOs are… or maybe are “extraterrestrial” in origin… but not all anonymous cases posted on the internet are authentic.

These anonymous cases that make extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof to back them. The burden of proof truly is with those claiming a case like this is real (a case that lacks the evidence and witnesses).


on Dec 12th, 2008, 5:27pm, DrStern wrote:
So, I tend to want to believe in your research, if you prove it to me. And you try very hard, and that is appreciated, believe me!

If we were to believe anything, as charted, the world would be flat!


The idea of the flat earth was due to the uneducated and inexperienced… your “average” sailing person was aware the Earth wasn’t flat (due the mast of distance ships dipping below the horizon, but no one fell off the world)… and there are ancient maps that seem to demonstrate the knowledge of the Earth not being flat. Knowledge won out in the end, no?


on Dec 12th, 2008, 5:27pm, DrStern wrote:
I just want to see an equasion proving that the Drone issue is bogus...

Show me that, and I'll believe...


When you are ready for it… it rests in front of you.



on Dec 12th, 2008, 5:27pm, DrStern wrote:
I know it's hard to find a program that once and for all shows this whole enigma to be true or false...but I will work hard to do so in the New Year 2009, because I now want to know.

I will let you know the outcome... grin

Again, and for the last time,

Merry Christmas to you all here at the UFO Casebook,

DrStern

Ps: A small Christmas present from me to you to help you to stay happy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3PBmPORUog



Merry Christmas to all and the best to you DrStern.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 14th, 2008, 2:00pm

Thank you DrDil,
I was quite excited when I found it, and it is just as Marvin said to Dr Stern, the truth is there right in front of us whe we are ready to look.
Here it came as the result not of a group of yes people, but independent members, torval does not know Marvin, and Marvin does not know 1111, 1111 does not know Wayne, or Biedny does not know Radi, or even I know Carrion, with whom I have problems, but know good work when I see it.. All from different places, and using different angles of attack.
As for those horrible exiles and Arc, we are perhaps the quickest to disagree among each other, and at times in public., and I would have it no other way and for discovery of truth it should be no other way when we accept to undertake the journey, whether as a team, or alone.

Kudos to UfoCasebook , I just saw that this months rankings passed, if I am looking at it correctly unknown country and Earthfiles. Earthfiles went below the radar..
thats odd, as UC and EF have radio backup and audience. Perhaps the economy is affecting those big three of ufology as well.. I could be wrong charts and numbers were never my forte.
Time to change the menu.smiley
User Image
Oh well
Joyous holidayl








Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 15th, 2008, 07:16am

DrStern,

May I ask, what evidence do you find the most compelling from the Big Basin Drone case... that makes you think it is a real event?

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

One of the grand daddys of all UFO hoaxes is the Apollo 20 case. It is more detailed, much more expensive, has more people involved and technically full of errors and BS. It appears these "people" who hoax, prey on folk who simply want to believe (and are not willing to do their homework). Unfortunately, there are a large number of these folks (both "believers" and hoaxers).
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 15th, 2008, 2:12pm

on Dec 15th, 2008, 07:16am, Marvin wrote:
One of the grand daddys of all UFO hoaxes is the Apollo 20 case. It is more detailed, much more expensive, has more people involved and technically full of errors and BS. It appears these "people" who hoax, prey on folk who simply want to believe (and are not willing to do their homework). Unfortunately, there are a large number of these folks (both "believers" and hoaxers).

Hi Marv smiley,

Granddaddy?

I believe that it pales into insignificance when compared with the Drones (or even SERPO!!) Granted, this is more to do with the alleged source/s, well what I mean is you could go to many, many individuals and associations/companies that could verify or refute the Apollo20 claim in seconds, whether you believe them or not, well, that’s up to the individual.

Even NASA’s –now unaffiliated(ish)- number one debunker, James Oberg posts here at Casebook quite a bit and is always more than happy to oblige in such matters!! And whether the original Hoax statement/claim was official, unofficial, leaked rumoured, hearsay etc. there are a multitude of sources to turn to, but where do you go to confirm or refute the Drone reports?

PACL? CARET? Isaac?

There are many, many websites that can show/tell you why the Apollo20 was exactly that, i.e. a hoax. How many online sources (excluding forums as there are many, many thousands of posts and as such could hardly be termed concise or even exact) do you know where the uninitiated could visit to find the same as regards the Drones?

Obviously -and as usual grin- this is ALL purely my humble opinion but as hoaxes go I’ve always been of the belief that the Drones were a bit special….. (Or at least massively different to earlier hoax attempts).

Cheers. wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 15th, 2008, 3:43pm

Apollo will hold a special place in my heart, it was prob the first hoax I became involved, my first love..
Indeed, ..Thierry went went to obsessive lengths at detail, with equipment and props, with substantial research done where bits and pieces could be verified , whereas as Reed was amateurish. Apollo has had three reiterations already..Drone would not have lasted 2 weeks if the TY pix had all been released by Linda, as the letters had all been linked to the LAP.
In Drone you could see concerted and brazen efforts to introduce new witnesses like Brent, and Cam, wheras in Apollo one doesnt.
One seems to be a passive hoax, the other quite aggressive, and it is perhaps what makes it Drone special, is that it gives us the best chance in exposing an organized industry/complex and its players.

If there was verassimilitude as Engineeringtype/Isaac said..and costing mucho bucks to do, it was in Apollo.
Despite the hoax folx just seem to gravitate..maybe because it had an exotic female with boobs and all, laying horizontal, asleep even, .
That can be a strong draw to all virile ufo hunters. smiley
Each has its own reason for staying power..
I think we stayed on as we are dedicated to getting the hoaxters and realize the damage, that certain ones, if not ferreted out can to to our community.
We can't prevent everyone from falling into the net anymore than we can prevent people falling into nigerian scams., they still do..despite untold thousands of victims and warnings.
Like Admin at OMF, fell hook line and sinker for Robert, threatening even then to ban us "debunkers" who merely asked simple questions.
He didn't need help or protective from anyone like mere members, he said to paraphrase.
Robert was then taken into DRT, where they realized eventually, they had taken in a Trojan Horse into the city.
Only after banning Robert from DRT did Admin Bren, the hardhead, do the same, claiming he "knew" it all along, and was waiting for Robert to undo himself.

As we say here in the south..
A hard head make for a soft behind..

I suggest in any situation like this, everyone occasionally reach around behind themselves, or preferrably, have someone else . to gently squeeze or pinch ..
just as a precaution. cool

woohoo!






























































Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 15th, 2008, 7:47pm

on Dec 15th, 2008, 2:12pm, DrDil wrote:
Hi Marv smiley,

Granddaddy?

I believe that it pales into insignificance when compared with the Drones (or even SERPO!!)



One of.... wink




on Dec 15th, 2008, 3:43pm, TeachersPet wrote:
We can't prevent everyone from falling into the net anymore than we can prevent people falling into nigerian scams., they still do..despite untold thousands of victims and warnings.



What? The Nigerian thing was a scam? shocked


And I sent bank info and everything.... grin grin grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by murnut on Dec 15th, 2008, 8:47pm

It has come to my attention that the drones appeared on the Sarah Connor Chronicles this evening.

I did not see it, but was wondering if anyone else did?

Anybody got a screen shot?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ZETAR on Dec 15th, 2008, 10:00pm

HEY MUR,
VERY INTERESTING POINT...

HEY MAN, GOOD TO SEE YA POSTING...YOUR INPUT HAS BEEN MISSED MY FRIEND wink...

SHALOM...ZETAR cool
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by murnut on Dec 15th, 2008, 11:05pm

User Image
User Image
User Image
User Image
User Image
User Image
User Image
User Image


Credit goes to Fore at OMF

Thanks for the kind words ZETAR
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 16th, 2008, 12:56am

Thanx Mur and Fore,
Zetar..You are the stranger too !! hahaha good to see you too my friend..
This may put thing in proper perspective , though I am sure some will say, oh they heard it on c2c like that artist and alienware, and decided to use it too.
So they had the trailer ready by sept 27. and of course trailers bring parts of epidosed also shot before then, and immediately after hearing of Isaac on June 26..
Amazing they can do that.
One of the boys at ATS provided this from wiki..


Prior to its broadcast on television, Fox undertook a large marketing effort to promote the show, which was described by Joe Earley, Fox Executive Vice President of Marketing and Communications, as the "biggest campaign for a new mid-season show in years."[39] The advertising campaign began months prior to the premiere date to make sure that it would attract existing Terminator fans as well as welcome in new fans.[40] After 24 was postponed to the 2008-09 TV season, more time was devoted to the show by Fox's marketing team and more on-air promotional spots were available for the show that would otherwise have gone to 24.[40] Fox began their advertising campaign for Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles on September 27, 2007, with a brief teaser which ran during primetime programs, consisting of an image of two red dots that lasted for a few seconds on screen before disappearing.[39] The two red dots were revealed to be the eyes of the Terminators from the show in the second phase of the advertising campaign, which began two weeks later. The final phase of the campaign commenced in November 2007 with more broadcast information being added to the advertisements. In addition to on-air teasers, Fox heavily promoted the show during the World Series by releasing the first 45-second preview for the show on October 27, 2007. Other forms of advertisements used included: mobile tours on "Terminator" buses sponsored by Verizon Wireless; an interactive cell phone game based on the series offered by Verizon's V CAST, which rewarded the players with ring tones, wallpapers and behind-the-scenes footage; cable tie-ins; online outreach via the official website and wiki; online sneak peeks; and a poster design contest run by Fox.[41] Advance screenings of the pilot episode were also held at the 2007 Comic-Con International convention and at Golden Apple Comics in Los Angeles on January 4, 2008. Billboard advertisements, which were described by Variety to have "blanketed New York and L.A.", contained images of Summer Glau's Terminator in a "Lady Godiva-esque pose" used to target the young-male demographic, while the key art emphasized on Sarah Connor being at the core of the show to attract the "mom demo".[40] Fox originally planned for more outdoor marketing in other cities but the marketing budget was reduced because of the Writers' Strike.[40] A promotional partnership with automobile manufacturer Dodge began in the show's second season and featured placement of Dodge products in several episodes, Dodge's exclusive sponsorship of the extended, 52-minute episode "Goodbye to All That," and a four-week vehicle giveaway entitled "The Never Back Down Challenge."[42]
So warner who produced this for Fox. And Fox also aired the PIS in March. And warner also doing Whitleys movies.....Am I missing something here, have we been solving one big commercial?
cheesy


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 16th, 2008, 09:15am

I record every episode of the SCC on my DVR. Last night in my viewing area, Fox aired "Monday Night Football", a national broadcast game. The SSC and Prison Break were not listed and did not air, so I'm confused as to when this season finale of the SCC is going to air. If my local Fox affiliate aired the game, just when will I see the SCC?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 16th, 2008, 11:10am

I posted this at ATS. I thought I would post it here as well.
-------------------------------

Hi all! I would like to point out that the drones and Isaac could have been a viral marketing scheme for the The Sarah Connor Chonicles (SCC) all along. But then the timing of the campaign got screwed up because of the 2007-2008 writers strike. The delay in production of episodes could have left the viral marketing out in the cold , so to speak, as in to much of a delay to effectively associate the drones to the show. By the time the association is made, the marketing campaign now appears to have a life of its own as a controversial sighting in Ufology that some believe to be real.

The question is whether or not viral marketers would simply abandon such a failed campaign (failure caused by the writers strike and delay in production) and let it fester on the internet as a possible true life event or would they acknowledge the campaign and its failure.

The recent episode with the drones was written by Natalie Chaidez. Perhaps she could offer insight!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 16th, 2008, 12:42pm

It won't be the the first time a contracted entity has dropped a campaign or put it on hold, Like EA did with ammo marketing, and Sony who had sock puppets all over the forums.
Sony coopted a group of graffitti artists to do work on one project and had to stop when it ran afoul of local laws, remember that incident with the srange ldevices planted in several places, last year, same there, or look at the manmade crop circles , I had posted examples of that OMG, with nike signature. here
Ammo never responded to queries, alienware never responded to queries, and they won't.

Look at it just like the military industrial complex,

this is the same, a hollywood news media and industrial complex.

They work together
Alienware dell warners and others Game makers computer makers ..they all overlap..Its not one person, its a group with common synergy.
Dell has warcraft laps, Alien has superman laps, and now this would indicate not just area51 but terminator as well.
they do not snitch
on each other.
Thats why they have NDA.
Thats why Angie and Minnie at AW went silent., luckily we have internal emails that pointed otherwise.
we the forums, and community, are merely dollar figures and pawns in the whole matter, well Not us as we caught and already had suspected as much if one goes back on the record..At least I have all along with Warner who reactivated the series after almost dropping it.

Linda knew its fake, has the evidence in her hands,
the real question I see at my end.
Is she and c2c and whitley part of the complex..
Whitley is already signed on with Warners in another project, So he can't say didley.
Georgie is signed on with Sci fi, using Linda and Whitley.
Do I think they knew..Yes I do.
Thats why despite knowing it was fake.she never came out and said anything, because all of them knew they would be biting one of the hands that fed them
Will we find out eventually, despite the silence?
of course..
we know how the complex works now..and Sci fi is still big business in movies and game making.and it will happen again.



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 16th, 2008, 1:11pm

on Dec 16th, 2008, 11:10am, Jeddyhi wrote:
I posted this at ATS. I thought I would post it here as well.
-------------------------------

Hi all! I would like to point out that the drones and Isaac could have been a viral marketing scheme for the The Sarah Connor Chonicles (SCC) all along. But then the timing of the campaign got screwed up because of the 2007-2008 writers strike. The delay in production of episodes could have left the viral marketing out in the cold , so to speak, as in to much of a delay to effectively associate the drones to the show. By the time the association is made, the marketing campaign now appears to have a life of its own as a controversial sighting in Ufology that some believe to be real.

The question is whether or not viral marketers would simply abandon such a failed campaign (failure caused by the writers strike and delay in production) and let it fester on the internet as a possible true life event or would they acknowledge the campaign and its failure.

The recent episode with the drones was written by Natalie Chaidez. Perhaps she could offer insight!




It could be…

But if it were their “intellectual property,” wouldn’t they just use the original stuff in the show?

It is more like they made enough changes (the Drone design, the LAP, the name Abraham and so on), so that someone could not come back on them later on for royalties.

To me, they are making a play off of the Drone saga like Alien Ware (a way to cash in on market share). But one never knows.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 16th, 2008, 2:12pm

Is anyone aware of the Starfire Tor report on the drones?

The Truth About The Aerial Drone Claims
And ET Reverse Engineered Technology

PART I: June and July 2007
PART II: October and November 2007

© Researched and Written
By
Starfire Tor



Here is a quote from Starfire.

"Shortly after Whitley Strieber introduced me to the 'aerial drone' mystery, I was approached by a group that wanted me to investigate the authenticity of the 'aerial drone' and related claims. I took on the task, and this report is an authorized abridged version of my confidential in depth report on the 'aerial drone' and related claims of 2007."

I wonder who the "group" was. I could assume it was the DRT and since the findings didn't point to the drones being real, they didn't bother to report it.

Here is the report.

http://www.starfiretor.com/AerialDrones.htm

The quote above is from page 3. Please forgive if this has already been discussed.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ZETAR on Dec 16th, 2008, 2:41pm

HEY T'PET,
THAT'S AN INTERESTING VIEW POINT...
I HAVE ALWAYS WONDERED WHY THE WATERS OF KNOWLEDGE CONCERNING THIS PHENOMENA STOPPED AT THE "DAM" PLACED BY "LMH"...MOREOVER...I'VE NEVER SEEN SUCH "RADIO SILENCE" ASSOCIATED WITH SOMETHING DEEMED SO IMPORTANT...

MAYBE THIS QUAGMIRE CREATED HAS MISSING A PHRASE WHICH THE GOVERNMENT SO FREQUENTLY USES..."PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY"...

I THINK IT WOULD COME DOWN TO TWO CRITCAL DISCLOSURES FROM "LMH"...

FIRST OF ALL...SHE COULD OPEN THE FLOOD GATES AND PROVIDE THE ORIGINAL FRAMES TO BE EXAMINED ALONG WITH ANY OTHER RELATED DATA TO FURTHER THE INVESTIGATION...

SECONDLY,...MANKIND IS A FORGIVING BUNCH IF ONLY ONE STEPS UP THE THE PLATE AND ADMITS FALLIBILITY.
"LMH" WOULD BESTOW UPON HERSELF MUCH CREDIBILITY IF IN FACT IT WAS A HOAX AND SHE STATED THAT SHE WAS DUPED...RUSHED TO JUDGEMENT... OR TRUSTED THE SOURCE WHICH PROVIDED INFORMATION TO HER AND SHE MADE A CURSORY OBSERVATION PRIOR TO HER RELEASE OF SAME.

WELL I GUESS THERE SHOULD BE A THIRD...IN ADDITION TO THE FIRST STEP...PROVIDE HER OPINION AS TO THE VALIDITY OF THE DRONE PHENOMENA AND WHY SHE CONSIDERS IT TO BE TRUE AND INDICATE THOSE EXPERTS WHOM EXAMINED SAID PICTURES OR OTHER INFORMATION PROVIDED TO HER TO LEAD HER TO THE POSITION TAKEN WITH REGARD TO THE DRONE PHENOMENA AS A WHOLE...

I SAY THE ABOVE FROM MERELY AS AN OBSERVER FROM THE "SIDELINES"...AND FROM MY "LAY OPINION" THE "STOP GAP" FROM BRINGING THIS MATTER TO FRUITION FOR BOTH CAMPS RESTS ENTIRELY AT THE FEET OF "LMH."

I MUST SAY FOR ONE TO STATE THEIR PURPOSE IS TO DISCLOSE THE TRUTH TO ALL AND REMAIN AS TIGHT LIPPED AS HAS BEEN... DEMONSTRATES CLEARLY A CONTRADICTION IN ONES ACTIONS/DEEDS AND WHAT ONE ESPOUSES...OF COURSE I SAY THIS WITH "ALL DUE RESPECT" AND POINT OUT MY ASSERTIONS ARE RELATED SOLELY TO HER INVOLVEMENT WITH THE "DRONE PHENOMENA"

WHAT SAY YOU?

SHALOM...ZETAR

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 16th, 2008, 2:52pm

on Dec 16th, 2008, 2:12pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
Is anyone aware of the Starfire Tor report on the drones?

The Truth About The Aerial Drone Claims
And ET Reverse Engineered Technology

PART I: June and July 2007
PART II: October and November 2007

© Researched and Written
By
Starfire Tor


Hi Jed, many thanks for the lead as it’s definitely news to me, but…..

Her page appears to be experiencing problems at the minute (3 different browsers & 2 different PC’s so it’s unlikely she’s just one of my ‘fans’ and has pre-emptively banned me!! grin)

Although I found the following at Whitley’s site:

Quote:

Is Starfire Tor a Real Time Traveler? (04-May-2006)
User Image
Starfire Tor


This week's Dreamland guest, Starfire Tor, has amassed years of evidence that suggest that she may be a time traveler from the future. Modern physics says that time travel is by no means impossible. If the future has become able to do this, it could be sending people back to its own past, which would be our present. Whitley thinks that the Master of the Key may have been such a person.

Magician Brandon Scott, who has time traveled with Starfire, will be on Coast to Coast AM on Wednesday, May 10.

In her interview on Dreamland, she remembers speaking the language of the birds. Time travelers would have only the most sketchy memories of their future lives, but would have an uncanny ability to anticipate events, just as the carefully documented life of Starfire Tor suggests. Is Starfire the real thing?
Source.

Just checked and it's not archived yet, good ole' Google has cached it though wink (*29th Nov).
Click HERE.

Cheers. smiley

* EDIT: Strangely it's the 29th Oct, (not Nov) cache is usually more recent than that..... For example.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 16th, 2008, 3:18pm

Just to save everyone else trawling through the cached pages, the last paragraph reads:

Quote:
I was right, about the 'aerial drone' hoax being connected to a viral marketing scheme associated with computers, as I described in Part I of my investigative report. The viral marketing didn't turn out to be for an XBOX 360 Halo computer game, although my research into that possibility remains valid and informative. This viral marketing scheme did turn out to be for a computer company, Alienware, that has linked its brand to legendary UFO history ... Area 51. 'Isaac's' hoaxed back story involved ET reverse engineering, and the brand name for legendary ET reverse engineering claims involves Area 51.

Is anyone else having difficulties loading the site?

If so and if anyone wants the info off the site, PM or email me (I've ripped it all).

Cheers. smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 16th, 2008, 3:19pm

Its working fine for me, Doc! I stumbled across her site while trying different variations of googling the drones. I wonder when this report first surfaced?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 16th, 2008, 3:38pm

on Dec 16th, 2008, 3:19pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
Its working fine for me, Doc! I stumbled across her site while trying different variations of googling the drones. I wonder when this report first surfaced?

Hi Jed smiley,

It must be regional, I'll try with a US IP.....

It's an old report as it states:

"PART I: June and July 2007
PART II: October and November 2007

UPDATE: In late October 2007, and through November 2007"

And "Part II" only has one page..... (p12)

Cheers!! wink


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 16th, 2008, 3:47pm

on Dec 16th, 2008, 3:38pm, DrDil wrote:
Hi Jed smiley,

It must be regional, I'll try with a US IP.....

Strange, Canadian & US IP loads page straight away!? undecided

Ah well, never mind..... grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 16th, 2008, 4:26pm

Yes I read the starfire report a while back but essentially declared Isaac a Hoax..like aother sites. I thought you already new of her and didnt want to add more of same..as I assumed we had more than enough.
http://www.starfiretor.com/AerialDrones-II-12.htm
Her tying in alienware is spot on, and Isaac in cahoots with AW, but also, note in her reports that Stargate is mentioned.. what she did not know at the time what we know now..Stargate is also producedced by Mario Kassar who produced Terminator.!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario_Kassar
This is joint OP..its done all the time between moviemakers and computermakers and game makers..
every avenur of profit is scrutinized.
The writers strike in November was due to squabbling over on line internet content and residuals!
Heck the T in the LAP probably stands for Terminator.

This was NOT simply borrowed material from Isaac, it was material created for us BY warners
And we know who else has history with Warners and sci fi and media in general..
Whitley and Linda and c2c. Its a lucrative game!
@Zetar..I agree, and now as the dust is settling and the Zebras run, we like the lion and the tiger, will stay focused I hope on that little zebra..before it loses itself in the rest of the stripes.
Shes not reporting news, she has been helping manufacture it ,by her actions in this and other cases.
At least c2c at times says entertainment, even if it is only barely a whisper.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 16th, 2008, 4:50pm

The Starfire report appears to be somewhat obscure as opposed to well known, which I find to be somewhat curious. Whitley showed her the case and then a group approaches her to research and analyze the case and then her results are never brought out and put on the table. Her conclusion, of course, is hoax! The 12 page report is a good read. Basically it boils down to the whole thing being a viral marketing scheme for AlienWare. Again I quote Starfire Tor:

"There may be some, for whatever reason drives them, who want to promote the idea that Alienware was so smitten by the 'aerial drone' character symbols that the company simply "borrowed" those character symbols for use in their contest. Let me be very clear about this: Alienware didn't "borrow" anything. In the corporate world, it's legal suicide to go around "borrowing" alphabets - and concepts - that don't belong to you. Alienware would not jeopardize itself by engaging in that type of illegal behavior. And for those of you, who think that Alienware did everything legally because they made arrangements with 'Isaac' ... think again. The only way, that 'Isaac' could have legally signed off on the 'alien alphabet', is if he were the creator of that alphabet. Since I already outed the 'aerial drone' and 'anti-gravity generator' as hoaxes, even before Alienware's viral marketing scheme was outed months later, it's safe to say that Alienware didn't "borrow" an alphabet from a stolen black ops project involving ET reverse engineered technology. Such a notion is Illogical. Had Alienware been inspired by the 'aerial' drone' character symbols, instead of having been associated with them, they could have created an alien alphabet of their own for their "Decipher the Alien Message" contest."
Source:http://www.starfiretor.com/AerialDrones-II-12.htm

The entire report deals with the photos, analysis of the photos by experts, their conclusions, the Isaac material itself and I find it to be very professional and informative. Especially coming from not a debunker, but a believer and follower of Ufology. I like what she says to open the report:

"I am a firm believer in the existence of extraterrestrial craft and technology, as well as the existence of the intelligence behind those craft and that technology ... whether the origins are off world, interdimensional, alternate timeline, or even of ancient or future earth origin. I am also an analytical thinker, and demanding researcher, when it comes to claims of the fantastic. This is because I know that it is possible for the fantastic to be a realistic and essential element that interacts with the structural foundation of planet earth, the human experience, and the multiverse. What seems fantastic may, in fact, provide a vital key to unlocking and understanding even greater hidden, lost, or suppressed core scientific truths.

Therefore, just because someone promotes a UFO and related story - complete with ET reverse engineering claims, photographs, and documents - as the 'aerial drone' claims do - doesn't mean that I am going to automatically accept that story and evidence as truthful. Such a claim should not be automatically accepted or rejected without a sincere and intelligent investigation. There is too much at stake. Either the 'aerial drone' claims are genuine, and the UFO community has been given some much needed smoking gun evidence, or another UFO related hoax has infiltrated and corrupted the field of UFOlogy."

Source:http://www.starfiretor.com/AerialDrones.htm

I personally find it a bit odd that this report has not been previously discussed.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 16th, 2008, 5:01pm

No Jeddyhi not strange, lord knows my friend, what other sites, have the same kind of stuff..only when we stop..and go back..do we see what we may have missed. Just like the evidence at om with numbers..it helped find the restaurant the DRT looked like it tried to steer us away from..
I saw hers and just saw the conclusion..at the time I was not looking for more yes people.
But going back now..after you brung it up..I saw the stargate material as sources, already discuseed , like the sci fi channel materiall..but that ties into the producers of sarah connors series with warners..Mario kassar ..
Like she said about Alienware..no accident. And like warners and Fox and use of PIs , no accident or borrowing ..
all planned..
People initially said it felt like a viral..they named wrong game and movie..but they were right..
It was a viral and its still running.
And Star is applauded for her work..Great actually it was done independently..So many independent minds coming to same conclusion. It follows the scientific method. of Verification and Corroboration
All pieces are nearly in place as to the source.
http://www.starfiretor.com/AerialDrones.htm
http://www.starfiretor.com/AerialDrones-II-12.htm
http://www.starfiretor.com/AerialDrones-I-2.htm
http://www.starfiretor.com/AerialDrones-I-3.htm
http://www.starfiretor.com/AerialDrones-I-4.htm
http://www.starfiretor.com/AerialDrones-I-5.htm
http://www.starfiretor.com/AerialDrones-I-6.htm
http://www.starfiretor.com/AerialDrones-I-7.htm
http://www.starfiretor.com/AerialDrones-I-8.htm
http://www.starfiretor.com/AerialDrones-I-9.htm
http://www.starfiretor.com/AerialDrones-I-10.htm
http://www.starfiretor.com/AerialDrones-I-11.htm

As for the alienware laptop m15x just got, that generic manual is dated November 2006., before the drones appeared. This deal was worked out between our dear Isaac Aliewnware and Warners long before Isaac did the June 26, 2007 release, or the first drone appeared.

I must grudgingly admit..its a beautiful laptop, letters and all.



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Dec 16th, 2008, 6:01pm

Would it be too difficult for an "investigator" to ask Alienware a direct question? I'm sorry but it sounds like more BS and cover-up to me.

Also, I fail to understand how the whole drone case could be helpful in selling laptops? It is not even a viral marketing.

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 16th, 2008, 6:13pm

on Dec 16th, 2008, 6:01pm, ABCStore wrote:
Would it be too difficult for an "investigator" to ask Alienware a direct question? I'm sorry but it sounds like more BS and cover-up to me.

Also, I fail to understand how the whole drone case could be helpful in selling laptops? It is not even a viral marketing.

ABC





It has already been done, Alien Ware denies being the originator of the LAP or Drones.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 16th, 2008, 6:15pm

on Dec 16th, 2008, 6:01pm, ABCStore wrote:
Would it be too difficult for an "investigator" to ask Alienware a direct question? I'm sorry but it sounds like more BS and cover-up to me.

Also, I fail to understand how the whole drone case could be helpful in selling laptops? It is not even a viral marketing.

ABC


Good questions abc..unless its an official police investigator they don't have to answer.
directly or indirectly. Other than internal emails acknowledging intellectual rights, they have not.
the second question, I wondered too how making superman laptops and warcraft laptops help..but if you consider they hire gamemakers to create games based on their movies, take any..like area51, Terminator..simpsons cartoons, just about anything on the screen or tv.., it creates and avenue of money for by royalties..
I almost purchased a loptp from dell n ebay..it was a warcraft one. My kid would have loved it. But the bid went sky hi, and it wasnt hat powerful.
Xbox creates Elite halo boxes its all synergistic and drives sales , like trading cards based on such themes.
The number of adults playing games is quite high., and they want you to have that device that looks good and makes you feel you are on top of your game..whether its transformers or Area 51.
Higher end games require higher end, and more demand for expensive, therfore lucrative PCs..particularly mobile ones lfor lan parties and meets,
Usually hosted by..yes..the pc makers like dell and AW.
They all work together like that.






Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 16th, 2008, 6:25pm

Just an observation.....AlienWare made use of the language and Lap but did not use a drone.....The Sarah Connor Chronicles made use of the drones but had to substitute the lap and language and even the term 'Isaac'.

A failed viral marketing scheme deployed by Alienware (they would never admit to viral marketing, would they?) instead grows into an internet controversy. The remnants of which are used by the Terminator show to enhance the story line. If I paid enough attention, the drones in the show are the precursors to the Hunter/Killers in the future universe of Terminator.

The writer of the Terminator episode is Natalie Chaidez. She may be worth contacting to elaborate on the drone angle.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 16th, 2008, 6:36pm

Yes they seem to be like a prequel..type thing..the making of starwars ,,the beginning..same with star trek
and Jeddy
I remember whats his name Arlington once mentioning he thought they might possibley be from the future..
several others did also, and dropped out.
Of course you know Arlington was suspicious from his ATS posts, with The Isaac suspect, engineeringtype.
All are gone..but just that future thing.
Thinking back..I also remember Reyes quoting that kurtzwell guy about future AI the singularity, when AI becomes self aware, like Skynet does in Terminator..
Just a thought.

Yes that would an excellent Idea, unless Natalie too has an NDA , as she can't talk about the movie T4, but did her conner series..
but does get to her background at this interview
And MMMM
she is cute.
http://www.thestream.tv/watch.php?v=976 natalie

One good thing they did..they shot Isaac/Abraham in the trailer..RIP.
smiley

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 16th, 2008, 7:20pm

on Dec 16th, 2008, 4:50pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
The Starfire report appears to be somewhat obscure as opposed to well known, which I find to be somewhat curious. Whitley showed her the case and then a group approaches her to research and analyze the case and then her results are never brought out and put on the table. Her conclusion, of course, is hoax! The 12 page report is a good read. Basically it boils down to the whole thing being a viral marketing scheme for AlienWare. Again I quote Starfire Tor:

<snip>

Therefore, just because someone promotes a UFO and related story - complete with ET reverse engineering claims, photographs, and documents - as the 'aerial drone' claims do - doesn't mean that I am going to automatically accept that story and evidence as truthful. Such a claim should not be automatically accepted or rejected without a sincere and intelligent investigation. There is too much at stake. Either the 'aerial drone' claims are genuine, and the UFO community has been given some much needed smoking gun evidence, or another UFO related hoax has infiltrated and corrupted the field of UFOlogy."[/i][/b][/color]
Source:http://www.starfiretor.com/AerialDrones.htm

I personally find it a bit odd that this report has not been previously discussed.

I agree Jedd, not only have I never seen the article before, I’ve never seen it mentioned anywhere prior to this. Well, while I can’t state that categorically I feel sure that I would have remembered such a site and/or article.

In keeping with the current theme then I found this a few days ago, it’s not the content that surprised me or even the context but rather the source as it was posted at a, “Study of fake space exploration” website:

Quote:
It is very difficult to technically prove that a picture is fake. A picture can obviously be a fake, and yet it can be perfectly impossible, or at least exceedingly difficult, to prove it formally so. See the summer 2007 CARET / California drones hoax.
Source: Pseudonautics (2008-11-26) .

Basically it claims NASA is lying about practically everything, “Lunar” related and yet the Blogger doesn’t hesitate in calling the Drones a hoax. I’m seeing more and more of these little proclamations from independent voices on the web and seemingly fewer and fewer forwarding the pro-real hypothesis. Of course that’s not really representative of anything other than perhaps a couple of things:

1) A potential hoaxer who claims to have the clearest and most detailed photograph ever captured of a UFO better have not only flawless pictures but also must produce verifiable and corroborative witnesses as well as an absolute wealth of minutia if they are ever to be believed.

2) A potential witness who genuinely photographs and presents a REAL image similar to the Drones will NEVER be believed regardless of whether the image is representative of a real-world experience or not.

Of course the second option is ONLY relevant if the Drones are NOT a hoax, but if they are then by recognising the fact that they are a hoax then surely we make it easier for the REAL images & reports to be recognised as such….. Don’t we? undecided

on Dec 16th, 2008, 6:25pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
Just an observation.....AlienWare made use of the language and Lap but did not use a drone.....The Sarah Connor Chronicles made use of the drones but had to substitute the lap and language and even the term 'Isaac'.

A failed viral marketing scheme deployed by Alienware (they would never admit to viral marketing, would they?) instead grows into an internet controversy. The remnants of which are used by the Terminator show to enhance the story line. If I paid enough attention, the drones in the show are the precursors to the Hunter/Killers in the future universe of Terminator.

The writer of the Terminator episode is Natalie Chaidez. She may be worth contacting to elaborate on the drone angle.

Regarding contacting the writer, while I agree it’s an excellent idea I personally find it infinitely more plausible that the writer has drew inspiration from the Drones rather than the other way around. As obviously she has a predilection for sci-fi because of the nature of the SCC so it’s certainly not inconceivable that inspiration for storylines could be gleaned from the online UFO community. Also, writers don’t usually supply schematics and real-world images with their text so I feel it’s equally likely that the writer either suggested the Drones in the storyline or simply left it open-ended and none-specific, in which case someone on the production side may have realised the potential of the Drones. Especially as Alienware apparently remains (publicly) unchallenged regarding copyright infringement.

On a side note & regarding Alienware using just the LAP, perhaps this is because while Isaac specifically stated that the content of his ‘release’ was not to be reproduced unless as a whole the alleged witnesses who submtted the images stipulated no such condition (the LAP appears on the main segmented paddles of both the Raj & Chad Drones). And as the witnesses remain anonymous and Isaac appeared after the original Drone images then as long as AW stick with just the LAP symbols then there is no copyright infringement, is there?

Cheers.

================

(Just on the off-chance it had eluded anyone then according to the Old Testament Isaac was the son of Abraham and it is written that god tested Abraham's faith by ordering him to sacrifice his son but <rather fortuitously wink> an angel prevented this just in the nick of time).

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Awakenow on Dec 16th, 2008, 8:57pm

Hi guys, new to posting here, but not new the phenomena..

After watching the show last night, everything, sort of clicked, with the whole purpose behind these crafts (drones)..

Starfire, is obviously correct. As I read her report a while back too.

The whole thing was fishy to me. Never before had these types of crafts been seen, photographed, or even witnessed. This was my first clue into, the "something's not right category", especially with the clarity of the photographs... *btw.. are there any really hi-res images of these out there, that can be truly scrutinized?

CGI stood out like a sore thumb here..

Then the release of the documents by 'Isaac'... hmm.. read like science fiction, not like a science document..(again agree with Starfire here).. Nevertheless, this guy was putting himself 'on the line' it seemed, so, who really knows what's real and what's not..right?

So I basically stuck all this info into the ... 'Interesting/But Not Enough Evidence' category with the whole thing and left it at that... Then, last night... towards the end of the show... Sarah, gets involved into the 3 dot slash ufo slash drone theory...wtf!!! lol..

Even towards the end, there's a 'slightly visible' drone craft, rings and all.. strange looking craft... something you would see in the movies.. and looking very similar to what was pictured and released with this Drone story.. Not to mention, the brief clips they show at the staged 'ufo convention', which shows exactly what was photographed...lol !!

So could this 'Isaac' be a hidden name trying to give us all a clue to the hoax? Simple Google Search 'Isaac Sci Fi' results with Isaac Asimov, lol.. smiley .... For those who don't know who Isaac Asimov was here's the Wikipedia on him http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Asimov .... Wonder if there's a hidden agenda going on there, with that alias...trying to tell us, this is all a bunch of hype for a future robot driven tv show (ie. The S.C.C. show) and possibly a future robot driven movie (i.e. Terminator Salvation)...where one can apply Asimov's three laws of robotics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Laws_of_Robotics which ultimately result with a conflict in law number 3 ... smiley This is the basis of this Terminator show, is it not?

If you sit back and think about it... lets say you had to create a bullsh&t name for yourself, because you don't want anyone to ever figure out who you were, especially, if it could possibly cost you your life! Would you pick Isaac? Out of all the billions of other possibilities? Isaac, O.k.? Seemed strange to me from the get go. I'd pick some strange, random sequence of letters and numbers probably... like "adf;k3" .. good luck trying to figure that one out..heh laugh

btw... anyone else get the impression that we are being prepared for some big event? Who would of thought that Indiana Jones series would end up, having to do with, Aliens? Wife and I went to go see the latest alien invasion movie, The day the earth stood still.. where we're the vermin on this planet and they have come to exterminate us...heh smiley True we are the vermin, true we are killing ourselves and probably doing some major damage to the planet... but exterminate us? how about help us..heh.. try that first... then exterminate us..heh smiley anyways.. I can list off a bunch of movies coming out (seen at the previews)..that seem to indicate doom and despair for us in the near future... lets hope we can all get our heads out of our arses...and stop with all this secret shyt...if they are here..and all evidence/testimony seems to point into that direction, and I'm no scientist, but, would not, the very first step be acknowledgment? Do we not have to first, say to ourselves, yep..they are here.. yep, they have been here, and now lets try to communicate with them, as a combined global effort, not leaving anyone out of the loop? The longer this is kept secret, the longer we all will be kept in the dark... Until we 'all' can acknowledge that we are not alone and that they are here... I believe, they won't make themselves known to everyone... It simply does not make sense, any other way!!! If you sit down and think about it, any other way, can only lead to a disastrous outcome...

Anyways, thanks for reading.. smiley

Awakenow

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 16th, 2008, 11:22pm

Welcome aboard, it was refreshing reading your post.

I saw that Indiana movie to..did you see that spinning fan at the end ..was that just an exhaust fan? Reminded me of a drone..
They threw everything in that movie from roswell to glass skulls and mayan prophecy, surprised Bigfoot wasnt in it, though he did make it to a wonderwoman episode in the 70s..as an alien bouncer in a cave.

according to Natalie who is a writer, and did heroes as well as Lost, and for the sarah connor episodes..she says that wll develop differently than the the T4 movie coming..a different universe figuratively with only a few flashbacks to the future.

There is a great need for escapist movies..I imagine they will be made in droves.

Do you have a link to that comic con conference..I recall about 6 months or mor ago most of us here searching that and could not find an alleged model that a poster who attended the event said he saw.
That would be good to find.
Warners has done same thing Cameron does with his movies and had any old concept art removed from around the web like at fan sites and such.
anyway welcome and glad you shared your thoughts.
Regards



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Dec 17th, 2008, 09:57am

on Dec 11th, 2008, 4:45pm, Marvin wrote:
Second, to answer your question, yes… light will be parallel, but shadows may not appear to be parallel depending on the direction of the shadows relative to the observer (to include perspective), and the shape of the object the shadow is cast on (you may include other factors if you are using a camera, such as barrel distortion). But in each case, they will indicate or point back to the light source.



The light source in question when compared to the earth...

User Image


Sun rays will always be parallel in the surrounding 3-dimensional environment. (by the way, your picture proves exactly the opposite.... Sun rays are parallel not because of the size but the great distance to the Sun)
In the 2-dimensional projection, however, you have to account for the curvature of the lens.

In any case, is this "shadows" issue coupled with the witnesses not coming to every Larry King show enough to pronounce it a hoax? What about the other photographs? Other witnesses coming forward, with names and everything but no hard evidence?

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 17th, 2008, 11:03am

ABC, you're free to believe its the real deal. If you believe it is real, what aspect of the case most makes it real to you?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 17th, 2008, 12:34pm

on Dec 17th, 2008, 11:03am, Jeddyhi wrote:
ABC, you're free to believe its the real deal. If you believe it is real, what aspect of the case most makes it real to you?


Mr. Jeddyhi, I was asked the same question by Marvin, and I want to answer.

1.st: "Isaac" was intriqued by the witnesses photo's, Raj and Ty, and the obvious reason was the resemblance of the "Primer" and the "Language" shown in the witness photo's.

2.cond: If the correlations (That is obvious) are consistant, the language are the same, and therefor consistant throughout the whole "hoax".

So, every witness are either the same person inventing this whole story, or they never was connected in any way.

3.rd: The hoaxer has taken several other persons in to help him/she in this elaborate hoax.

Surely "spinoffs" was expected, as not everyone here are that gullible... grin

No, I still seriously doubt that any major TV source even are collective aware, what goes on in every single show, so the Idea of LMH and Whitley and their influence is common knowledge, no...I seriously doubt that...

Marvin, I think TY did move, and the forground image of the trees changed, but the farther trees stayed in the same position.

Maybe this is where the evidence halts, because we don't know the exact perspective, but he sure didn't move more than a couple of steps...

Merry Christmas,

DrStern

Ps: (Edit to add) Isn't it remarkable that TY takes 1 (one) picture, then add the Drone, and shows it as "inset" in a serie, and then takes 1 (one) other picture, showing the same Drone from a different position...weird isn't it? From a hoaxers point of view?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Dec 17th, 2008, 2:20pm

on Dec 17th, 2008, 11:03am, Jeddyhi wrote:
ABC, you're free to believe its the real deal. If you believe it is real, what aspect of the case most makes it real to you?


I would say, all the factors outlined by DrStern plus the fact that it is super-difficult to come up with a something totally different and alien to us with such a compelling bag of evidence.
I was saying from the beginning it's not about being able to re-create the model in the computer, it's about producing the whole idea from nothing. Only a few geniuses throughout history were able to truly think outside the box.

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Radi on Dec 17th, 2008, 2:25pm

on Dec 11th, 2008, 4:45pm, Marvin wrote:
User Image


Not to get off track here but something wrong with this picture if I remember correctly...Wasn't pluto declared no longer a planet in 2006... grin wink laugh
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 17th, 2008, 2:52pm

on Dec 17th, 2008, 09:57am, ABCStore wrote:
Sun rays will always be parallel in the surrounding 3-dimensional environment. (by the way, your picture proves exactly the opposite.... Sun rays are parallel not because of the size but the great distance to the Sun)
In the 2-dimensional projection, however, you have to account for the curvature of the lens.



Actually, I believe we are saying the same thing (kind of, sort of)… but from two different perspectives.

I am saying the Sun’s rays travel in a straight line (or more technically, the shortest distance). It is not true the size of the light source is irrelevant (within a parameter of distance). Illumination will be a function of light source size, energy and distance to an object.

You are saying due to the distance to the Sun (one AU or 92,855,920.5 miles), that causes the light to be “parallel.” This will appear to be true on a small scale (it is considered to be intuitively correct) and I fully agree with this premise. But if you were to plot the rays to infinity, you will see it is not correct in reality.

But for all practical purposes, one can consider the path of sunlight in a photo to be parallel. There are circumstances that will make sunlight appear to not be parallel:

1. perspective
2. the “lay if the land” or tilt and uneven surfaces
3. and yes, with cameras, barrel distortion caused by the lens.

As I have challenged anyone, to find the errors cause by the above or any other error that would make up the difference between the two solar angles I have shown. The 3D models (made by 4 CGI artist) only reinforce my 2D examples. So if you can show the cause for the appearance of two light sources (as being one light source), then I am still waiting (LOL to you wink ).

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Dec 17th, 2008, 3:07pm

on Dec 17th, 2008, 2:52pm, Marvin wrote:
As I have challenged anyone, to find the errors cause by the above or any other error that would make up the difference between the two solar angles I have shown. The 3D models (made by 4 CGI artist) only reinforce my 2D examples. So if you can show the cause for the appearance of two light sources (as being one light source), then I am still waiting (LOL to you wink ).


I am sorry, but I don't see "two light sources"... Everything in the picture is within normal.

IMHO.

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 17th, 2008, 3:22pm

on Dec 17th, 2008, 12:34pm, DrStern wrote:
Mr. Jeddyhi, I was asked the same question by Marvin, and I want to answer.

1.st: "Isaac" was intriqued by the witnesses photo's, Raj and Ty, and the obvious reason was the resemblance of the "Primer" and the "Language" shown in the witness photo's.

2.cond: If the correlations (That is obvious) are consistant, the language are the same, and therefor consistant throughout the whole "hoax".

So, every witness are either the same person inventing this whole story, or they never was connected in any way.

3.rd: The hoaxer has taken several other persons in to help him/she in this elaborate hoax.

Surely "spinoffs" was expected, as not everyone here are that gullible... grin



Good points Doc,

They are the same issues as to why I did not originally take a closer look at the photos last year.

Then a number of questions were asked…


on Dec 17th, 2008, 12:34pm, DrStern wrote:
Marvin, I think TY did move, and the forground image of the trees changed, but the farther trees stayed in the same position.

Maybe this is where the evidence halts, because we don't know the exact perspective, but he sure didn't move more than a couple of steps...



Ty’s photo are an area I am very familiar with (I still see them in my sleep). Compare KK and LL:

User Image

This is an overlay so you can see what the background trees are doing. Notice the zooming on the far trees but the Drone stays the same distance.

It is not possible for Ty to only take a step or two because it is not true that the farther trees stay in the same position. I have done an analysis on the Ty photos.


on Dec 17th, 2008, 12:34pm, DrStern wrote:
Ps: (Edit to add) Isn't it remarkable that TY takes 1 (one) picture, then add the Drone, and shows it as "inset" in a serie, and then takes 1 (one) other picture, showing the same Drone from a different position...weird isn't it? From a hoaxers point of view?



This is exactly what a hoaxer has to do in order to give the appearance of being “normal”… or it will be too obvious something is not right if the Drone does not change position.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 17th, 2008, 4:03pm

I rest my case.

Please can you All have a Merry Christmas, And for once think "out of the box"?

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 17th, 2008, 4:06pm

on Dec 17th, 2008, 3:37pm, DrStern wrote:
Ps: I said TY (The photographer) changed his position...

PPS: If you're not behaving right, I'll consider reclaiming my Christmas gift for you...and you wouldn't want that! wink



My apologies if I misunderstood what you said:


on Dec 17th, 2008, 12:34pm, DrStern wrote:
Marvin, I think TY did move, and the forground image of the trees changed, but the farther trees stayed in the same position.

Maybe this is where the evidence halts, because we don't know the exact perspective, but he sure didn't move more than a couple of steps...



It seemed to me you were implying the background trees stayed in the same position (photo to photo). Clearly, the photographic evidence does not support this point of view.



As for Christmas gifts, the best gift (IMHO) would be the fellowship we share here at the Casebook. What more could one want? smiley

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 17th, 2008, 4:11pm

on Dec 17th, 2008, 2:20pm, ABCStore wrote:
I would say, all the factors outlined by DrStern plus the fact that it is super-difficult to come up with a something totally different and alien to us with such a compelling bag of evidence.
I was saying from the beginning it's not about being able to re-create the model in the computer, it's about producing the whole idea from nothing. Only a few geniuses throughout history were able to truly think outside the box.

ABC



Proof is not about what is "impressive" or "compelling."

Proof is about what is "factual."


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 17th, 2008, 4:17pm

on Dec 17th, 2008, 2:25pm, Radi wrote:
Not to get off track here but something wrong with this picture if I remember correctly...Wasn't pluto declared no longer a planet in 2006... grin wink laugh



It's planet like...


(yes, it is an old example of relitave sizes... but it still works, even for the dwarf. wink ). grin grin grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 17th, 2008, 4:20pm

on Dec 17th, 2008, 3:07pm, ABCStore wrote:
I am sorry, but I don't see "two light sources"... Everything in the picture is within normal.

IMHO.

ABC



Then you are welcome to your opinion, bless your heart. wink

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 17th, 2008, 4:25pm

Marvin, I love you! You are the best!

Here's a second present for you: (And all here are invited in!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwId01XG2ug
For those interested: http://www.paramounttheatre.com/resource.html

Please enjoy, as this will be my last post here on UFO Casebook for a while.

Signing off,

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 17th, 2008, 5:35pm

on Dec 17th, 2008, 4:25pm, DrStern wrote:
Marvin, I love you! You are the best!

Here's a second present for you: (And all here are invited in!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwId01XG2ug
For those interested: http://www.paramounttheatre.com/resource.html

Please enjoy, as this will be my last post here on UFO Casebook for a while.

Signing off,

DrStern



An awesome gift by far! Happy Holidays and a Merry Christmas!


Edit to add... do not be a stranger here Doc. Come back soon.

And a gift to you and all here at the Casebook...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oe-dDn8Bee8
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Dec 17th, 2008, 7:38pm

Marvin, try, for once, to think at a difference perspective. Instead of saying to yourself "it is not possible", try to figure out how it could be possible. Think of it as a tricky problem at the test. Any explanation will do, even if the photographer had to go 20 feet up in the air.

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 18th, 2008, 01:13am

Perhaps its the word possible, when maybe what you mean most probable and highly improbable., within a range of possibilities..
Knowing what the limitations were from onset, it would be highly improbbible. That does not eliminate an astronomically insignicant possibility, but itdoes not make it probable.

If you try hard enough, lots of things are possible. but they get farther away from what may have actually happened..
User Image
User Image
User Image
User Image
User Image
smiley

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 18th, 2008, 09:41am

on Dec 17th, 2008, 7:38pm, ABCStore wrote:
Marvin, try, for once, to think at a difference perspective. Instead of saying to yourself "it is not possible", try to figure out how it could be possible. Think of it as a tricky problem at the test. Any explanation will do, even if the photographer had to go 20 feet up in the air.

ABC




User Image

1111’s 3D pole study

User Image

1111’s 3D pole and Drone study (top view)

User Image

1111’s 3D pole and Drone study (camera view)

User Image

My 2D study


Both show two light (non-interacting) sources… meaning the Drone is post added to the photo.


What did Nekitamo have to say about this (who happens to be a Global Moderator and Founding Dronie at the DRT):


on Dec 12th, 2008, 04:04am, nekitamo wrote:
But what I really wanted to say is this: IMO, we can't figure out what really happens with light in pic0016 without some kind of 3D analysis, either using CG or - even better - real models. Why do we still discuss some "lines" drawn on 2D images over and over again when we already have results of advanced 3D analysis from multiple independent sources? If I remember correctly, practically everyone who did 3D computer analysis (including myself) noted the following "problems":

1. There's a significant misalignment of shadows on the drone and the pole. Here's an illustration using two drones with the one on top tilted and rotated to achieve similar shadows as in Raj's image:

User Image

2. Even thus tilted and rotated, shadows on the top drone in previous example still don't quite fit those in Raj's images. In order to reproduce them correctly, we have to use a local (or "point") light source, like this:

User Image

3. Feel free to add other problems I forgot to mention here.

Please excuse my simple 3D models, but you can also find similar results from other 3D analysts in other forums with much better quality. As for problems I discovered using other methods of analysis, I'd also like to point out this thread at the DRT forum. Now, could we please move on from discussing "crude" 2D analysis methods and some reappearing issues that IMO seem irrelevant in light of the above mentioned research and continue our analysis from the (IMO) already achieved, much more advanced point where we left it?

Btw, note that I'm not offering any kind of conclusion here, just presenting facts as I see them.


Even Nekitamo is finding the issue and more that is not correct in the photo.

Your debate is not with me, but with anyone who has done a 3D analysis. All of the 3D analysis just confirm my analysis (and conclusions of two light sources). Maybe you should debate Nekitamo?

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Dec 18th, 2008, 10:06am

Marvin,
I was referring to Ty's pictures...

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 18th, 2008, 10:48am

For the record Marvin, the first three images you posted in your last post were not created by me.

The first image was created by SPF33, after I explained the shadows at OMF with my renders.

The second two images were created by Kris A.

However both images completely show MY conclusions. Making it 3 completely different people from different places on the Earth coming to the same conclusion..

Here is a song I dedicate to everyon LOL:
http://www.actionext.com/names_t/tool_lyrics/anema.html

Here's the lyrics:

Some say the end is near.
Some say we'll see armageddon soon.
I certainly hope we will.
I sure could use a vacation from this

Bulls**t three ring circus sideshow of
Freaks

Here in this hopeless f***ing hole we call LA
The only way to fix it is to flush it all away.
Any f***ing time. Any f***ing day.
Learn to swim, I'll see you down in Arizona bay.

Fret for your figure and
Fret for your latte and
Fret for your hairpiece and
Fret for your lawsuit and
Fret for your prozac and
Fret for your pilot and
Fret for your contract and
Fret for your car.
Fret for your drones. :lol: jk

It's a
Bull***t three ring circus sideshow of
Freaks

Here in this hopeless f***ing hole we call LA
The only way to fix it is to flush it all away.
Any f***ing time. Any f***ing day.
Learn to swim, I'll see you down in Arizona bay.

Some say a comet will fall from the sky.
Followed by meteor showers and tidal waves.
Followed by faultlines that cannot sit still.
Followed by millions of dumbfounded dipxxxxs.

Some say the end is near.
Some say we'll see armageddon soon.
I certainly hope we will, cuz'
I sure could use a vacation from this

Stupid S**t
Silly S**t
Stupid S**t

One great big festering neon distraction,
I've a suggestion to keep you all occupied.

Learn to swim
Learn to swim
Learn to swim

Mom's gonna fix it all soon.
Mom's comin' round to put it back the way it ought to be.

Learn to swim.

F**k L Ron Hubbard and
F**k all his clones.
F**k all those gun-toting
Hip gangster wannabes.

Learn to swim.

F**k retro anything.
F**k your tattoos.
F**k all you junkies and
F**k your short memory.

Learn to swim.

F**k smiley glad-hands
With hidden agendas.
F**k these dysfunctional,
Insecure actresses.

Learn to swim.

Cuz I'm praying for rain
And I'm praying for tidal waves
I wanna see the ground give way.
I wanna watch it all go down.
Mom please flush it all away.
I wanna watch it go right in and down.
I wanna watch it go right in.
Watch you flush it all away.

Time to bring it down again.
Don't just call me pessimist.
Try and read between the lines.

I can't imagine why you wouldn't
Welcome any change, my friend.

I wanna see it all come down.
suck it down.
flush ït down.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tomi01 on Dec 18th, 2008, 11:48am

on Dec 18th, 2008, 09:41am, Marvin wrote:
User Image

My 2D study


Both show two light (non-interacting) sources… meaning the Drone is post added to the photo.



Hi Marvin,

If you are using the glare coming off of the metal tag as an indication that there are two sources of light in this photo, then I have a counter point to make about this assumption. The tag is metal and it is going to reflect and refract light in a completely different way then the surface surrounding it. IMO it is entirely possible that this light on the tag comes from the same angle that highlights the drones.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 18th, 2008, 12:16pm

Studies and research by some very bright people have proven that there are two distinct light sources. Whether or not "drone believers" want to accept this evidence is another matter. They do not have to accept it at all. But I have yet to see any research or study that refutes the two light source conclusion. All I ever see or hear is that the conclusion is wrong....never why it is wrong.

I personally believe that the drones started as viral marketing for the SCC tv show but that the viral campaign timing was screwed up due to the writers strike. So the campaign was abandoned. Those that fell for it have kept whatever spark that remains from going completely out.

The SCC viral marketing explains the quality daylight photos (done with state of the art CGI programs and a nice budget) and the anonymous witnesses who, for all intents and purposes do not even exist.

But I guess that "dronies' will continue to believe, defend, and investigate until hell freezes over lol! wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 18th, 2008, 12:38pm

on Dec 18th, 2008, 10:06am, ABCStore wrote:
Marvin,
I was referring to Ty's pictures...

ABC


My bad.

The Ty photos have an issue that is unique to themselves. The trees (any of them) lack any change in perspective from photo to photo. If you go back and read the analysis, it is talked about. You can over lay all of the photos and the leaf positions (outer edges) and *tree outlines do not change. Leaf and tree outlines will quickly change with just three foot steps (as proven by experimentation). Ty’s trees (outline and shape) do not change with “camera movement” as one would expect them to do. So DrStern’s assertion is intuitively correct, but there is no physical way to actually reproduce it in the real world. Ty’s photos give the appearance of being one photo of the trees that has been cropped different ways to give the illusion of being different photos.

Move the camera 20 feet in any direction and you will not be able to reproduce Ty’s photos… so good luck on keeping an open mind on that.

*It has been suggested that the wind is blowing in the photos… but the leaves in the outline of the trees show no evidence of that being the case… a wind strong enough to move branches around would change the profile or outline of the trees, but again this is not happening in Ty's photos (as proven by experimentation).

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 18th, 2008, 12:41pm

on Dec 18th, 2008, 10:48am, neveleeleven wrote:
For the record Marvin, the first three images you posted in your last post were not created by me.

The first image was created by SPF33, after I explained the shadows at OMF with my renders.

The second two images were created by Kris A.

However both images completely show MY conclusions. Making it 3 completely different people from different places on the Earth coming to the same conclusion..




My apologies Eleven,

I did not mean to say you made the pics... which is why I called them studies.

Thank you for clarifying.

Marvin

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 18th, 2008, 12:44pm

on Dec 18th, 2008, 12:16pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
Studies and research by some very bright people have proven that there are two distinct light sources. Whether or not "drone believers" want to accept this evidence is another matter. They do not have to accept it at all. But I have yet to see any research or study that refutes the two light source conclusion. All I ever see or hear is that the conclusion is wrong....never why it is wrong.

I personally believe that the drones started as viral marketing for the SCC tv show but that the viral campaign timing was screwed up due to the writers strike. So the campaign was abandoned. Those that fell for it have kept whatever spark that remains from going completely out.

The SCC viral marketing explains the quality daylight photos (done with state of the art CGI programs and a nice budget) and the anonymous witnesses who, for all intents and purposes do not even exist.

But I guess that "dronies' will continue to believe, defend, and investigate until hell freezes over lol! wink




It does seem that research shows the issues and opinion says there are no issues. wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 18th, 2008, 3:21pm

on Dec 18th, 2008, 11:48am, tomi01 wrote:
Hi Marvin,

If you are using the glare coming off of the metal tag as an indication that there are two sources of light in this photo, then I have a counter point to make about this assumption. The tag is metal and it is going to reflect and refract light in a completely different way then the surface surrounding it. IMO it is entirely possible that this light on the tag comes from the same angle that highlights the drones.





Tomi,

I am not using the yellow tag in the analysis (I really do not see any glare on the tag anyway). You need to go back, re-read and understand the analysis first.

Best regards,

Marvin

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tomi01 on Dec 18th, 2008, 4:02pm

on Dec 18th, 2008, 12:16pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
But I guess that "dronies' will continue to believe, defend, and investigate until hell freezes over lol! wink


Hi Jeddyhi, laugh I hope this doesn't mean that anyone with a counter argument to subjective proof, which is all we have on the table really.... is going to be labeled a "dronie".. hmmm someone coined that word.. rolleyes

ok.. maybe I am a dronie, but that doesn't mean I believe blindly or even by any proof, (subjective of course..) So I don't believe, I wait for what it will take for me to know.... one way or another.
Maybe your threshold is lower, eh? We could all be dronies... soon a 12 step plan.. I expect sys/es will lead the way there wink

Marvin, I think you mean also the shadow that edges the length of the pole. I really see so many arguments for this lighting source to be the same that I'm at a loss as to if I went ahead and drew lines on where I think it shows correctness, if it will even matter within the sphere of the ultra sophisticated 3 dimensional CGI arguments here.

Which I personally don't think can be an accurate assessment. And someone should do what Kris and others suggested, test the hypothesis using HPO's model and a CGI reproduction of the scene taken with HPO's model. Can CGI 3/d replicate the shadows exactly of a daylight photograph with a drone in it?
Just wondering...

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 18th, 2008, 5:25pm

on Dec 18th, 2008, 4:02pm, tomi01 wrote:
ok.. maybe I am a dronie, but that doesn't mean I believe blindly or even by any proof, (subjective of course..) So I don't believe, I wait for what it will take for me to know.... one way or another.

Maybe your threshold is lower, eh? We could all be dronies... soon a 12 step plan.. I expect sys/es will lead the way there wink



If the debate is honest here, then define “subjective.” I know what it means... but do you apply the same meaning?

Also, since it seems your “balance” for the burden of proof appears to be a bit on the biased side (and has yet to be supported by objective evidence), what is the level of proof you need for “belief.”

(My apology Tomi, and here is the bias I am seeing… evidence, proof, facts and knowing something is not a “belief” system, it is a knowledge system. If you truly are entrenched in a belief system, then I fear no level of proof will be enough to give you a different view point, since you firmly believe it to be true.


on Dec 18th, 2008, 4:02pm, tomi01 wrote:
Marvin, I think you mean also the shadow that edges the length of the pole. I really see so many arguments for this lighting source to be the same that I'm at a loss as to if I went ahead and drew lines on where I think it shows correctness, if it will even matter within the sphere of the ultra sophisticated 3 dimensional CGI arguments here.

Which I personally don't think can be an accurate assesment.



I wish you would share that side of the debate with us… I have not seen anyone using CGI that has demonstrated a single light source (vs. two)… not even Nekitamo.

All of the 3D work I have seen, backs what I am seeing. So please share (and I hope it is not from Lev).

on Dec 18th, 2008, 4:02pm, tomi01 wrote:
And someone should do what Kris and others suggested, test the hypothesis using HPO's model and a CGI reproduction of the scene taken with HPO's model. Can CGI 3/d replicate the shadows exactly of a daylight photograph with a drone in it.

Just wondering...


I have no issue with someone doing that… but you are looking at the light source for the pole here:

User Image

Do you disagree with it? It matches the shadows on the pole.

User Image

Here they are together… in CGI, which is telling us there are 2 sources. It is a simple question of you accepting this data or not? When everything lines up in CGI (and the CGI models are basically correct)… then it is the same thing as taking a model (like HPO”S, which is basically correct, but not exact) and a pole. When independently verified by 4 CGI artist (as this work has)... then this just goes back to my first question, “what is the level of proof you need for ‘belief’.”

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Gort on Dec 18th, 2008, 5:34pm

on Dec 18th, 2008, 4:02pm, tomi01 wrote:
Hi Jeddyhi, laugh I hope this doesn't mean that anyone with a counter argument to subjective proof, which is all we have on the table really.... is going to be labeled a "dronie".. hmmm someone coined that word.. rolleyes

ok.. maybe I am a dronie, but that doesn't mean I believe blindly or even by any proof, (subjective of course..) So I don't believe, I wait for what it will take for me to know.... one way or another.
Maybe your threshold is lower, eh? We could all be dronies... soon a 12 step plan.. I expect sys/es will lead the way there wink

Marvin, I think you mean also the shadow that edges the length of the pole. I really see so many arguments for this lighting source to be the same that I'm at a loss as to if I went ahead and drew lines on where I think it shows correctness, if it will even matter within the sphere of the ultra sophisticated 3 dimensional CGI arguments here.

Which I personally don't think can be an accurate assessment. And someone should do what Kris and others suggested, test the hypothesis using HPO's model and a CGI reproduction of the scene taken with HPO's model. Can CGI 3/d replicate the shadows exactly of a daylight photograph with a drone in it?
Just wondering...


If you are still on this cgi stuff your pissing in the wind.

I guess you don't know anything about RC models. I have made plenty and have many on YouTube

You have no idea, it would be so easy to make an RC model of this drone. I'm almost tempted to do that.

But I have other RC models I'm currently working on.

Even if I did and even if I said it was an RC model you wouldn't believe me you'd still think it was real.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1380642903108144015



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 18th, 2008, 6:03pm

Hi Tomi, I hope you’re well. smiley

on Dec 18th, 2008, 4:02pm, tomi01 wrote:
<snip>
Maybe your threshold is lower, eh? We could all be dronies... soon a 12 step plan.. I expect sys/es will lead the way there

The absolute opposite, isn’t it? Threshold being the level that must be reached for a psychological or physiological effect to begin or be noticeable. Surely his threshold his higher?

on Dec 18th, 2008, 4:02pm, tomi01 wrote:
<snip>
if it will even matter within the sphere of the ultra sophisticated 3 dimensional CGI arguments here.

Nice delivery Tomi!! (I’m a sucker for sarcasm kiss).

But surely it’s just shifting the goal-posts? While I appreciate you didn’t write the following a similar comment was also posted without being questioned (just the opposite in fact) at the DRT forum, so I assumed it was something of a consensus:

on Dec 3rd, 2008, 5:21pm, Latitude wrote:
Are you kidding me? It's a 3D environment. It's not as simple as connecting dots and drawing lines in two dimensions. It's much more complicated. Maybe that concept is too much for you?

on Dec 7th, 2008, 12:53pm, Latitude wrote:
Marvin,

Your yellow arrow showing the sunlight direction on the pole is totally wrong. You evidently are confused when looking at a 2 dimensional representation of a 3 dimensional scene. Either that or you are purposely misrepresenting it to further your agenda. Actually, I think it's a lttle of both. wink

So Marv updated and represented his factually based appraisal using a 3D environment……(Kudos Marvin!! grin)

Poor Marv, he has constantly & consistently rose to all challenges and answered every question asked of him, providing data, examples, images, animations and the best it seems he gets in return is, “You’re wrong” with the person claiming such having little or no evidential data to back it up. But as you, Marv, Kris, Lat & others have already mentioned, perhaps the best chance of this being resolved is to composite HPO’s model into a 3D environment and test the lighting/shadows.

Merry Christmas Tomi & all!! smiley

(I’m sure you had more posts logged Tomi….. wink)
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 18th, 2008, 8:44pm



Hi DrDil,

Yes,, At sometime I got two logins herw and keep forgetting which version it is.. tongue Sry..

Getting to the issues you raised, I can summarize more easily by condensing it down to what I do agree with what Lat has said, in my estimation and I believe he thought the same, the sun is more of a 2 + oclock postion above the horizon.

Now DrDil, the rest of what Lats reasoning is, I really haven't had a chance to discus for a while !

I found a posting at one post on OM (I think) that was an initial attempt to replicate HPO's drone in CGI. I thought .. yes!.. the shadows between the real and the cgi are not exact... but I was busy and didn't note much more than that. It would be good to do. Especially outside with a large object similiar to the phone pole but in some kind of realistic scale. Then someone does the CGI of this scene. I bet the shadows will be off..
Any takers..?

Now I'm not saying the pictures are real either. And maybe I'm more concerned with the what and why and maybe who than the finer aspects of arguing shadows in 3D compared to 2D. All we have are 2D pictures and now a 3D drone.. Serious forensic work could be done with this regarding knowledge of how exact in fine detail replication these 3D programs are..

But common sense tells me that if you can't use this kind of analysis in deciding legal issues, it's not air tight.

Nobody, so far, has found one "gotcha" smoking gun.. A myriad of opinions from experts that never have a consenus, always an opinion about another issue.. Always finding a new issue to declare it a hoax with.. and well it may be. I don't know.

I spent a day researching James Cameron and his associations and resources and that boy has de power.. and motive maybe.. if anyone has or had to have created this.. but did he?

That should tell you a lot DrDil. That I have conceeded from hours of looking at the talent this man has under his network... that this could have been done with the kind of perfection it has by this one talent house and resource.. but was it?

I dont know.. and to be perfectly honest.. a matching or not matching shadow doesn't even begin to tell me what I want to know about this case. But yes, I do admit it could have been a magnificent production of fantasy.. (nicer than saying hoax..) but is ithuh
Hard to believe the drones are real, the longer it goes on.. the more the initial dronie glow begins to fade.. but there is so much that needs to be answered..



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by nekitamo on Dec 18th, 2008, 9:58pm

on Dec 18th, 2008, 09:41am, Marvin wrote:
What did Nekitamo have to say about this (who happens to be a Global Moderator and Founding Dronie at the DRT):

I think some explanations are in order here, as this "flashy title" may seem like more than it really is. Although I became a member of the DRT forum soon after it was created (note the distinction: only a DRT forum member, not a member of the original Drone Research Team of five that started it), the title of "Founding Dronie" is simply due to the fact that I reached 100 posts - it has the same meaning as someone's "Senior Member" status that is gained after a few hundred posts over here (not sure about the exact number, as it depends on custom forum settings).

As for my "Global Moderator" status - it has nothing to do with moderation and I never used it for that purpose. If you remember, when Chad's location was discovered by the PIs, it wasn't revealed by the DRT right away in order to protect the ongoing investigation. However, along with some other DRT forum members, I was given a privilege of early access to some of the images and measurements from the location by means of a special, moderator-only forum board which required our elevation into moderator status in order to be able to access it and collaborate with each other. After a few weeks, the results of our research were made available to the general public and soon everybody found out everything about the "secret" location.

As you can see, there's nothing special about my status over there - I'm pretty much just one of the members, expressing my own thoughts, like I do here or at any other forum, for that matter. But there's something special about the DRT forum that is not so common elsewhere: it is a great place to do research, a place where you're treated with respect, a place where nobody is forcing you to think this way or that, despite what some may think. And let me assure you: there's no such thing some often refer to as "the DRT forum opinion" or "the DRT forum angle" or however they put it - everyone is allowed to think for themself over there.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by murnut on Dec 18th, 2008, 10:25pm

on Dec 18th, 2008, 9:58pm, nekitamo wrote:
But there's something special about the DRT forum that is not so common elsewhere: it is a great place to do research, a place where you're treated with respect, a place where nobody is forcing you to think this way or that, despite what some may think. And let me assure you: there's no such thing some often refer to as "the DRT forum opinion" or "the DRT forum angle" or however they put it - everyone is allowed to think for themself over there.


Ha!

Anyone who believes it to be a hoax is prohibited from joining.

Yeah, that's respect.

And it is amazing the research that can be accomplished when one side of the coin is completely excluded.

Don't get me wrong, you can have whatever clubhouse and members you want.

But there is no respect when you don't allow dissenting opinions which include the hoax theory.

That's what cults do, not researchers.

So forgive us if the drt is grouped together as one rather than individuals.

Sorry for the rant, it's not personal....just the hypocrisy of your above words struck a nerve.

wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 19th, 2008, 03:20am

on Dec 18th, 2008, 8:44pm, tomi01uk wrote:
Now I'm not saying the pictures are real either. And maybe I'm more concerned with the what and why and maybe who than the finer aspects of arguing shadows in 3D compared to 2D. All we have are 2D pictures and now a 3D drone.. Serious forensic work could be done with this regarding knowledge of how exact in fine detail replication these 3D programs are..

Hi Tomi,

Wouldn’t that make you a……

*Hoax Hunter*? User Image

Cheers.


(I found the following image a while ago).

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 19th, 2008, 04:46am

I found two excellent articles on sunlight and shadows.
In case they haven't been posted or read before:

http://www.sunposition.com/

http://vstar3d.com/index.php?page=3d-lighting-tutorials

One thing that leaps at me from this info is how a sun positioned at the angle that is described by Marvin and others being more at a 3 oclock angle above the horizon would be less capable of casting such a strong shadow. As you can see in these articles, the sun from that angle has more dissipation and a reddish hue, that is why I believe that long shadow cast along the length of the pole has the possibility of coming from the sun at a higher position in the sky.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 19th, 2008, 05:47am

on Dec 18th, 2008, 10:25pm, murnut wrote:
Ha!

Anyone who believes it to be a hoax is prohibited from joining.

Yeah, that's respect.

And it is amazing the research that can be accomplished when one side of the coin is completely excluded.

Don't get me wrong, you can have whatever clubhouse and members you want.

But there is no respect when you don't allow dissenting opinions which include the hoax theory.

That's what cults do, not researchers.

So forgive us if the drt is grouped together as one rather than individuals.

Sorry for the rant, it's not personal....just the hypocrisy of your above words struck a nerve.

wink


I hear ya, Mur. This quote by majicbar is quite astounding and revealing.

"I still think that the cloaking/invisibility aspect of the drone might also distort the local atmosphere and thus also the shadows falling on the drone."

In this one statement, Majic rejects all shadow and light research and evidence of a hoax and finds it easier to accept that a yet to be proven to exist drone may have a cloaking machine that effects shadows. For the love of God, am I the only one that sees the weirdness in that?

I'm sorry as well, Nek. Not aimed at you personally, just venting my frustration. Sorry to get off topic. We should not turn this into a "Bash the DRT" party. My apologies.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 19th, 2008, 07:27am

Outside of the US, many people don't know about Ted Turner, who started CNN, the way we do from the States. He is an outspoken, many times too arrogant, true maverick.

In my case, I lived on one of his sailboats, knew Fredericka (sex on two legs is the only way to describe her), his wife, his kids, his "tom" Jimmy, a wonderful black man who knew him from a boy, stayed with him all his life. The mouth of the south is what Ted was called.. But Turner had to fight hard to raise the empire he did. He became a mental mentor to me, especially after one day when he told me, "get a job at McDonalds.." Granted, I was very young then, but it had a motivating effect on me to build a business too...

Why am I saying all this?.. Because yesterday I saw an interview with him on CNBC. Turner, for all his shortcomings as a father, and the arrogance he has, is still a very perceptive and intelligent man.

He was asked what do you think reflecting back on your relationship with Castro in Cuba.. he is an enemy of this country you were on a friendly basis, communicating with him? He said, "I like to know and be on friendly terms with everyone, I don't let ideologies stop me when I am in the news business."

So.... as long as there is no malicious intent from anyone regarding the discovery and solving of this drone case or against the members who are conducting the work from both sides of the spectrum, in my opinion, taking sides based on ideology is shorting the discovery potential.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 19th, 2008, 07:56am

on Dec 18th, 2008, 8:44pm, tomi01uk wrote:
Getting to the issues you raised, I can summarize more easily by condensing it down to what I do agree with what Lat has said, in my estimation and I believe he thought the same, the sun is more of a 2 + oclock postion above the horizon.



I think you are using the terminology for clock location, in a confusing way.

Are you using the time of day for the solar location:

User Image

or are you using the actual clock location:

User Image

http://www.kayakforum.com/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/guille/wiki.pl?Clock_Directions


on Dec 18th, 2008, 8:44pm, tomi01uk wrote:
I found a posting at one post on OM (I think) that was an initial attempt to replicate HPO's drone in CGI. I thought .. yes!.. the shadows between the real and the cgi are not exact... but I was busy and didn't note much more than that. It would be good to do. Especially outside with a large object similiar to the phone pole but in some kind of realistic scale. Then someone does the CGI of this scene. I bet the shadows will be off..
Any takers..?


Swapping out a similar model (the Drone) in CGI will not change the direction of illumination. That is controlled by the software. So if there was an issue or “mistake,” it was with the placement of the light source by who ever created that CGI.

If you can find it again, would you place a link to it here?

(for the Mods… is there no search ability on the forum to find things on Casebook?)



on Dec 18th, 2008, 8:44pm, tomi01uk wrote:
Now I'm not saying the pictures are real either. And maybe I'm more concerned with the what and why and maybe who than the finer aspects of arguing shadows in 3D compared to 2D. All we have are 2D pictures and now a 3D drone.. Serious forensic work could be done with this regarding knowledge of how exact in fine detail replication these 3D programs are..

But common sense tells me that if you can't use this kind of analysis in deciding legal issues, it's not air tight.



I do not know about the UK, but in the States, this type of modeling is used in the Courts. Air tight? That’s up to a jury, isn’t it?



on Dec 18th, 2008, 8:44pm, tomi01uk wrote:
Nobody, so far, has found one "gotcha" smoking gun.. A myriad of opinions from experts that never have a consenus, always an opinion about another issue.. Always finding a new issue to declare it a hoax with.. and well it may be. I don't know.


Really, nobody has found one?

Let me re-ask… what level of evidence are you willing to accept or are you in a belief system?

Honestly, it’s okay if you just want to believe in this. But before you claim to other people that it is real, you need facts and evidence.



on Dec 18th, 2008, 8:44pm, tomi01uk wrote:
I dont know.. and to be perfectly honest.. a matching or not matching shadow doesn't even begin to tell me what I want to know about this case. But yes, I do admit it could have been a magnificent production of fantasy.. (nicer than saying hoax..) but is ithuh
Hard to believe the drones are real, the longer it goes on.. the more the initial dronie glow begins to fade.. but there is so much that needs to be answered..



I think you are giving your “belief” position away here Tomi… the shadows not matching tells you about the credibility of the photographic evidence (which is the only “objective evidence” you have in this case). If the photographic evidence is bogus, then what foundation do you have to continue the case? You have no witnesses… you only have the anonymously submitted internet story and fake photos. Add it up (it equals zero). If you want it to be real, you need real evidence.

http://www.crime-scene-investigator.net/admissibilityofdigital.html

http://www.thirdamendment.com/photos.html

http://chnm.gmu.edu/aq/photos/essay/1.htm







on Dec 19th, 2008, 04:46am, tomi01uk wrote:
I found two excellent articles on sunlight and shadows.
In case they haven't been posted or read before:

http://www.sunposition.com/

http://vstar3d.com/index.php?page=3d-lighting-tutorials

One thing that leaps at me from this info is how a sun positioned at the angle that is described by Marvin and others being more at a 3 oclock angle above the horizon would be less capable of casting such a strong shadow. As you can see in these articles, the sun from that angle has more dissipation and a reddish hue, that is why I believe that long shadow cast along the length of the pole has the possibility of coming from the sun at a higher position in the sky.




I am glad you are seeing some things I have been seeing. For the time of day and the solar angle… the photos are too “bright.” Yet, you have a photo of a slightly tilted Drone, with the bottom illuminated. Therefore, logic will tell you the sun can not be very high above the horizon.

I believe 1111 has done a study on the time of day (5:42pm per EXIF info imbedded in the JPEG) for that date (and month) which reveals the Sun’s position in the sky. Maybe 1111 will enlighten us with more information.

But it seems to me Tomi, we all find the issues… but some of us spend a lot of time trying to explain them all away.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 19th, 2008, 08:20am

I'm now not so sure about the drones being viral marketing for the SCC. I found a viral website related to the Sarah Connor Chronicles and there is no mention of the drones at all. Check it out.

http://enitechlabs.com/index.html
http://terminator.wikia.com/wiki/EniTech_Research_Labs

This terminator wiki link has a hunter/Killer drone listed but looks nothing like the "drones".

http://terminator.wikia.com/wiki/Non-Humanoid_Hunter_Killer

If the drones are related to SCC in a viral sense, it is a connection that has not been as easily identifiable as Enitech.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 19th, 2008, 09:59am

@Jeddyhi I dont think so either despite some similarity I noted and posted at ATS, If there is it may be to some T4 rbotics. Both films are as Natalie said, like seperate Universe, though she may borrow on future scenes like flashbacks from the future. Is not SC I am following as a lead but Alienware and Warners, historical partners prior to Isaac. Warners in 2006 Purchased a 10percent stake in Eios a well known game maker. This mutual backscratching is old hat for them.I did find a copyright dated august 10, 2007 for that desktop theme.
so all impregnation with desings and lettering took place within 45 days of Isaac release, . particular to the M15x.and warners liked it so much they use it .
If it was none of them, why that would leave poor c2c and Linda, who aside from her silence, is withholding the hi re pix, email adresses and ips , caught untruthing, and was closest along with c2c who dropped it on us.
We certainly wouldn't want that would we?
@Marvin, the more you learn (sic) them them the dummer you get. They need scraps to justify their existence as a DRT, we don't. I would tell them after all has been done to go talk to the hand. Otherwise it leaves the impression that yours and all the other analysis was not enough to prove deliberate tampering,Tampering which does not occurr spontaneously in a natural universe.



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 19th, 2008, 11:09am

on Dec 19th, 2008, 05:47am, Jeddyhi wrote:
I hear ya, Mur. This quote by majicbar is quite astounding and revealing.

"I still think that the cloaking/invisibility aspect of the drone might also distort the local atmosphere and thus also the shadows falling on the drone."

In this one statement, Majic rejects all shadow and light research and evidence of a hoax and finds it easier to accept that a yet to be proven to exist drone may have a cloaking machine that effects shadows. For the love of God, am I the only one that sees the weirdness in that?

I'm sorry as well, Nek. Not aimed at you personally, just venting my frustration. Sorry to get off topic. We should not turn this into a "Bash the DRT" party. My apologies.


Jed, you need to understand Majicbar's words more completely. You see, this is the difference between us and them. Majicbar said the key word "might". He never stated as fact that a shadow distortion is in effect. This is called being open minded (a common drt member trait).

Remember the tiny connecting rods of the BB drone? How they were criticized for being impossible? Remember the criticism about the unconnected cage bars? This criticism was silenced (and shown to be closed minded) when Isaac revealed the pacl documents detailing the "Rigid Spacial Relationship" effect.

But some people have a hard time thinking outside the box. They only think in Earth grounded terms and limited ways. Your accusation that Majic is rejecting anything is unfounded. You don't know his thoughts. It seems to me that Majic has merely pointed out a possibility however remote it may be. Remember the drones supposedly are able to be not only invisible but silent and also impervious to ballistic weaponry.

Haven't you noticed in the drone pics how the spikes fade out at the top? Why is that?


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 19th, 2008, 11:54am

on Dec 19th, 2008, 11:09am, Latitude wrote:
But some people have a hard time thinking outside the box. They only think in Earth grounded terms and limited ways. Your accusation that Majic is rejecting anything is unfounded. You don't know his thoughts. It seems to me that Majic has merely pointed out a possibility however remote it may be. Remember the drones supposedly are able to be not only invisible but silent and also impervious to ballistic weaponry.

Haven't you noticed in the drone pics how the spikes fade out at the top? Why is that?




Are you saying the spikes fading out at the top is a sign of some effect made by the craft… therefore, showing it is real?

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 19th, 2008, 11:58am

on Dec 19th, 2008, 11:09am, Latitude wrote:
Jed, you need to understand Majicbar's words more completely. You see, this is the difference between us and them. Majicbar said the key word "might". He never stated as fact that a shadow distortion is in effect. This is called being open minded (a common drt member trait).

Remember the tiny connecting rods of the BB drone? How they were criticized for being impossible? Remember the criticism about the unconnected cage bars? This criticism was silenced (and shown to be closed minded) when Isaac revealed the pacl documents detailing the "Rigid Spacial Relationship" effect.

But some people have a hard time thinking outside the box. They only think in Earth grounded terms and limited ways. Your accusation that Majic is rejecting anything is unfounded. You don't know his thoughts. It seems to me that Majic has merely pointed out a possibility however remote it may be. Remember the drones supposedly are able to be not only invisible but silent and also impervious to ballistic weaponry.

Haven't you noticed in the drone pics how the spikes fade out at the top? Why is that?



"a yet to be proven to exist drone may have a cloaking machine that effects shadows. For the love of God, am I the only one that sees the weirdness in that?"

I know Majic said might, as you can see above, that is why I said may. Regardless, the idea is ludicrious. To account for shadow anomolies some would rather speculate that their is a cloaking field on an imaginary craft that alters shadows......For pete's sake, is there any sanity left lol! You are all rejecting anything that suggests the drones are fantasy. Look at a picture of a drone and tell me in all honesty that you believe such a craft is actually real. That you could picture one hovering over your backyard. It's as real as a Star Wars X-wing fighter. laugh

There is abundant evidence of hoax, some people are just obsessive about wanting it to be real. And these same obsessive people know there is not a snow's ball chance in hell that it will ever become recognized as a real sighting. Not enought evidence, testimony, documentation, or witness participation.

When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on.

Remember that MUFON has determined hoax. Starfire Tor, as a favor to Streiber investigated and analyzed, had her experts investigate and analyze, and detemined Hoax. Numerous CGI experts have detemined hoax, UFO Hunters determined hoax. Just who on this green and blue planet besides a select few at the DRT even believes the drone case at all?.....no one!

In order for there to be a cloaking field that distorts the atmosphere and causes shadows to be wrong, the drone first has to exist. Or at least strong compelling evidence needs to exist that suggests the drones are real.

To speculate about cloaking fields, the drones purpose for being here, what it is made of, etc......its all fluff that serves no purpose. Its like wondering what kind of thermal underwear Santa wears and what he feeds his reindeer.

Remember that thinking outside the box does not mean throwing out sound reason and research. It does not mean rejecting evidence solely because the evidence is not supporting of a postion or stance. It means looking at something from different angles. Thinking outside the box is applying unconventionial problem solving where conventionial problem solving fails.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 19th, 2008, 12:12pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 11:58am, Jeddyhi wrote:
To speculate about cloaking fields, the drones purpose for being here, what it is made of, etc......its all fluff that serves no purpose. Its like wondering what kind of thermal underwear Santa wears and what he feeds his reindeer. Lets prove that Santa exists before we speculate on his life.



Fruit of the Loom
Chocolate chip cookies


Don’t you dare undermine my version of reality! grin grin grin

(I still believe) wink

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 19th, 2008, 12:19pm

I believe too! It was just the first anology that came to mind......Sorry Santa! grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 19th, 2008, 12:24pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 11:09am, Latitude wrote:
Remember the drones supposedly are able to be not only invisible but silent and also impervious to ballistic weaponry.


And thats according to an anonymous guy that enhanced the drone story and disappeared. Thats compelling evidence! Impervious to ballistic weaponry? I missed that part.

Quote:
Remember the tiny connecting rods of the BB drone? How they were criticized for being impossible? Remember the criticism about the unconnected cage bars? This criticism was silenced (and shown to be closed minded) when Isaac revealed the pacl documents detailing the "Rigid Spacial Relationship" effect.


Sounds like Isaac showed up just in time. And with explanations for everything. That is what I call awfully convenient. Just because an anonymous source speaks doesn't necessarily mean he speaks the truth. It is all part of the hoax. Why did Isaac sneak out top secret papers in his pants ( rolleyes ) in the first place? So in case an invisible, cloaked object was ever spotted, he could be johnny-on-the-spot with pertinent info? Come on, Man!

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 19th, 2008, 12:38pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 11:58am, Jeddyhi wrote:
Regardless, the idea is ludicrious.

...For pete's sake, is there any sanity left lol! You are all rejecting anything that suggests the drones are fantasy. Look at a picture of a drone and tell me in all honesty that you believe such a craft is actually real. That you could picture one hovering over your backyard. It's as real as a Star Wars X-wing fighter. laugh

There is abundant evidence of hoax, some people are just obsessive about wanting it to be real. And these same obsessive people know there is not a snow's ball chance in hell that it will ever become recognized as a real sighting. Not enought evidence, testimony, documentation, or witness participation.

When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on.

Remember that MUFON has determined hoax. Starfire Tor, as a favor to Streiber investigated and analyzed, had her experts investigate and analyze, and detemined Hoax. Numerous CGI experts have detemined hoax, UFO Hunters determined hoax. Just who on this green and blue planet besides a select few at the DRT even believes the drone case at all?.....no one!

In order for there to be a cloaking field that distorts the atmosphere and causes shadows to be wrong, the drone first has to exist. Or at least strong compelling evidence needs to exist that suggests the drones are real.


IMO, over 30 good pictures (along with eyewitness accounts and a gov whistleblower) from 6 possible separate sources is compelling enough to consider it. Plus there is all the other ancilary stuff like the newspaper reporter running from the PIs and the emails to Bren and Ivo, plus the location data found by the PIs and drt and a whole mess of other stuff.

What you see as evidence of hoax I see as either flawed or speculative. You state this stuff as fact when it is very far from it.

Why does it bother you so much that we ask what if?

We don't care if the world does not recognize the drones as a real sighting. It does not bother us one bit. To tell you the truth, imo it will never be accepted. That's just the way it is and nothing can change it. But I don't care. I will continue to follow and study the case. Sorry if that offends you.

So "Starfire Tor" says it's a hoax? Ha ha. grin


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 19th, 2008, 12:48pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 12:38pm, Latitude wrote:

So "Starfire Tor" says it's a hoax? Ha ha. grin


Yeah and what makes it really funny is that she is on the fringe, a true believer in almost everything....except the drones! grin

Her report is actually quite professional though. Have you read it?


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Gort on Dec 19th, 2008, 1:02pm

Someone's dream or hoax another's reality


http://s221.photobucket.com/albums/dd188/Klaatubarada/?action=view¤t=yf.flv

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 19th, 2008, 1:06pm

Mr. Jeddyhi,

You just lost my goodwill here:

Quote:
To speculate about cloaking fields, the drones purpose for being here, what it is made of, etc......its all fluff that serves no purpose. Its like wondering what kind of thermal underwear Santa wears and what he feeds his reindeer.



I know I said, that I was gone from here for a while, but this post simply aggrivated me so much, that my Christmas nightcap simply fell off!

To ridicule the speculations of how and why the Drones might work, as it is a great issue taken on here, by a lot of physicists lurking, I assure you! And surely has no resemblance to "Santa" as quoted!

I am very angry to see the work of so many belittled by the so very few!

I sure hope this quote was a joke, I surely hope so, because if it's not, I sincerely weep my dry tears for those whom laid in a trusty work trying to discover the workings of the "Drones", including myself!

If we're seeing more of this, I suggest you lay this whole issue to rest, and let serious investigation happen elsewhere.

Merry Christmas,

DrStern

Ps: Edit to please mr. Jeddyhi (I hope I didn't offend you by misspelling your name, as it was nothing more than a typo!)

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 19th, 2008, 1:07pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 12:48pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
Yeah and what makes it really funny is that she is on the fringe, a true believer in almost everything....except the drones! grin

Her report is actually quite professional though. Have you read it?



Whoever said the drones were fringe? wink

Yes I saw it. She seems to be speaking out both sides of her mouth, trying to satisfy some people.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 19th, 2008, 1:12pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 12:38pm, Latitude wrote:

So "Starfire Tor" says it's a hoax? Ha ha. grin


Hopefully she will travel into the future and tell us who the hoaxers really are! grin

Tuna
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 19th, 2008, 1:17pm

DrStern,

I am glad to see you are still with us.

Have you seen the movie K-Pax? Where a man claims to be an alien named Prot?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 19th, 2008, 1:28pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 1:06pm, DrStern wrote:
Mr. Jeddihy,

You just lost my goodwill here:



I know I said, that I was gone from here for a while, but this post simply aggrivated me so much, that my Christmas nightcap simply fell off!

To ridicule the speculations of how and why the Drones might work, as it is a great issue taken on here, by a lot of physicists lurking, I assure you! And surely has no resemblance to "Santa" as quoted!

I am very angry to see the work of so many belittled by the so very few!

I sure hope this quote was a joke, I surely hope so, because if it's not, I sincerely weep my dry tears for those whom laid in a trusty work trying to discover the workings of the "Drones", including myself!

If we're seeing more of this, I suggest you lay this whole issue to rest, and let serious investigation happen elsewhere.

Merry Christmas,

DrStern



Why do you spell my name wrong DrStern? And no, it was not a joke. Speculating on why a drone is here, implies that the drone is actually here. Speculating on how it works implies that the drone does indeed exist. The first and foremost goal should be to find out if the case is a hoax or not before speculating on how the cloak works, how it navigates, what it is made of, etc......that is putting the wagon in front of the horse, is it not? And it suggests to people new to this case that the drones are more than an unsupported claim with nothing but anonymous witnesses and questionable photos. Some call that type of thing misleading propaganda. I call it fluff. Sorry to have angered you, Doc. Merry Christmas!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 19th, 2008, 1:30pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 1:17pm, Marvin wrote:
DrStern,

I am glad to see you are still with us.

Have you seen the movie K-Pax? Where a man claims to be an alien named Prot?


Marvin, don't be too glad, as I'm in my "angry" mode...

Yes, I have - he has a very specific way of eating a banana... grin

Merry Christmas, my friend,

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 19th, 2008, 1:40pm

Quote:
Why do you spell my name wrong DrStern? And no, it was not a joke. Speculating on why a drone is here, implies that the drone is actually here. Speculating on how it works implies that the drone does indeed exist. The first and foremost goal should be to find out if the case is a hoax or not before speculating on how the cloak works, how it navigates, what it is made of, etc......that is putting the wagon in front of the horse, is it not? And it suggests to people new to this case that the drones are more than an unsupported claim with nothing but anonymous witnesses and questionable photos. Some call that type of thing misleading propaganda. I call it fluff. Sorry to have angered you, Doc. Merry Christmas!


I'm sure DrDil can help dig out to find all (or some) posts that show how much work was done trying to figure out the workings of the possible Drone, that was speculated throughout this entire thread, as he has a remarkable way of remembering what was said and done.

I rest my case, and if you feel I'm wrong, please come forward.

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 19th, 2008, 1:52pm

California Drones Mystery Solved By Sarah Connor Chronicles?
http://screenrant.com/sarah-connor-chronicles-california-drones-mystery-brusimm-4647/
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 19th, 2008, 1:59pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 1:40pm, DrStern wrote:
I'm sure DrDil can help dig out to find all (or some) posts that show how much work was done trying to figure out the workings of the possible Drone, that was speculated throughout this entire thread, as he has a remarkable way of remembering what was said and done.

I rest my case, and if you feel I'm wrong, please come forward.

DrStern


I already have come forward and stated why I feel the way I do. You do not have to agree with it, like it, or even pay attention to it. It is my opinion. It is the way I feel. Again, I'm sorry if that upsets you, Doc! I just don't see the sense in speculating on how a drone works when the drone is yet to be proven to exist.

Constructive speculation would be how a F-117 Stealth fighter absorbs radar. That exists. Speculation on how a drone has a cloaking field and that it distorts the atmosphere and causes shadow anomolies is not constructive. It is an attempt to counter the shadow anomalies caused by two light sources and holds no water since the drones existence has not been established. The drone must first exist and have a cloaking field in order to speculate that that is causing shadow anomalies.

Any other speculation relating to how the drone works is serving what purpose? Anyhow, whether we agree or disagree, I hate to anger anyone. My apologies, Drstern! wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 19th, 2008, 2:01pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 1:30pm, DrStern wrote:
Marvin, don't be too glad, as I'm in my "angry" mode...

Yes, I have - he has a very specific way of eating a banana... grin

Merry Christmas, my friend,

DrStern




The event that made one realize, Prot was really who he claimed to be... when the Psychiatrist arranged a meeting with the Astrophysicists, and Prot drew a complex orbit of a planet around a binary star system (that happened to be located where the Astrophysicists had recently made the discovery of that system... not yet known to the public).

An “Ah Ha” moment like that is what I need to shoot more life back into the Drone mystery. I have waited a year and a half now… sadly, no “Ah Ha” moment.



on Dec 19th, 2008, 12:38pm, Latitude wrote:


What you see as evidence of hoax I see as either flawed or speculative. You state this stuff as fact when it is very far from it.

Why does it bother you so much that we ask what if?

We don't care if the world does not recognize the drones as a real sighting. It does not bother us one bit. To tell you the truth, imo it will never be accepted. That's just the way it is and nothing can change it. But I don't care. I will continue to follow and study the case. Sorry if that offends you.





Lat, I fully respect your right to believe and I feel no offence. I just wish more evidence would be brought forward... any evidence at all. Debating beliefs, speculation and opinions do not advance either side of the Drone saga.

I use to be waiting for that day when the DRT would announce “we found them” (the witnesses) or at least, “we found one.” Or some new evidence would come to the surface… but alas, it looks like the deck is “stacked against you.”



Edit to add:

DrStern... sorry you are angry. But angry or not, it is always good to have you here. smiley

And you too Lat. Anyone that likes ELO is okay in my book. wink

Merry Christmas to all.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 19th, 2008, 2:04pm

Quote:
-tomiuk-
And someone should do what Kris and others suggested, test the hypothesis using HPO's model and a CGI reproduction of the scene taken with HPO's model. Can CGI 3/d replicate the shadows exactly of a daylight photograph with a drone in it?
Just wondering...


Tomi, we have already perfectly modeled the telephone pole, and matched every single shadow with the pole in raj's image. What makes you think the drone would be different? Why do you think we can perfectly recreate every shadow on the telephone pole, but the done shadows are inaccurate?

3D Studio Max is used to simulate REAL WORLD LIGHTING. They use 3DSM in movies, video games, everything.... When they want to place a fake object with real looking lighting effects in a movie, they use 3DSM, to fool the people in thinking it is real.

Matching an image of HPO's model with a 3D model, is exactly like matching our 3D model telephone pole with raj's image. We have already done it.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 19th, 2008, 2:10pm

Mr. Jeddyhi (Spellcheck, please?)

So, it's not allowed to try to figure out how a maschine is working, being real or not?

Gee, that's what was keeping me from staying here..

IF it is real, isn't it good to estimate how it COULD be working? And, if you say, it's out of the question something like this could ever be real?

I have to disappoint you, as much of the technologies proposed here, are in work today, maybe terrestrial, but never underestimate from where and how we brilliant minds got our knowledge from.

If you never question some things in your life, you never will be pleased with what is true.

Again, Merry Chistmas

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 19th, 2008, 2:12pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 2:04pm, neveleeleven wrote:


Tomi, we have already perfectly modeled the telephone pole, and matched every single shadow with the pole in raj's image. What makes you think the drone would be different? Why do you think we can perfectly recreate every shadow on the telephone pole, but the done shadows are inaccurate?

3D Studio Max is used to simulate REAL WORLD LIGHTING. They use 3DSM in movies, video games, everything.... When they want to place a fake object with real looking lighting effects in a move, they use 3DSM, to fool the people in thinking it is real.

Matching an image of HPO's model with a 3D model, is exactly like matching our 3D model telephone pole with raj's image. We have already done it.




HEY 1111....

Can you fill us in on the solar position with the Raj photo 16 (I believe the EXIF data states 5:42PM)? What is the angle above the horizon? Thanks.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 19th, 2008, 2:13pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 1:52pm, DrStern wrote:
California Drones Mystery Solved By Sarah Connor Chronicles?
http://screenrant.com/sarah-connor-chronicles-california-drones-mystery-brusimm-4647/


This fully supports the claim I made back in 2007 when all this started:

"The entire drone hoax is most likely scrap material from a movie/video game that didn't make it to the final cut. Movie and video game producers tend to make a lot of extra content, and create "background stories" for characters or situations, and make a lot of props, images, and prototypes of ideas, and a lot of it doesn't make it to the final production. Someone probably thought it would be funny to use the scrap material to create a hoax."

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Katterfelto on Dec 19th, 2008, 2:34pm

This is where everyone and the fun went! Guess I'll join the party. grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 19th, 2008, 3:04pm

Ketter! hahaha jump on in in the waters fine and warm!
And you don't have to worry about a Believer Admin spoiling the water or banning you just because you don't!

11 11 + 1 want you to marry my sister Carmelita, shes hot, and you would make a great brother in law!

Welcome
ES/Sys

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 19th, 2008, 3:06pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 2:12pm, Marvin wrote:
HEY 1111....
Can you fill us in on the solar position with the Raj photo 16 (I believe the EXIF data states 5:42PM)? What is the angle above the horizon? Thanks.



Based off of calculations for the Raj photo 16, I believe the solar position is:

A. Azimuth = 278
H. Altitude = 20
Z. Cosine of Zenith Angle = 0.351

Which would make it about 5:20pm.

However, if the time 5:42 is correct, the solar position should be:
A. Azimuth = 281
H. Altitude = 16.5
Z. Cosine of Zenith Angle = 0.280

A 2D representation of a 3D position of the Sun. rolleyes
User Image

Quote:
zenith angle - an angular measurement from straight up (zenith) to a point in the sky. Zenith angle can be used along with azimuth to indicate the position of a star or other celestial body. Zenith angle is the complementary angle of the elevation (elevation = 90° - zenith). (See azimuth and elevation.) See Azimuth/Elevation/Zenith Figure. The cosine of the solar zenith angle is used to calculate the vertical component of direct sunlight shining on a horizontal surface.


By the way, my calculations provide evidence that Raj's camera was not set for Daylight Saving Time.

Also, something tells me that the drone hoaxers didn't know that the solar Zenith angle could be calculated using the telephone pole and shadows. lol

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 19th, 2008, 3:08pm

whoops double post...

...don't have anything good to type here lol.

-edit-

Quote:
11 11 + 1 want you to marry my sister Carmelita, shes hot, and you would make a great brother in law!


LOL, I'm single, got a picture?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 19th, 2008, 3:35pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 2:13pm, neveleeleven wrote:
This fully supports the claim I made back in 2007 when all this started:

"The entire drone hoax is most likely scrap material from a movie/video game that didn't make it to the final cut. Movie and video game producers tend to make a lot of extra content, and create "background stories" for characters or situations, and make a lot of props, images, and prototypes of ideas, and a lot of it doesn't make it to the final production. Someone probably thought it would be funny to use the scrap material to create a hoax."


Sigh embarassed rolleyes Came across that article a couple of days ago and I was going to post this link somewhere, but where? And what will people think about my comments? Will it offend DRT or look stupid to either camp? I just don't know anymore how we can satisfy our NEED to talk about drones.. without getting up each others nose.. I want to talk about the dam* things.. what I'm thinking or researching or observing without getting labeled or lampooned or thought to be a pro droner or a pro hoaxer.

But as you can see, even now soo soon, history is getting distorted by what she wrote. Her facts are not correct, because I was part of what she is writing about. Where do I post thishuh? Why do we all have to fight?

Lat, I wanted to be able to say on DRT forum, I spent 5 hours researching Cameron and certain things I found made me think about what I posted earlier about him, but I dare not! I almost dared not here too. Because I will either offend (or confound smiley) the sensibilites of one camp or the other.. with anything I say for sure.

But one thing is for sure... we are all passionate about this drone saga in our own way.. And we need to hash it out with each other. We need peer review as well about all aspects that are studied.

I think if two people think the same about something, one of them is unnecessary. There is a balance obtained in looking squarely at this saga, only because there are both ends of the spectrum. We don't want to lose the plot, do we?, because one side says It's a hoax forget about it.. and the other says.. no it's real..

The balance comes from both sides, I wish at Christmas we could after a fricking year and a half appreciate that and each other. laugh
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 19th, 2008, 4:05pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 2:34pm, Katterfelto wrote:
This is where everyone and the fun went! Guess I'll join the party. grin



Welcome Katterfelto, there is always room for more!



on Dec 19th, 2008, 3:04pm, TeachersPet wrote:
Ketter! hahaha jump on in in the waters fine and warm!
And you don't have to worry about a Believer Admin spoiling the water or banning you just because you don't!

11 11 + 1 want you to marry my sister Carmelita, shes hot, and you would make a great brother in law!

Welcome
ES/Sys



If she looks anything like your avatar, then she is hot!




on Dec 19th, 2008, 3:06pm, neveleeleven wrote:
Based off of calculations for the Raj photo 16, I believe the solar position is:

A. Azimuth = 278
H. Altitude = 20
Z. Cosine of Zenith Angle = 0.351

Which would make it about 5:20pm.



Thanks 1111.

20 sounds right.



on Dec 19th, 2008, 3:08pm, neveleeleven wrote:
LOL, I'm single, got a picture?


@TP

I put my glasses on… and I would like to retract my hot statement. wink grin

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 19th, 2008, 4:13pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 2:10pm, DrStern wrote:
Mr. Jeddyhi (Spellcheck, please?)

So, it's not allowed to try to figure out how a maschine is working, being real or not?


lol You perplex me, Doc! The point is that research based on a scientific approach has turned up problems with the drone case. Problems that clearly point to a hoax scenario. These points are refuted with speculative data based on a presumption that the drone is real and compounded with speculative notions as to how the drone would work if real, and how the performance of a real drone would effect a real world situation. Of course, all the notions and speculation are a moot point since the reality of a drone has not been proven.

Quote:
Gee, that's what was keeping me from staying here..

huh

Quote:
IF it is real, isn't it good to estimate how it COULD be working? And, if you say, it's out of the question something like this could ever be real?


You're losing me with this sentence! IF something is real, it is good to estimate how it works, hence my F-117 Stealth fighter example. I don't believe I said it's out of the question something like this could be real as I firmly believe in UFOs and the possibility of anti-gravity drives. I just don't believe this case is real. Supporting evidence is to weak to counter the evidence of hoax.

Quote:
I have to disappoint you, as much of the technologies proposed here, are in work today, maybe terrestrial, but never underestimate from where and how we brilliant minds got our knowledge from.


You have not disappointed me, Doc, only enlightened me. As much as we like to think we have back engineered technology from aliens, do not underestimate the intelligence of the Human race. We are capable of so much.

Quote:
If you never question some things in your life, you never will be pleased with what is true.

Again, Merry Chistmas

DrStern


You speak as if I need help in believing in the human spirit. One cannot gain knowledge or wisdom without learning and learning means asking questions, no matter how silly the question may seem. When one stops asking questions, the quest for knowledge is over. I ask myself questions all the time. Questions pertaining to the drones that I ask myself are:

1. Where are the witnesses who took the photos?
2. Why did they all report their sighting online only?
3. Why did they all refuse to call any authorities to document their sighting?
4. Why did they all remain completely anonymous when they only needed to remain publically anonymous. (As in letting investigators know who and where they are but not the public)
5. Why did Chad lie about the location of his sighting to LMH?
6. Why does the Big Basin Drone look like a it is a cut and paste job
7. Why does the DRT ignore these things and make excuses for them
8. Why did Isaac steal documents over 20 years ago and do nothing with them? If the drones had never have been spotted, what was the purpose of his espionage?
9. Why did the drones seems magnetically attracted to people with digital cameras? And people who wanted to remain anonymous and not report their sighting in a documentive way?
10. Why does the drone case fit the parameters of an internet hoax?
11. Why are there some people who do not ask these questions and instead speculate on how a drone works?
12. Why does good healthy debating without personal insult have to be referred to as "fighting" by Tomi lol?

I could go on and on. I ask questions, Doc, I ask good hard questions and then I look for answers. I don't always find them though!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 19th, 2008, 5:05pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 4:13pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
1. Where are the witnesses who took the photos?
2. Why did they all report their sighting online only?
3. Why did they all refuse to call any authorities to document their sighting?
4. Why did they all remain completely anonymous when they only needed to remain publically anonymous. (As in letting investigators know who and where they are but not the public)
5. Why did Chad lie about the location of his sighting to LMH?
6. Why does the Big Basin Drone look like a it is a cut and paste job
7. Why does the DRT ignore these things and make excuses for them
8. Why did Isaac steal documents over 20 years ago and do nothing with them? If the drones had never have been spotted, what was the purpose of his espionage?
9. Why did the drones seems magnetically attracted to people with digital cameras? And people who wanted to remain anonymous and not report their sighting in a documentive way?
10. Why does the drone case fit the parameters of an internet hoax?
11. Why are there some people who do not ask these questions and instead speculate on how a drone works?
12. Why does good healthy debating without personal insult have to be referred to as "fighting" by Tomi lol?


1. Unknown
2. You don't know that.
3. Same as #2
4. They did not. We have names and you know it.
5. Did Chad Lie? You don't know it. Depends on interpretation.
6. Does not look cut and paste to me
7. DRT only ignores baiting. We answer when we can.
8. We can only speculate on Isaac's motives. My guess is obvious to me. He knew one day he would want to tell somebody and would need some sort of proof. He likely knows now that people would not want to hear it. Sad but that's the world we live in.
9. Totally backwards question. You don't even know if Ty used a digital camera. You do like to jump to conclusions.
10. In your opinion
11. Because we are free to ask what we want
12. Can't answer for Tomi but as for myself, insults are often couched in so called debate.

You seem unable to put yourself into the shoes of the witness. For that reason it all seems foreign to you.

PS: Hey, I'm Gold member now. That's better than being fat bastard!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 19th, 2008, 5:29pm

Mr. Jeddyhi

Please don't patronize me, as I see your post as an insult to my intelligence.

All these things has been debated, and I certainly ask myself why we haven't arose beyond this...

As I see it, the only reason to keep this alive, is that you're not at all sure that what you present is true.

I on the other hand are not able (As standing) to prove that this issue is real.

So, we're at status quo, you have your arguments, and I have mine....

True debate is when one discuss evidence as presented, and some here master that disciplin, some not.

Here it's open if the "evidence" is present, or a clever hoax.

Either side has presented possible ways, this either is true or hoax. To little avail, in my humble opinion!

If you are so sure of your belief, why not standardize it, and write a scientific paper explaining the whole "hoax" in a way that is understandable to the scientific world?

I'll save you the work...it's not possible!

That's why every spinoff excites you, telling you this is all a hoax...

But, stubborn as you are, you hold onto the belief that this could never happen!

Sure, it could happen! Maybe you haven't checked up on your science, but what is shown in the "Isaac" files actually might be used as we speak, and known as "Terrestrial" research, and you, the common man, wouldn't be the wiser.

It's everywhere, in your cellphone 4g is the next step...

Sorry to say, but evolution took 1000'th of years...the human developement takes only a few 100 years, a very small if not microns of time compared to how evolution created you and me. And ofcourse we need to think "out of the box" as the development of super computers times itself double every time you go to the lavatory!

You, Mr. Jeddyhi are a thinker who lost the real foundation upon every civilisation is built! In other words, you live in the "Dark Ages".

Merry Christmas,

DrStern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 19th, 2008, 5:33pm

Drstern, if you insist on talking down to me, you can talk with yourself! Conversation over. Happy holidays!

Edited to adjust anger level grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 19th, 2008, 5:36pm

Lat....Not one single photo witness has been vetted. You have no idea who they are, where they are, or what their real names are. Get real, buddy!

Edited for grammar.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 19th, 2008, 6:03pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 1:52pm, DrStern wrote:
California Drones Mystery Solved By Sarah Connor Chronicles?
http://screenrant.com/sarah-connor-chronicles-california-drones-mystery-brusimm-4647/


I can remember all of the different viral campaign possibilities that were being discussed way back when. I tried to think of any way that one of the drones could ever be used for a movie or game or whatever. The only thing that I could think of, was the opening scene to the original Terminator movie! The war, with the craft flying overhead, would have been a perfect fit for the BB drone, carrying humans or something...

So when I saw the screen shots with the drones in them, I thought this had to be it! They basically showed an exact model of the Raj drone...

So, does this mean they scrapped a viral plan 5 full months before the writers even went on strike?
If so, they would have no problem in saying so, right?

But if that is what happened, wouldn't AW, Doritos and anyone else that used the drones and language be in legal trouble?

Just throwing some thoughts out there...

Tuna
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 19th, 2008, 6:23pm

Nah Newtothis.., not if it was therirs already. Aw not only trademarked some of the letters, but august 10 2007 laptops internals shows copyright on that design and letters in design of their screen saver which copied the designs exactly. Remember that these folx like warners,have already worked jointly on things like this before. It doesnt have to be necessarily Terminator, all that could have been taken care of before it even started. There will be no legal court battles. Or it would have been mounted against AW long ago. AW would never go against Warners, like the watchmen creators went againnst Warners for stealing their ideas.
No this is smart business right. Nothing really failed, slowed yes, but not failed.
Anyone take a tour of burbanks warners studio to see if the pole is there,?I did a google earth and in green areas I see similar lamps. I hear they shot that SCC right there also, and have a whole makeshift town.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 19th, 2008, 6:34pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 4:13pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
12. Why does good healthy debating without personal insult have to be referred to as "fighting" by Tomi lol?

I could go on and on. I ask questions, Doc, I ask good hard questions and then I look for answers. I don't always find them though!


I will answer #12. Please don't think I was refering to you here. TBH, I am most frustrated by the situation as a whole. And I'm trying to put the notion out that there must be healthy debate to keep the case healthy and our minds stretched to possibilities as much as possible.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 19th, 2008, 6:52pm

on Dec 19th, 2008, 6:03pm, newtothis wrote:
I can remember all of the different viral campaign possibilities that were being discussed way back when. I tried to think of any way that one of the drones could ever be used for a movie or game or whatever. The only thing that I could think of, was the opening scene to the original Terminator movie! The war, with the craft flying overhead, would have been a perfect fit for the BB drone, carrying humans or something...

So when I saw the screen shots with the drones in them, I thought this had to be it! They basically showed an exact model of the Raj drone...

So, does this mean they scrapped a viral plan 5 full months before the writers even went on strike?
If so, they would have no problem in saying so, right?

But if that is what happened, wouldn't AW, Doritos and anyone else that used the drones and language be in legal trouble?

Just throwing some thoughts out there...

Tuna


Hey Tuna,
Cheers for taking this topic up. I spent a long time mulling over Cameron and his cohorts. Lucas, Speilberg, and everyone on down the bell curve, this man has some endeavour with.

Just to get a flavor of the talent in his back pocket:
http://www.filmmakers.com/links/

See... when I pondered the work of these people, their vast resources and capabilities, I saw that "anything" was possible. It was the first time it really struck me that if this was an extravagant fantasy so executed to perfection that it can't be solved.. these people would and could do it.

Why? Not for the Sarah Connors chronicles I'm pretty sure.. Not for Terminator 4 either, but what about Avatair? Do you know about that? Well, nobody knows about it. It's still building in anticipation, but nobody has any insight into the movie plot that I can find at least.

What about all this drone business being partly true and partly protrayed by the talent of this eschelon?
It's possible..

What I realised looking deeply into this Camerons connections and resources is that it certainly is possible..

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 19th, 2008, 9:15pm

I wrote on Camerons Avatar some time ago, the premise being of natives being used as proxies in an underwater war. The main characters somehow inject their minds into the natives to do whatever. An artificial language was developed by a university professor, Fromm at UCLA which I was unable to find by hook or crook, to see if it bore any resemblance to the Isaac glyphs.
but it was done. They have systemmatically erased all past references to the project called then 880 , from clips, fan sites , websites etc.in the JJ abrams iron hand style.Shallayman also had a similarly named film , but changed it to Green Mist or something after a legal challenge.
Part of the film was done off Mexico on a giant oil platform, and thus my interest, as I wanted to find oil pigs, landing pads, etc. It is wrapped up very tight.
It will also redefine state of the art in movie making and CGI, as he Trained Steven Spielberg on equipment he designed (cameron) himself.
Your premise is sound as these people, with hundred million dollar films, or muli million dollar TV series, doing what was done is extremely simple, and they no doubt have a dedicated few still working the buzz..or softening up the audience sometimes 2 years in advance. Avatar is Due Dec 2009, so we should start hearing and seeing things soon.
The disclosure we so want, the feeling "something big" is coming, is just that , a big movie.
Quite plausible, , whether its Disney, Warners, Sony or others.
He is supposed to redo the old Forbidden Planet in 3d as well. I am looking foward to that one.
http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avatar_(film) make sure you get the whole link or you will be kicked to another Avatar topic.
in fact he also selectoded Ubisoft to produce an online game by the same name..like warcrafts online MMORG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avatar_%28video_game%29 Its how most of them do.
But Why us in these things,?
Dillinger a famous Bankrobber was asked why he robbed banks, and he responded.."cause thats where the money is"



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 20th, 2008, 06:16am

Now that it really sunk in after seeing the talent out there under that umbrella that surrounds Cameron, I realise that the GENIUS of this drone saga, which is true genius.. either real or not.. is possible.... coming from the minds of mere mortals.. But I'm still not convinced that it is just for a movie..

Avatar was being developed in 2006 I imagine.. That could tie it in somehow, but there is more to this whole thing... IMO

There is more.... it is pure Genius, that is why we are so entrenched in it, trying to figure it out, appreciating it and conflicted about it all at the same time.

Is it partly real, partly portrayed? What elements of truth about something alien could be part of this? All of it? Part of it?

My instincts tell me that there is more to this than just the movie, that there is something of human talent here possibly mixed up with pure alien genius .. or else Avatar is going to be one hell of a movie.. because the genius of the drone saga is unmatched in its intricate designs, pure raw creative genius ... etc.

Gotta be more to this.. just my instinct saying this now..
No.. more than instinct.. reasoning.. is telling me there is so much more.. I may be wrong.. but there is too much in this drone saga, in design, work, execution, etc.. just to be a build up to a movie 4 years forward..

Plus there is all the tie-ins to what comes from the history of our government working secretly, the history of sightings by people, the amount the government has expended itself in work and research.

There is something we don't understand, people see ufo's, the governments have researched them, there are stories unverified.. yet coming from all directions..

My reasoning won't let me just dismiss this as a viral for a movie.. it's too much just for a movie.. I'm thinking.

But kudo's to you ES/Sys, you hit on the Cameron Avatar possibility. Long way to go though before we figure this out. We should all be thankful for everyone, the DRT, the PI's, everyone throwing their 2 cents and more into figuring out this saga..

Sure we are going to knock heads about it.. It's Christmas time though and we should be thankful for everyone's work, dedication and allocation of resources to figure this out. We are blessed.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 20th, 2008, 07:18am

Hi Tomi smiley,

For what it's worth I've always been highly sceptical regarding all, ‘viral’ hypotheses. Even when the writers strike is taken into account I don’t believe that the Drones are related to SCC, I don’t discount that Cameron has enough talent in his stable to orchestrate the entire scenario as do many other companies, I just don’t think the Drones were ever intended to be -nor were perpetrated- as an advertising campaign.

I’ve said the same about Halo3, Transformers, Cloverfield etc. because as I say I don’t believe that a viral promotion was ever the intention.

I’m a little puzzled how you can still wax lyrical about the “genius” that is on display Tomi, when you say things like:

on Dec 20th, 2008, 06:16am, tomi01uk wrote:
I realise that the GENIUS of this drone saga, which is true genius.. either real or not.. is possible.... coming from the minds of mere mortals.. There is more.... it is pure Genius, that is why we are so entrenched in it, trying to figure it out, appreciating it and conflicted about it all at the same time.

To what specifically are you referring?

Apart from the obvious skill involved in compositing a CGI object into a background image (of course supposing that it is all a CGI hoax) then to what, ‘genius’ do you refer?

Mere mortals”?

Do you not think its just second-rate sci-fi?

If there is anything significant about the event then it’s the people discussing, debating, investigating & researching the Drones that have elevated the debacle to this higher status, (the same people who are as you say still, “entrenched” in it) as undoubtedly the standard of research has been incredibly high from all involved.

But to still claim it as ‘genius’ is just a little naive, isn't it?

Cheers. smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 20th, 2008, 08:13am

There’s something I’ve been meaning to mention for a while now and it’s regarding the possibilities of Chad being vindicated from spinning his web of deceit by the fact that he didn’t live where the images were captured, as 11Aug was quick to point out when I didn’t include his conjecture when I quoted him here. Prompting 11 to write:

on Nov 23rd, 2008, 4:05pm, elevenaugust wrote:
Hi DrDil,

It seems like that you forgot to quote my full post on OMF, so just to be fair....

User Image

Well on March 25, 2008 Linda Moulton-Howe sent James Carrion an email stating that she had Chad’s full name and also that in a further and unpublished email Chad had wrote that:

Quote:
“His pregnant wife was so upset he was concerned about her health and they were leaving their house to stay with relatives.”

Coupled with Chad’s OWN words:

Quote:
  • Then we tried again the next day, and we found it within like 30 minutes and followed it for a while.
  • Most of the time I see it out of windows in my house, in the distance. but I would say almost half of the hikes
  • I have gone on in my area, I have seen it very close.
  • It is very easy to photograph
  • Many neighbors aside from my friend have also seen it.

All of which suggests that it was for a FACT Chad's house, unless he's lying. Which (either way) also means that he lied about quite a bit (if not all) of his encounter/s with the Drone.

So I guess that takes us full circle back to my original question:

on Nov 23rd, 2008, 3:51pm, DrDil wrote:
<snip>
Seems as if Chad is a pathological liar who tricked Linda as I feel it’s highly unlikely that Chad gave Linda his real name when he obviously lied to her repeatedly about his location….

So relying JUST on the evidence what makes you believe Chad didn’t lie abut everything?

Cheers smiley.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 20th, 2008, 11:03am

Quote:
“His pregnant wife was so upset he was concerned about her health and they were leaving their house to stay with relatives.”


Which means Chad could have been staying with relatives when he said he was near Bakersfield.

The only fact here is that you don't know what Chad said to Linda so all of your speculation (and accusations) is moot.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 20th, 2008, 12:09pm

on Dec 20th, 2008, 11:03am, Latitude wrote:
Which means Chad could have been staying with relatives when he said he was near Bakersfield.

The only fact here is that you don't know what Chad said to Linda so all of your speculation (and accusations) is moot.


Hi Lat,

A little tetchy today?
(Bah Humbug!! laugh)

I was merely stating what LMH actually wrote, sure Chad could have been staying with relatives just as easily as Chad could have created every Drone & the Isaac documents or Chad could be a figment of LMH’s imagination as I fail to see what any of them has to do with what I wrote.

And if my repeating what LMH has wrote is -as you claim- an ‘accusation’ then I can see any further discussion with you is pointless…..

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by murnut on Dec 20th, 2008, 12:53pm

on Dec 20th, 2008, 12:09pm, DrDil wrote:
]then I can see any further discussion with you is pointless…..



You're just realizing thishuh?? wink

Murray Christmas all
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 20th, 2008, 1:24pm

on Dec 20th, 2008, 12:09pm, DrDil wrote:
Hi Lat,

A little tetchy today?
(Bah Humbug!! laugh)

I was merely stating what LMH actually wrote, sure Chad could have been staying with relatives just as easily as Chad could have created every Drone & the Isaac documents or Chad could be a figment of LMH’s imagination as I fail to see what any of them has to do with what I wrote.

And if my repeating what LMH has wrote is -as you claim- an ‘accusation’ then I can see any further discussion with you is pointless…..


The accusation I was referring to is the one you made that Chad is a pathological liar. Who knows for sure? Chad may have told a lie somewhere in his writings and correspondence but nobody at this point can state for a fact what was a lie. Also, just because he may have not been completely forthcoming about everything (especially that which may identify him, his family or his location) does not in any way render his entire account false.

I am merely trying to set the record straight and put it all into proper perspective. Because I don't agree with you about everything does not make me tetchy or a humbug.



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 20th, 2008, 2:14pm

on Dec 20th, 2008, 12:53pm, murnut wrote:
You're just realizing this?? wink

Murray Christmas all

Not really Mur, (just living in denial I guess…. undecided)

Merry Murray Christmas to you as well!! grin

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 20th, 2008, 2:20pm

Hmmmmm... rolleyes ok.. well.. so much for Peace & Good Will, among men and their drones.. tongue

DrDil, I guess I'm not too naive because I anticipated that question coming from you all day cheesy

What makes this genius?? We have had this discussion so many times in different ways out on the boards by just about everyone with a strong opinion about it.
That alone makes it genius.

It's hard to convey... why do I think this is genius. I'm first inhibited because I really don't expect anyone to read line after line of my musings about the drones..
We've all heard it before... ad nausium.. that alone makes it genius..

The fact we are all still here 1.6 years later looking with disbelief at either each other or this saga.. makes it genius..

I've spent my life appreicating art. Parents were artists. I've spent inordinate amounts of time looking at filigree, ornamental designs, architecture, anything that is related to art. Most of my closest friends are artists.
So from a design standpoint, I have to agree with Syd Mead, the LAP is genius ... Am I off the hook now?

Not yet?.. ok... Well, lets just assume then for the sake of argument that these are "phoney".

The creator of the LAP even figured in the ratio aspect .. so estimation of actual size would become a part of research after release to the public.

It is just too perfect. And where there might be cracks, there is always wiggle room sufficient enough to give cause for doubt or contention..

Now I haven't even touched yet on the drones.. Can you imagine in your mind a more counter intuitive aerodynamic design?? Leonardo Di Vinci on acid might.. but he was a genius.. wasn't he.. ? I rest my case..
based mainly on subjective perception of course kiss


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 20th, 2008, 4:01pm

on Dec 20th, 2008, 2:20pm, tomi01uk wrote:
DrDil, I guess I'm not too naive because I anticipated that question coming from you all day cheesy

Oh, I don’t know about that, I knew you were expecting it when I seen you editing your original post to include such examples and so I thought I’d give you a hand by just asking you outright, so you tell me….. Naïve? User Image

on Dec 20th, 2008, 2:20pm, tomi01uk wrote:
What makes this genius?? We have had this discussion so many times in different ways out on the boards by just about everyone with a strong opinion about it.
That alone makes it genius.

It's hard to convey... why do I think this is genius. I'm first inhibited because I really don't expect anyone to read line after line of my musings about the drones..
We've all heard it before... ad nausium.. that alone makes it genius..

Oh I agree 100%!! But that’s why I wrote:

on Dec 20th, 2008, 07:18am, DrDil wrote:
If there is anything significant about the event then it’s the people discussing, debating, investigating & researching the Drones that have elevated the debacle to this higher status, (the same people who are as you say still, “entrenched” in it) as undoubtedly the standard of research has been incredibly high from all involved.

And I assure you that I meant it sincerely and I find this aspect of it a great deal more interesting than possible propulsion/cloaking systems etc. etc.

on Dec 20th, 2008, 2:20pm, tomi01uk wrote:
The fact we are all still here 1.6 years later looking with disbelief at either each other or this saga.. makes it genius..

I sort of agree but while I may be looking with ‘disbelief’ it’s not at the Drones or their aesthetics sweetheart!! User Image

on Dec 20th, 2008, 2:20pm, tomi01uk wrote:
Now I haven't even touched yet on the drones.. Can you imagine in your mind a more counter intuitive aerodynamic design?? Leonardo Di Vinci on acid might.. but he was a genius.. wasn't he.. ? I rest my case..
based mainly on subjective perception of course kiss

I can think of literally thousands!! Off the top of my head, hmm, how about a brick? That’s about as ‘counter intuitive’ an aerodynamic design as there is. Unless you’re implying that the Drones were an aerodynamic design and if so you’ll have to (again!!) enlighten me with your pearls of wisdom as I’m not sure what part of the Drones you believe are of an ‘aerodynamic design’?

However, if you’d prefer to not cast said pearls before swine then I understand completely….. wink

Lastly, regarding “subjective perception.”

Well, isn’t ALL perception subjective? (By definition if nothing else?)

If the opportunity should present itself then I heartily recommend trying the objective approach, I appreciate it may be a little outdated for your tastes but what can it hurt?

Hell, you may even see the *light* ….. kiss

I sincerely wish you & yours a Merry Christmas,
And all the best Tomi!!
Cheers. smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TheShadow on Dec 20th, 2008, 4:11pm

Hey all,
Long time no drone! Just wanted to pop in and wish all Happy Holidays (yes even you Lat/Numbers)........or is that Murrey Christmas??

Take care Shads
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 20th, 2008, 4:20pm

on Dec 20th, 2008, 4:11pm, TheShadow wrote:
Hey all,
Long time no drone! Just wanted to pop in and wish all Happy Holidays (yes even you Lat/Numbers)........or is that Murrey Christmas??

Take care Shads

grin Cheers Shads and right back at ya’.
It’s good to see you posting somewhere, (anywhere!!)

All the best & Happy Holidays.
Cheers.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 20th, 2008, 4:50pm

on Dec 20th, 2008, 2:20pm, tomi01uk wrote:
Now I haven't even touched yet on the drones.. Can you imagine in your mind a more counter intuitive aerodynamic design?? Leonardo Di Vinci on acid might.. but he was a genius.. wasn't he.. ?


Have you ever seen a satellite before?
http://images.google.com/images?ndsp=20&um=1&hl=en&rlz=1W1GGLL_en&q=satellites&start=0&sa=N

The drones resemble quite a few satellites that exist. I saw one long ago on some show that looked exactly like a drone, except with a sold torus. I can't remember the exact name but I think it was an old satellite sent to Saturn, or and early Mars satellite. Ill have to find it...

Anyway, if you want to see GENIUS. Look at a satellite. Now imagine all the engineering that went into it. Now image the electrical wiring schematics of it, and how the genius and complexity dwarfs anything found in the LAP. The LAP may look complex and genius to YOU, or others, but that's probably because you aren't around many things that are more complex than it.

There is ABSOLUTLY NOTHING special about the drones. All of this is a giant waste of our time. Time we will never get back in our life, and it is a very horrible joke that will end with people being very sad.

Big wow, it "expanded your mind" a little, you can do that with any sci-fi movie, or heck even better, you can expand your mind on things that actually exist instead. Truth is stranger than fiction, and the fictional drones are actually dulling my reality. Ive seen more complex things in kids cartoons...




Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 20th, 2008, 5:58pm

on Dec 20th, 2008, 4:11pm, TheShadow wrote:
Hey all,
Long time no drone! Just wanted to pop in and wish all Happy Holidays (yes even you Lat/Numbers)........or is that Murrey Christmas??

Take care Shads

Shads you rascal how are ye ..you know I alays keep thinking about that area 51 incident, have nightmares about it actually..where have you been?
Speaking of chad, I really think he likes lambchops, with that restaurant and all. Did the PIs find lambchop bones along the trail? Maybe if we offer him a reward like a free Dinner for 2 at that Deer creek restaurant he might come foward.
Like the owner said of his food, woo hoo...it might work ..Even Geniuses, hoaxters, and iddiots like to eat.smiley

@Marvin , my sister read what you said and she was quite disturbed, as I am the ugliest member of my family, I admit that, no shame.no dishonor...I am used to it..
but you spoiled it for Never..11 11 ..
Think of all the grooming they missed to get to know each other..tragic..
User Image

sad

and finally lets not let a hoaxter or even real et , for that matter, steal our christmas.
They are probably somewhere roasting chestnuts on an open fire , and drinking spiked eggnog enjoying theirs.
User Image
good night




Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 20th, 2008, 6:49pm

on Dec 20th, 2008, 4:01pm, DrDil wrote:
Oh, I don’t know about that, I knew you were expecting it when I seen you editing your original post to include such examples and so I thought I’d give you a hand by just asking you outright, so you tell me….. Naïve? User ImageCheers. smiley


Ahh ! Now DrDil... don't be naive.. I rarely (sad to say) change my words enough, its my spelling I'm going after wink kiss

Actually, I think I was editing in the mushy bits about everyone, and forgot to mention readers music and art.. !

You and yours have a lovely Christmas too.
Wishing everyone a Happy and Prosperous 2009.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 20th, 2008, 7:04pm

on Dec 20th, 2008, 5:58pm, TeachersPet wrote:
@Marvin , my sister read what you said and she was quite disturbed, as I am the ugliest member of my family, I admit that, no shame.no dishonor...I am used to it..
but you spoiled it for Never..11 11 ..
Think of all the grooming they missed to get to know each other..tragic..
User Image




Give my apologies to your sister.

She's hot! (I will get my glasses later).


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 21st, 2008, 03:19am

on Dec 20th, 2008, 4:11pm, TheShadow wrote:
Hey all,
Long time no drone! Just wanted to pop in and wish all Happy Holidays (yes even you Lat/Numbers)........or is that Murrey Christmas??

Take care Shads


Welcome back!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 21st, 2008, 03:29am

on Dec 20th, 2008, 4:50pm, neveleeleven wrote:
There is ABSOLUTLY NOTHING special about the drones.


You can't be serious! Why do you spend time discussing the drones if they are insignificant? Even the most die hard hoax campers are STILL hounding these forums and doing searches for anything DRONE! Nothing special?

Tuna
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 21st, 2008, 03:36am

on Dec 20th, 2008, 4:11pm, TheShadow wrote:
Hey all,
Long time no drone! Just wanted to pop in and wish all Happy Holidays (yes even you Lat/Numbers)........or is that Murrey Christmas??

Take care Shads


Hey there, I'm obviously curious about your thoughts on the drones now... SCC viral? Big dogs stealing from small dog ideas? Have you been to Turkey? Please tell!! smiley

Tuna
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 21st, 2008, 07:41am

on Dec 21st, 2008, 03:29am, newtothis wrote:
You can't be serious! Why do you spend time discussing the drones if they are insignificant? Even the most die hard hoax campers are STILL hounding these forums and doing searches for anything DRONE! Nothing special?

Tuna


Believe it or not, I am helping to protect 'ufology'. I am also being nice and I am softening the fall for the believers of the drone.

If it wasn't for people like myself debating about the reality of these drones, there would probably be multiple cults forming, and worshiping these drones, and starting another Heavens Gate.

If people like myself just sit back, and ignore this debate, then all of the "drone reality" b.s. will flood the internet. Then people will start getting conned into believing they are real, and they will probably end up wasting 1000's of dollars on something that is fake. Probably spend money on P.I.'s , professional photo analysis, maybe some reward for finding a certain object. All that money adds up. And there is probably quite a few people who are in that position.

I am trying to prevent people from doing that in the future, regarding this drone.




Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 21st, 2008, 08:45am

on Dec 20th, 2008, 4:01pm, DrDil wrote:
I sort of agree but while I may be looking with ‘disbelief’ it’s not at the Drones or their aesthetics sweetheart!! User Image


Classic!

I think that line from DrDil just about sums up why any of us "non drone believers" involve ourselves in this endless circle of debate. It is not because of the extraordinary details of such a complete and documented sighting. It is not because the case seems grounded in reality. It is not because we find the drones captivating....it is because of how some not only took the bait hook, line and sinker but that they also swallowed the pole, tipped the boat, and continue to tread water hoping the drone case will throw them a life jacket. grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 21st, 2008, 09:27am

on Dec 21st, 2008, 07:41am, neveleeleven wrote:
Believe it or not, I am helping to protect 'ufology'. I am also being nice and I am softening the fall for the believers of the drone.

If it wasn't for people like myself debating about the reality of these drones, there would probably be multiple cults forming, and worshiping these drones, and starting another Heavens Gate.

If people like myself just sit back, and ignore this debate, then all of the "drone reality" b.s. will flood the internet. Then people will start getting conned into believing they are real, and they will probably end up wasting 1000's of dollars on something that is fake. Probably spend money on P.I.'s , professional photo analysis, maybe some reward for finding a certain object. All that money adds up. And there is probably quite a few people who are in that position.

I am trying to prevent people from doing that in the future, regarding this drone.


Very interesting reply. Will surely be useful.....At least for know how debunkers think....
grin
You know NOTHING about our investigations (pro-real or pro-hoax) and label us as "Hard-believers", which is not true.
Moreover, things are not always "all white" or "all black" (Manichaeism vision), there are multiple intermediate levels between these two extreme situations....
Here's how it work with the drone investigations actually and that makes the difference between you and me.....:

User Image

A REAL Ufologic investigation must consider all aspect of an event, even the most extraordinary

The very interesting question would be, as pointed out by Tuna,
Quote:
Why do you spend time discussing the drones if they are insignificant? Even the most die hard hoax campers are STILL hounding these forums and doing searches for anything DRONE!

I would just add... Why do you really spend time....

Merry Christmas all and see ya later!!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by murnut on Dec 21st, 2008, 09:32am

on Dec 21st, 2008, 09:27am, elevenaugust wrote:
Very interesting reply. Will surely be useful.....At least for know how debunkers think....
grin
You know NOTHING about our investigations (pro-real or pro-hoax) and label us as "Hard-believers", which is not true.
Moreover, things are not always "all white" or "all black" (Manichaeism vision), there are multiple intermediate levels between these two extreme situations....
Here's how it work with the drone investigations actually and that makes the difference between you and me.....:

User Image

A REAL Ufologic investigation must consider all aspect of an event, even the most extraordinary

The very interesting question would be, as pointed out by Tuna,

I would just add... Why do you really spend time....

Merry Christmas all and see ya later!!




This DRT forum was created for the discussion of the reality of the drones. Other forums exist for hoax discussion.


Nice try eleven
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 21st, 2008, 10:02am

My bad, thank you for correcting me.

User Image

Nice try, Mur.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by murnut on Dec 21st, 2008, 10:14am

on Dec 21st, 2008, 09:27am, elevenaugust wrote:
You know NOTHING about our investigations (pro-real or pro-hoax) and label us as "Hard-believers", which is not true.



So we do know that there are NO pro hoax investigations.....right?

Is that fair to say?

Any leads that suggest hoax are not followed up by the drt?

I believe I know your answer.....but for the sake of clarity, would you indulge me an answer? ( speaking for yourself and not the drt)
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 21st, 2008, 10:41am

Feel free to make your own deductions or conclusions; all I have to said was in my previous post.

Now back to work.

Cheers!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 21st, 2008, 10:43am

on Dec 21st, 2008, 09:27am, elevenaugust wrote:
Very interesting reply. Will surely be useful.....At least for know how debunkers think....
grin
You know NOTHING about our investigations (pro-real or pro-hoax) and label us as "Hard-believers", which is not true.
Moreover, things are not always "all white" or "all black" (Manichaeism vision), there are multiple intermediate levels between these two extreme situations....

While I appreciate what you’re saying 11 it does seem to directly contradict what we ALL know from personal experience with the DRT as an entity.

I think your ‘Manichaeism vision” metaphor may be a little off-kilter regarding the context you present it in. But considering the current situation then indeed is perhaps more relevant than you initially thought when (mis)applying the term as it isn’t quite as simple as “black & white” and is much more ideologically grounded than that.

It seems as if you’re criticising the work being done by all those who believe the Drones are a hoax, even stranger is the fact that you post snide comments at the DRT forum which label this forum as, “The hoax believer forum” which admittedly is an improvement as at least you now call us *THE* hoax believers rather than *A* hoax believers forum. grin

So…..

YOU are over at the DRT posting aspersions about this forum.
YOU believe we look at nothing except proof of hoax.
YOU come over here to this forum to further continue your attack.
YOU go to the trouble of creating a highly speculative graph to further this attack.
YOUR forum prevents any of us having a ‘right to reply’.
YOUR forum pre-emptively bans specific (opposing) persons IP addresses.
YOUR forum prevents the voice of opposing opinions being heard.
YOUR forum censors free speech.
YOUR forum tries to even stop us reading it.

etc. etc. ad infinitum..... laugh

So regarding “Manichaeism” then it seems as if it’s quite appropriate to describe your actions and intent as surely YOURS is the dualistic philosophy which seeks to suspiciously divide the community with a definite line of belief, serving as a reducer or more accurately as confinement lest the divide between *us & them* become blurred by friendship…..

In short then I guess personally I would perhaps ascribe the word, “Machiavellian” as infinitely more appropriate and ultimately more descriptive to better define your actions of late.

All the best!!
Cheers. smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TheShadow on Dec 21st, 2008, 10:44am

on Dec 21st, 2008, 03:36am, newtothis wrote:
Hey there, I'm obviously curious about your thoughts on the drones now... SCC viral? Big dogs stealing from small dog ideas? Have you been to Turkey? Please tell!! smiley

Tuna


Hey Tuna,
To be honest the drone hoax has become boring and tedious to me. I am as convinced today as I was when i first read Chads ridiculous letter so long ago that this is a hoax....perhaps viral marketing gone bad, perhaps some talented CGI artist having a chuckle at the UFO communities expense, perhaps a test from the PtB.....none of it matters as drones only exist in ones imagination!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by murnut on Dec 21st, 2008, 10:46am

Oh....you are too smart for me and realized where I was going.....


on Dec 21st, 2008, 09:27am, elevenaugust wrote:
A REAL Ufologic investigation must consider all aspect of an event, even the most extraordinary




Since the drt does NOT consider all the possibilities, it must not be a real investigation.

Thanks for playing wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 21st, 2008, 11:03am

on Dec 21st, 2008, 09:27am, elevenaugust wrote:
You know NOTHING about our investigations (pro-real or pro-hoax) and label us as "Hard-believers", which is not true.


elevenaugust, to tell you the truth, I really don't give a crap about you, or your "investigation".

Actually, I don't even remember mentioning your name, or "DRT". It seems you have lumped yourself into the "hard believers" category all on your own. I actually don't remember saying anything about "hard believers".

on Dec 21st, 2008, 09:27am, elevenaugust wrote:
Here's how it work with the drone investigations actually and that makes the difference between you and me.....


The difference between you and me, is that I am not stupid enough to actually believe these CGI renders are real.

The graph you need to be worried about is this one:
User Image
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 21st, 2008, 2:22pm

on Dec 21st, 2008, 11:03am, neveleeleven wrote:
elevenaugust, to tell you the truth, I really don't give a crap about you, or your "investigation".

The difference between you and me, is that I am not stupid enough to actually believe these CGI renders are real.


It's inflammatory and derogatory posts like this that explains why you are the only debunker ever to be thrown off of ATS.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by murnut on Dec 21st, 2008, 2:32pm

on Dec 21st, 2008, 2:22pm, Latitude wrote:
It's inflammatory and derogatory posts like this that explains why you are the only debunker ever to be thrown off of ATS.



I hate to agree with Lat, but he is right that it was over the top...little bit.

But I also must protest the use of the word "debunker" by Lat...it is inflammatory and derogatory
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 21st, 2008, 2:51pm

Hahahaha , Nice response to the facts,What a joke .
If the shoe fits wear it I say.,what you just said., and 1111 was allowed back in after
showing Springer his case, and allowed to go on with the forum, succesfully, and going on to finish smoking the rest of the tuna at omf., and has high standing at ATS.look who is talking about banned, you were banned for being caught in a lie by Jake and Jeddyhi ie, an incorrigible liar , that is precious. What don't you tell us your version of what happened at Area 51 with that family member, you told Shads, we know, but lets hear it from YOU.
who knows, maybe the PTB are really after YOU and did the hoax just for YOU. After all, you must know something we all don't to ignor the obvious.
Its possible, you know, the PTB have been known to take whole planes down to get at one person,Ask Bill.
If you let it out now, maybe we can guarantee and arrange some kind protection for you and maybe even Linda., and what the heck, the DRT can protect you too.
That would be something!
It might even lead to disclosure!



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 21st, 2008, 3:02pm

I forgot. We can't say the D word. But let's call a spade a spade. No need to sugar coat it. Search his posts on all forums. When has he once posted in favor of being open minded to a sighting or eyewitness account? These types only frequent these forums for one purpose. It's one that takes great pleasure in debunking and ridicule. You can easily tell who they are. Those are the ones that always end up on the contrary point of view.

Not to blow my own horn but I have been on both sides and only for one purpose, to seek the truth while keeping an open mind.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 21st, 2008, 3:12pm

on Dec 21st, 2008, 2:51pm, TeachersPet wrote:
look who is talking about banned, you were banned for being caught in a lie by Jake and Jeddyhi ie, an incorrigible liar


This is a lie and you should know it. First, I was not banned from OMF. I was incorrectly and unfairly suspended for two weeks by Jake. Jed had nothing to do with it and you can ask him yourself. It's not my fault Jake has a funny way of misunderstanding things. That quirk also got the hell beat out of him when he could not understand why his neighbor was mad at him for smoking his apartment out. It was hilarious as he recounted the event when he tried to tell the guy "I don't smoke" while standing there next to his barbecue. grin




Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 21st, 2008, 3:15pm

11 11 may not be a candidate for a Shirley Temple award, the fact is, attitudes aside, narrow and open mnds sides aside, his analysis stands..Hoax!
Yes you are misunderstood, no need to explain,..Yes hilarious Jake getting the crap beat out of him, he.s' laughing too, hilarious, just tell us what happened with Shad. Did he misunderstand you too?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Radi on Dec 21st, 2008, 3:39pm

on Dec 21st, 2008, 2:32pm, murnut wrote:
I hate to agree with Lat, but he is right that it was over the top...little bit.

But I also must protest the use of the word "debunker" by Lat...it is inflammatory and derogatory


I also protest using that word Truth-Seeker is more the word in the drones case...We can easily call the other side Probunker.... wink smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 21st, 2008, 3:57pm

11 11 may not be a candidate for a Shirley Temple award, the fact is, attitudes aside, narrow and open mnds sides aside, his analysis stands..Hoax!
Yes you are misunderstood, no need to explain,..Yes hilarious Jake getting the crap beat out of him, he.s' laughing too, hilarious, just tell us what happened with Shad. Did he misunderstand you too?
The question stands unanswered. I don't want us to get sidetracked and the mods here have been very fair, if not, exemplary,
I don't believe they will misunderstand whats going on and the answers.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TheShadow on Dec 21st, 2008, 5:36pm

Damn it man....every time i try to get out they pull me back in........the drone mafia! LOL

Lat.....nice to see you are your old defensive self........since you live so close to where Chad spotted his drone and are practically neighbors with the PIs please do enlighten us all on what (if any) proof you have that the drones are real?? Lets see some evidence please.
To all forgive me if this is "old hat" but i have been drone free for a while and have not had the pleasure of hearing a DRT sidestep serious questions in quite a while!

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 21st, 2008, 5:43pm

Hi shads, glad you are with us!Yes we are on pins and needles, waiting for that answer, and as for me saying a lie about tha ban by jake, another distortion, Jake suspended his account indefinitely, with right of appeal in two weeks, that is very different than a 3 day ban or 2 week ban, that drops off automatically. Again a twisting of words to avoid facts.
User Image
I will even overlook that insult to me, as long as he answers our questions.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by LoneGunMan on Dec 21st, 2008, 5:54pm

This was one very well planned, Expertly crafted, Exactingly executed, Well produced "HOAX"!!

The craft, if it was a craft ( No it wasn't ) has not been seen or photographed since the announcement and no one seems to have any idea who the true perpetrators of the reports actualy are. Ms. Linda seems to have conflicting reports about the origins and no one wants to come forward with anything more in the way of evidense from the originators. You can disect and extrapolate and run experiments on the photos but all you are realy doing is furthering the laughter of those that have given you nearly 9 months of run around!

If any new photos or sighting are forthcomming ,I might change my mind but I doubt it. You've all been hoaxed and its time to move on to much better investigations of newer, more sound reports.

Lone

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Dec 21st, 2008, 6:29pm

1. This thread is about drones. It would be nice if you discussed all irrelevant issues under different subforum, perhaps "General". Too bad moderators don't point this out.

2. Debunkers: please make up your mind. Is it CGI or cut-and-paste?

3. If you've figured it out to be a hoax, there's no need for any further investigation or debating. You've stated your conclusions, nothing else needed.

IMHO

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by murnut on Dec 21st, 2008, 6:35pm

on Dec 21st, 2008, 6:29pm, ABCStore wrote:
1. This thread is about drones. It would be nice if you discussed all irrelevant issues under different subforum, perhaps "General". Too bad moderators don't point this out.

2. Debunkers: please make up your mind. Is it CGI or cut-and-paste?

3. If you've figured it out to be a hoax, there's no need for any further investigation or debating. You've stated your conclusions, nothing else needed.

IMHO

ABC


The Drone Truthers will have finished when the hoaxers are identified.

Fair enough?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 21st, 2008, 8:34pm

Thank you Mur,
I never thought that part would be such a hard concept to grasp, searching for the proximate cause, and the thread is called Global search for truth, and I believe our questions can now proceed in that direction such as mine and Shads..
Hoaxters and facillitators and their associations, are very relevant to the discussion. This one started online, and the hoaxters, are no doubt, still online with us.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 21st, 2008, 8:44pm

on Dec 21st, 2008, 6:29pm, ABCStore wrote:
1. This thread is about drones. It would be nice if you discussed all irrelevant issues under different subforum, perhaps "General". Too bad moderators don't point this out.

2. Debunkers: please make up your mind. Is it CGI or cut-and-paste?

3. If you've figured it out to be a hoax, there's no need for any further investigation or debating. You've stated your conclusions, nothing else needed.

IMHO

ABC


Except maybe trying to enlighten those that still give this case the time of day. By believing in the bull crap and defending it, they are promoting the hoax. They are extending the shelf life of this hoax way past the expiration date.

You would think that without vetted witnesses and documentation, that the average professional investigator would be obliged to can this drone case until more conclusive proof arises that points to a real event. By taking the stance that the drone case is real as based on the current evidence at hand, they are enabling a hoax to continue.

If the DRT would raise their standard of what is probable and acceptable as evidence of a real event, this hoax would have disappeared long ago, like the photo witnesses themselves.

So I personally believe that the DRT's involvement in this case, along with the pro real stance they have displayed during said involvement, has helped the hoax to succeed . Unwittingly? Maybe. Maybe not.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TheShadow on Dec 21st, 2008, 9:07pm

on Dec 21st, 2008, 8:44pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
.... the DRT's involvement in this case, along with the pro real stance they have displayed during said involvement, has helped the hoax to succeed . Unwittingly? Maybe. Maybe not.


To some in the DRT i believe it was an unwitting acceptance.....but others in the DRT I am positive know the truth and yet still work to advance the hoax.......and at least one member of that organization IMO has been extremely involved from day one....... perhaps not the mastermind.......but an accomplice that very likely knows that area very well!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 21st, 2008, 9:09pm

Next thing we know you guys will be calling us "grasshopper"

cheesy
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 21st, 2008, 9:15pm

on Dec 21st, 2008, 9:07pm, TheShadow wrote:
To some in the DRT i believe it was an unwitting acceptance.....but others in the DRT I am positive know the truth and yet still work to advance the hoax.......and at least one member of that organization IMO has been extremely involved from day one....... perhaps not the mastermind.......but an accomplice that very likely knows that area very well!


What "conspiracy story" are you dreaming up? Seriously.. the road to "enlightenment" about drones is a individual path. When we get to nirvana it will only come when we all have the answers we are looking for... And believe it or not, we are all looking for the same answers. What's it all about .. Alfie.. lol it's late and I'm feeling silly here. forgive the rant.. smiley


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 21st, 2008, 9:25pm

on Dec 21st, 2008, 3:57pm, TeachersPet wrote:
11 11 may not be a candidate for a Shirley Temple award, the fact is, attitudes aside, narrow and open mnds sides aside, his analysis stands..Hoax!
Yes you are misunderstood, no need to explain,..Yes hilarious Jake getting the crap beat out of him, he.s' laughing too, hilarious, just tell us what happened with Shad. Did he misunderstand you too?
The question stands unanswered. I don't want us to get sidetracked and the mods here have been very fair, if not, exemplary,
I don't believe they will misunderstand whats going on and the answers.

some are not after the same thing, unfortunatelyl lets get some answers and see where they lead us.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 21st, 2008, 9:37pm

on Dec 21st, 2008, 9:15pm, tomi01uk wrote:
What "conspiracy story" are you dreaming up? Seriously.. the road to "enlightenment" about drones is a individual path. When we get to nirvana it will only come when we all have the answers we are looking for... And believe it or not, we are all looking for the same answers. What's it all about .. Alfie.. lol it's late and I'm feeling silly here. forgive the rant.. smiley



It doesn't bother you that during your quest for nirvana that you could be the driving force behind a hoax. By believing in the drones and attempting to refute all claims of hoax, the DRT keeps the drone hoax going.

Given that 99.5% of Ufology and most, if not all, forum boards have had the sense to call a duck a duck, why does the DRT insist on preserving the drone case?

If we all had wrote the case off as a hoax, that would have at least triggered the hoaxers into releasing more material. But by glorifying the drones, the hoaxers only need log on to the internet and watch their baby being raised by the DRT.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 21st, 2008, 10:03pm

And like Lev, willing to lie and mislead for it Jeddyhi
I forgot to include our colleague, the last Rajman location, and Webmaster for PI between the dots. Makes a nice hero sandwhich doesn't it.

We need answers

User Image
Marvin: Note: the trees in question are visible behind 11A (the handsome Frenchmen on the left).


Aug 21, 2008, 3:05pm, sqt wrote:


Remember, they had initially told us that the area where Chad took the pictures was "risky" and "scary" and full of marijuana growers where no one would go to take fake UFO pictures. Yet it turns out it's right behind a restaurant with a nice view just by a busy highway. Now an obviously paved path has become a "private dirty road." rolleyes

We need answers

User Image

Yes we really do..
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TheShadow on Dec 21st, 2008, 10:50pm

on Dec 21st, 2008, 9:15pm, tomi01uk wrote:
What "conspiracy story" are you dreaming up?


No conspiracy Tomi, just a little thing called common sense and an understanding of human nature. Two things the DRT obviously do not understand. Someone involved in this hoax is involved in keeping it alive..... that person mysteriously joined all the forums the drones are discussed at just before the arrival of the Chad sighting and of course gets extremely defensive when ever someone doubts the validity of the drones.

Another quite damning point is that of 28 plus witnesses none have reported this odd manacing machine to anyone but the queen of disinfo herself or come out of hiding to enlighten the masses as to what they've seen.


I know Old points....but since you are one of the very few that have drank the drone kool-aid and still believes this nonsense i thought perhaps you may need a refresher course!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 21st, 2008, 10:53pm

on Dec 21st, 2008, 9:37pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
It doesn't bother you that during your quest for nirvana that you could be the driving force behind a hoax.


No you will never guilt trip me into feeling responsible for perpetuating a hoax because of investigating it.
Are you in ARC? wink

Quote:
By believing in the drones and attempting to refute all claims of hoax, the DRT keeps the drone hoax going.



To each his own in the DRT I always say. Some believe, some are on the fence. I wait for what the PI's and investigation turns up. I think theres a deeper situation here to be discovered than just giving it a "hoax" label and calling it a day.

Quote:
If we all had wrote the case off as a hoax, that would have at least triggered the hoaxers into releasing more material. But by glorifying the drones, the hoaxers only need log on to the internet and watch their baby being raised by the DRT.


Yeah, but having both ends of the spectrum available and debate in the middle is important till this case is solved. It's natural, when has it never been this way on subjects being researched?

Never try to fix a watch that is keeping time.. smiley

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TheShadow on Dec 21st, 2008, 10:56pm

on Dec 21st, 2008, 10:53pm, tomi01uk wrote:
I wait for what the PI's and investigation turns up. I think theres a deeper situation here to be discovered than just giving it a "hoax" label and calling it a day.



And how many hours have the PIs billed on the drone case? Have they uncovered ANYTHING verifiable?
How about releasing some of the info the DRT has collected rather than work in secrecy to further your own twisted beliefs?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by murnut on Dec 21st, 2008, 11:01pm

on Dec 21st, 2008, 10:56pm, TheShadow wrote:
And how many hours have the PIs billed on the drone case? Have they uncovered ANYTHING verifiable?
How about releasing some of the info the DRT has collected rather than work in secrecy to further your own twisted beliefs?


And who exactly is paying the Pi's?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 21st, 2008, 11:54pm

on Dec 21st, 2008, 2:51pm, TeachersPet wrote:
look who is talking about banned


LOL, can I quote you and say "look who is talking about banned"? rolleyes

You are the last person that can cast stones!

Tuna
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 21st, 2008, 11:57pm

on Dec 21st, 2008, 10:56pm, TheShadow wrote:
And how many hours have the PIs billed on the drone case?


And you care why? You already know it's a hoax, why bother?

Tuna
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 21st, 2008, 11:59pm

on Dec 21st, 2008, 11:01pm, murnut wrote:
And who exactly is paying the Pi's?


Mur, An honest question, why does it matter? Do you think the fund providers are the hoaxers?

Tuna
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:02am

on Dec 21st, 2008, 10:03pm, TeachersPet wrote:
Remember, they had initially told us that the area where Chad took the pictures was "risky" and "scary" and full of marijuana growers where no one would go to take fake UFO pictures. Yet it turns out it's right behind a restaurant with a nice view just by a busy highway. Now an obviously paved path has become a "private dirty road." rolleyes

We need answers.


Since you live nearby, I surmise you have investigated the situation fully, right?

Tuna
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:02am

I didnt raise the issue Tuna or cast the first stone. Read the posts. and none of us are banned Here, and we should all be able to respond to questions without lame excuses.

The questions asked so far remain unanswered with what I see are attempts to sidetrack the initial ones posed.
They have nothing to do with pixel counting.

Since Marvin and the rest were extremely to a fault patiently answering all of the DRTs, its only fair we get ours answered now, and by the person who both clamored for discussion and to whom they were directed, Latitude.

You wanted talk..lets talk.



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TheShadow on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:12am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:02am, TeachersPet wrote:
You wanted talk..lets talk.




Yes talk is good...... a few answers would be better!!!!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:15am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:02am, TeachersPet wrote:
You wanted talk..lets talk.

Then let's be straight from the start. Are you, ES, and Sys the same person? Or 2 or 3 people... I only ask because I'm a trusting person and usually give people the benefit of the doubt and I sometimes get confused with your posts.

Tuna
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:22am

Yes I am the trinity Sys ES and the TP. smiley one and the same. I only post as TP here, and Sys at ATS. One forum at a time. One name at a time.
Shads , if Numbers fails to answer the first question concerning that Area 51, would you refresh or comment to assure accuracy. You are under no obligation to do so. i was hoping he had the fortitude to answer himself. It might explain some of the behavior we have seen.
Thank you.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by murnut on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:35am

on Dec 21st, 2008, 11:59pm, newtothis wrote:
Mur, An honest question, why does it matter? Do you think the fund providers are the hoaxers?

Tuna


Why is it hidden?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TheShadow on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:43am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:22am, TeachersPet wrote:
Y
Shads , if Numbers fails to answer the first question concerning that Area 51, would you refresh or comment to assure accuracy. You are under no obligation to do so. i was hoping he had the fortitude to answer himself. It might explain some of the behavior we have seen.
Thank you.


Sure Why not.

Numbers/ Latitude When the drones first came on the scene and you were constantly sending me PMs trying to befriend me...did you or did you not tell me part of the reason you believed the drones were real had to do with your father being killed under mysterious circumstances while working at Area 51?

Please enlighten us all to the truth of this story and explain exactly why you believe the drones are real and what is the correlation to your fathers untimely demise?

Thanks

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 22nd, 2008, 06:14am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:43am, TheShadow wrote:
Sure Why not.

Numbers/ Latitude When the drones first came on the scene and you were constantly sending me PMs trying to befriend me...did you or did you not tell me part of the reason you believed the drones were real had to do with your father being killed under mysterious circumstances while working at Area 51?

Please enlighten us all to the truth of this story and explain exactly why you believe the drones are real and what is the correlation to your fathers untimely demise?

Thanks


Come on everybody.. lighten up!
The marijauna theory was my idea. Don't blame anyone else in DRT for that. They do grow a lot of it in them there woods.. And it would have explained the excessive secrecy on the locals part...

The DRT must protect the the PI's, and the investigation, (for all of our sake, so we can get to the truth someday) so asking them to out confidencial information is like looking a gift horse in the mouth.

It's frustrating looking at this from the outside, but conjecture about the PI's and the sponsors is biting the hand that is helping to solve this.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Radi on Dec 22nd, 2008, 06:20am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 06:14am, tomi01uk wrote:
Come on everybody.. lighten up!
The marijauna theory was my idea.



If it was a theory why was it brought up as to be a FACT....This is not the way to run a supposed investigation....

Do you have any credentials to come to that kind of conclusion?
Do you have any statistics to prove this beyond a doubt?
DO you have any pictures to show this type of thing going on?

You might as well say this is where the cocaine supply is coming from for the whole western seaboard......
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 22nd, 2008, 06:28am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:35am, murnut wrote:
Why is it hidden?


For no other reason than the logical normal reasons. Many people when they contribute to charity or research generally do not want their names made public. It is their personal finances. It is as simple as that. You can not ask DRT to betray that, without putting them into an unfair situation.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 22nd, 2008, 06:32am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 06:20am, Radi wrote:
If it was a theory why was it brought up as to be a FACT....This is not the way to run a supposed investigation....

Do you have any credentials to come to that kind of conclusion?
Do you have any statistics to prove this beyond a doubt?
DO you have any pictures to show this type of thing going on?

You might as well say this is where the cocaine supply is coming from for the whole western seaboard......


As far as I remember, nobody said for sure that was the reason, it was brought up as a possibility for the locals secrecy.

You want proof of maijuana growing in them there woods.. lol. I think there was a recent bust in there about 6 months ago.. Is that good enough?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Radi on Dec 22nd, 2008, 06:52am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 06:32am, tomi01uk wrote:
As far as I remember, nobody said for sure that was the reason, it was brought up as a possibility for the locals secrecy.

You want proof of maijuana growing in them there woods.. lol. I think there was a recent bust in there about 6 months ago.. Is that good enough?


Well there are a lot of busts over the years but it does not prove that this is why the locals were not talking....Maybe it was the approach of Lat or maybe the locals knew nothing of the drones because its an Internet Hoax and was never seen by anybody but those online.....
There are so many reasons why the locals did not want to talk..To nail one down to a specific reason serves as only speculative and unproven..
http://tinyurl.com/6u4ajr

Like the reporter who avoided the PIs..Maybe the parents were protecting their daughter from some strangers whom they felt were a threatening influence...
Which there is nothing strange or sinister about that parents like to protect their kids from things and people who they think might hurt their child...

So your theory is like me saying that Fox is behind the drones since we have them on the SCC program....They have also hired the PIs to bring this more to the public after all they were interviewed on the FOX news....
grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 22nd, 2008, 07:09am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 06:52am, Radi wrote:
Well there are a lot of busts over the years but it does not prove that this is why the locals were not talking....Maybe it was the approach of Lat or maybe the locals knew nothing of the drones because its an Internet Hoax and was never seen by anybody but those online.....
There are so many reasons why the locals did not want to talk..To nail one down to a specific reason serves as only speculative and unproven..
http://tinyurl.com/6u4ajr

Like the reporter who avoided the PIs..Maybe the parents were protecting their daughter from some strangers whom they felt were a threatening influence...
Which there is nothing strange or sinister about that parents like to protect their kids from things and people who they think might hurt their child...


Well, lets just say that I've known enough that I am not "naive" about what is grown in them there woods..

However, I've never been there so don't start accusing me of either maijuana growing or setting some hoax senerio up tongue

I agree with you about the reporter. We all have our own subjective views on that aspect. I think she just wanted no part of this drone business. Protective parents or not. But that is JMO.

edit to add: And I think the reason why she probably wanted no part of this drone business, confidenciality assured by the PI's even... is because she feels vulnerable. Too many kooks out there, most people feel quite afraid of publicity and what consequences it could bring, esp in this kind of event.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Radi on Dec 22nd, 2008, 07:11am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 07:09am, tomi01uk wrote:
don't start accusing me of either maijuana growing or setting some hoax senerio up tongue



rolleyes rolleyes rolleyes rolleyes rolleyes rolleyes tongue tongue tongue tongue
Sure sounds like you are accusing the locals without proof thou....
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 22nd, 2008, 07:19am

It is a cottage industry in there. Why do you think they fly planes over that area with infra-red scopes? They are even commissioning "drones" to go flying through there.. funny enough grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by murnut on Dec 22nd, 2008, 07:23am

I think who is paying the pi's is a question that deserves an answer.

We already have anonymous photo witnesses, why the need for anonymous donors?

I think that part is BS...imo.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 22nd, 2008, 07:32am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 07:23am, murnut wrote:
I think who is paying the pi's is a question that deserves an answer.

We already have anonymous photo witnesses, why the need for anonymous donors?

I think that part is BS...imo.


No it is not. Did the couple who have made that forum now a paid forum talk about who their sponors are?
It is just the same kind of respectful courtesy that any sponsorship requires. Nothing more! Unless after all this time you think I am a liar or a bs'er and I hope your insight into character is better than that !
And no.. I'm not delusional either.. wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 22nd, 2008, 07:35am

on Dec 21st, 2008, 11:03am, neveleeleven wrote:
The difference between you and me, is that I am not stupid enough to actually believe these CGI renders are real.

The graph you need to be worried about is this one:
User Image

Thank you for reinforce and confirm my points about your Manichaeism vision of the drone business.
For you (and most of those here) it's a 100% hoax, plain and simple. You can't even imagine a 10% real/90% hoax.
It's not the lead we are following at the DRT.

I guess you're new to ufology, simply because you seem to naively think that's it's as easy to prove as the drones are fake that they are real.
How many UFO event, according to you, has been prove to be "real"?
For us, it's a long run work that can't be accomplished in one, two or three years.

Anyway, debunkers contribution to this drone business is useful, at least to:
1- Show how actually their mind is working (the easier part to understand)
2- Help us to possibly prove the drones to be real, by gradually eliminate all the alleged "smoking guns", or "bad science postings" (call it whatever you want) that we can see (here and elsewhere).

I took the liberty to edit your graph (in a Manichaeism vision, of courserolleyes)

User Image
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 22nd, 2008, 07:37am

on Dec 21st, 2008, 3:02pm, Latitude wrote:
Search his posts on all forums. When has he once posted in favor of being open minded to a sighting or eyewitness account? These types only frequent these forums for one purpose. It's one that takes great pleasure in debunking and ridicule. You can easily tell who they are. Those are the ones that always end up on the contrary point of view.


WOW, what a joke. "You can easily tell", hahaha...

News flash, you are completely wrong! There are quite a few topics with videos I did analysis on, and have came to the conclusion that it was a real object, a real Unidentified Flying Object. Actually, I myself have seen many UFO's with my own eyes. I totally believe in the reality of aliens and UFO's, it is mathematically possible.

Every single UFO case that I look at, I always START with an open mind, every single time. Because, I know in this universe, anything is possible. However, the more I research a certain sighting, or a witness account, and observe, and calculate, and read other peoples opinions, the more my mind starts to close on that specific account. To keep an open mind about something even after multiple amounts of evidence proves it to be fake, well, that's like believing in the Tooth Fairy after your parents, and all your friends, and everyone you know, told you the Tooth Fairy isn't real.

on Dec 21st, 2008, 2:22pm, Latitude wrote:
It's inflammatory and derogatory posts like this that explains why you are the only debunker ever to be thrown off of ATS.



I was just talking the TRUTH. If the truth hurts you, its YOUR FAULT, not mine.

"Thrown off of ATS", you don't know crap! I was only temporarily removed because off my very short fuse when arguing with idiots.

Just read "Springers" signature quote at ATS, which Sprigner and I have discussed in private many times:
Quote:
Never argue with an idiot, he'll only bring you down to his level and beat you with experience!


I am having a very hard time with the "never argue with an idiot" part.

Springer actually messaged me and told me I was "doing much better this time", when I had come back to ATS. We then discussed on how to shred someone apart without using insults, and just by showing evidence on how wrong they are.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 22nd, 2008, 07:43am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 07:35am, elevenaugust wrote:
I took the liberty to edit your graph (in a Manichaeism vision, of courserolleyes)



Wow you don't even know how to read a graph!!! HAHAHAHA.

You see, only the pro-hoax has supporting evidence. There is absolutely ZERO supporting evidence for pro-real. Actually, we have evidence that your witnesses lied, which is actually means pro-real has a NEGATIVE amount of supporting evidence.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 22nd, 2008, 07:51am

You don't simply know how to read my edit.

Anyway, some others don't even know how to read a compass.... rolleyes

A link to your previous analysis showing real UFOs please??

Edit:
Where is the title of your graph??
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 22nd, 2008, 08:38am

The PI's, in an interview, stated they were hired by a woman from the UK. I always figured that was Tomi. What other women are there that belong to the DRT and live in the UK? rolleyes

From Frank Dixon interview,

Los Angeles Times
By, John M. Glionna
March 18, 2008


A onetime captain in the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Department, Davis considers himself an expert in scam artists and nut cases. So his radar went up in January when he got the call from a woman in London. She said she was from the Open Minds Forum, an Internet group specializing in "UFOlogy." She said she represented people who were interested in the drone and wanted to contact Raji and others who claimed in Web postings to have seen the craft. There was the guy in Bakersfield who called himself Chad. There was the hiker and the bicyclist, both from the San Jose area. Nobody used last names. So far, nobody could be found.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 22nd, 2008, 08:48am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 08:38am, Jeddyhi wrote:
The PI's, in an interview, stated they were hired by a woman from the UK. I always figured that was Tomi. What other women are there that belong to the DRT and live in the UK? rolleyes

From Frank Dixon interview,

Los Angeles Times
By, John M. Glionna
March 18, 2008


A onetime captain in the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Department, Davis considers himself an expert in scam artists and nut cases. So his radar went up in January when he got the call from a woman in London. She said she was from the Open Minds Forum, an Internet group specializing in "UFOlogy." She said she represented people who were interested in the drone and wanted to contact Raji and others who claimed in Web postings to have seen the craft. There was the guy in Bakersfield who called himself Chad. There was the hiker and the bicyclist, both from the San Jose area. Nobody used last names. So far, nobody could be found.


Wish I had the war bucks grin ! If I did, I would contribute to the case as well. No, I didn't "hire" them.

As I've explained before, Tom and Frank were initially contacted by me along with about 20 other PI's. After running over a few choices who were interested in taking the case on, we decided on Tom & Frank. A very good choice. They are stars in every sense of the word.

btw... just came across a very interesting article.

here is a part of it:

"Though Plato had the most profound influence on Western Culture, his Allegory in particular was largely ignored if only it was somewhat subversive to the growth of scientific and mechanical cultures, which largely divorced mind from Nature and developed the "scientific" cult of "objectivity." Science and mechanism dominated the idea of the real, which became a thing which could be measured, and such measurements could be agreed upon by social and intellectual consensus. This formed a consensus culture which largely agreed that what could be measured and predicted, organised and investigated, had laws which represented the laws of "reality."

Have only just begun to read it.

http://charlesbalves.spaces.live.com:80/blog/cns!F548A18D15F89438!376.entry



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 22nd, 2008, 08:58am

ha ha......nice deflection! wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 22nd, 2008, 09:03am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 08:58am, Jeddyhi wrote:
ha ha......nice deflection! wink


No.. it's a very interesting article.
And what more can I tell you? Look at it this way... ok..
you have to take my word for it. And I'm being honest with what I say and can say.

What nobody can say is who has contributed to the PI's. But common sense alone should tell everyone that a group of people who met in a forum and wanted to investigate the drones doesn't go out and hire PI's to investigate this if one of them is part of the element they are investigating.. And the rest of them should be intelligent enough to know that each other is not complicit after a year and a half of thinking all the time about figuring this out. It's common sense..

I mean.. look.. there is enough to worry about here, and you have to separate the wheat from the chaff.
A cigar is just a cigar. Contributions are just contributions.. The investigation is just what it is.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 22nd, 2008, 09:18am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 07:51am, elevenaugust wrote:
You don't simply know how to read my edit.


No I read your edit, I just don't know how to turn myself into an idiot to understand it the way you do.

I don't see how the amount of supporting evidence can change from day to day. That is really moronic. It's been the same since day one, pro-real has less than ZERO evidence. Pro-hoax has multiple evidence, and it's not changing as far as I can tell....


on Dec 22nd, 2008, 07:51am, elevenaugust wrote:
Anyway, some others don't even know how to read a compass.... rolleyes


I know how to read a compass...
Some people just don't know how to DRAW a compass. Or they try to draw a 2D compass in an image representing 3D.

Listen, rule number 0ne:
1: NEVER EVER REVERSE THE LETTERS OF A COMPASS WHEN DRAWING THEM. ALWAYS LEAVE THEM AS THEY WOULD APPEAR ON A COMPASS.

Rule number two:
2: THE ARROW POINTING IN THE SAME DIRECTION YOU ARE FACING IS THE DIRECTION YOU ARE GOING.

Here is what you drew:
User Image

When you reverse the letters to make them easyier to read, you also give the impression that you are holding a compass from a top down view. This would mean the camera is facing North in your image, and you have the E, and W, wrong.

This is what you should have drawn, but didn't because of your lack of knowledge:
User Image
-note the mirrored N and S, which indicate you are looking at the compass from the bottom view, up. Also notice the direction of the E and W. This is how it would appear on a REAL compass, when looking at it from a bottom view.

Even that is incorrect though, because it's still 2D. Also, the Sun doesn't set exactly West so the direction is wrong too. This is how I would have done it:
User Image

After all, that's how REAL compasses are:
User Image


on Dec 22nd, 2008, 07:51am, elevenaugust wrote:
A link to your previous analysis showing real UFOs please??


Do your own research.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 22nd, 2008, 09:37am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 08:38am, Jeddyhi wrote:
The PI's, in an interview, stated they were hired by a woman from the UK. I always figured that was Tomi. What other women are there that belong to the DRT and live in the UK? rolleyes


Hey I had the same impression! Crazy! Still to this very moment I believe it to, because she just admitted to contacting them. heh.

Quote:
From Frank Dixon interview,
Davis considers himself an expert in scam artists and nut cases. So his radar went up in January when he got the call from a woman in London.


I'm sure his radar went up because he thought the woman in London was a nut case, LOL. Milking the nut cases for money.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 22nd, 2008, 09:44am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:43am, TheShadow wrote:
Sure Why not.

Numbers/ Latitude When the drones first came on the scene and you were constantly sending me PMs trying to befriend me...did you or did you not tell me part of the reason you believed the drones were real had to do with your father being killed under mysterious circumstances while working at Area 51?

Please enlighten us all to the truth of this story and explain exactly why you believe the drones are real and what is the correlation to your fathers untimely demise?

Thanks


You indeed are foul. I tried to befriend you? One PM and now I will forever regret it. I sent you the PM before I knew you were such a sad character. You want to try to post my personal information now? This has nothing to do with the drones and you know it only a personal attack. You are a sick individual.

Let this be a lesson to all forum members. Never send any PMs to any hoax hunter especially TP/Sysconfig or Shadow. They will swear confidentiality but will always double cross you down the road. They are of low character. Nasty liars. TP/Sysconfig did the same to Tomi, double crossing her and posting her PMs online in an attempt to attack me.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 22nd, 2008, 09:47am

Numbers/Lat

Why would you lie and say your dad worked and was killed at Area 51?

You are fishing for sympathy, IMHO.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TheShadow on Dec 22nd, 2008, 09:48am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 09:44am, Latitude wrote:
You indeed are foul. I tried to befriend you? One PM and now I will forever regret it. I sent you the PM before I knew you were such a sad character. You want to try to post my personal information now? This has nothing to do with the drones and you know it only a personal attack. You are a sick individual.

Let this be a lesson to all forum members. Never send any PMs to any hoax hunter especially TP/Sysconfig or Shadow. They will swear confidentiality but will always double cross you down the road. They are of low character. Nasty liars. TP/Sysconfig did the same to Tomi, double crossing her and posting her PMs online in an attempt to attack me.


Please answer the question...it is not a personal attack and i kept this to myself for a LONG time...until i saw it as a pretty good piece of the mounting evidence and one heck of a motive for a hoaxer to try to pull something like this off!!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:35am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 09:37am, neveleeleven wrote:
Hey I had the same impression! Crazy! Still to this very moment I believe it to, because she just admitted to contacting them. heh.



I'm sure his radar went up because he thought the woman in London was a nut case, LOL. Milking the nut cases for money.


Excuse me ! sad But you are talking about me now!
Granted it was a difficult sell.... I tried hard not to sound like a nut case.. grin

edit to add: You can't imagine how hard it was to introduce this case to some I interviewed. You can't imagine how difficult it was.. so cut me some slack ok?

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:42am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:35am, tomi01uk wrote:
Excuse me ! sad But you are talking about me now!


So wait, you DID hire the P.I.'s?

Who's paying for the P.I.'s?

-not answering is exactly like answering.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:48am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 09:44am, Latitude wrote:
You indeed are foul. I tried to befriend you? One PM and now I will forever regret it. I sent you the PM before I knew you were such a sad character. You want to try to post my personal information now? This has nothing to do with the drones and you know it only a personal attack. You are a sick individual.

Let this be a lesson to all forum members. Never send any PMs to any hoax hunter especially TP/Sysconfig or Shadow. They will swear confidentiality but will always double cross you down the road. They are of low character. Nasty liars. TP/Sysconfig did the same to Tomi, double crossing her and posting her PMs online in an attempt to attack me.


This exact thing happened to me when approached by TP.

So, if you are after Latitude in this particular issue, then you are also dealing with me...

Merry Christmas,

Dr. Stern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:51am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:48am, DrStern wrote:
This exact thing happened to me when approached by TP.

So, if you are after Latitude in this particular issue, then you are also dealing with me...

Merry Christmas,

Dr. Stern


And you are just someone else promoting a website.... nice motive? rolleyes
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:52am

Sheesh DrStern, that sounded so....grade schoolish!

Name: Latitude
Posts: 1006

Position: Gold Member

Date Registered: 05/23/07 at 00:31:48


Joined right when the drones were hitting the scene. Interesting!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:53am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:42am, neveleeleven wrote:
So wait, you DID hire the P.I.'s?

Who's paying for the P.I.'s?

-not answering is exactly like answering.


You can't readhuh Read back....
We all decided who to go with, as several different PI co's were interested. Frank and Tom became our choice because they had the years of experience in various forces, the right location near where it all happened and they had great interest and respect for us as well as good honest natures.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:56am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:51am, neveleeleven wrote:
And you are just someone else promoting a website.... nice motive? rolleyes


I'm not promoting anything..and even if I were, I sure would not promote it here...

Why would you think I laid down substantial time trying to say that the science related to the "Drones" might be terrestrial, if I don't follow it up?

Give it a real hard thought..

Merry Christmas,

Dr. Stern
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:56am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:52am, Jeddyhi wrote:
Sheesh DrStern, that sounded so....grade schoolish!

Name: Latitude
Posts: 1006

Position: Gold Member

Date Registered: 05/23/07 at 00:31:48


Joined right when the drones were hitting the scene. Interesting!


I joined OM or this forum I think in 2004, but didnt come to read very much at all till the drones event either. Loads of ppl joined the forums at the time of the drones out of intense interest like myself..

btw.. that article.. very interesting. The guy lives in London and I imagine he is pretty well respected out there. Very verbose... that's for sure..
So... he is speculating that either some supreme PTB created this or it is part meme protrayed by aliens.. huh

Oh .. the other part I grin grin grin just loved is how he figures that it was targeted to the ultra intelligent out on the internet..

See... everything is subjective wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 22nd, 2008, 11:04am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:56am, tomi01uk wrote:
I joined OM or this forum I think in 2004, but didnt come to read very much at all till the drones event either. Loads of ppl joined the forums at the time of the drones out of intense interest like myself..


Good point. I joined here in 2005. I was a founder of OMF during Serpo. Do you or Lat have a history of an interest in Ufology prior to the drones in 5-2007. Seems like Serpo didn't interest any of you. Lat (Numbers) didn't join OM until just 3 months prior to the drones (February).
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 22nd, 2008, 11:05am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:53am, tomi01uk wrote:
You can't readhuh Read back....


I know how to read, you are just contradicting yourself.

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 08:48am, tomi01uk wrote:
No, I didn't "hire" them.
"we decided on Tom & Frank"


"We" means "you", along with others, decided on Tom and Frank. When you say "decided" that means you "chose" them, or "hired" them.

When I said this:
Quote:
I'm sure his radar went up because he thought the woman in London was a nut case, LOL. Milking the nut cases for money.


I deliberately planted that message to see who would get offended by it, because that would uncover who exactly the London woman was.

Since it offended you, that means you ARE the London woman who called the P.I.'s

Just making sure...

The P.I.'s claimed to be "hired" by that woman, am I correct?


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 22nd, 2008, 11:14am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:56am, DrStern wrote:
I'm not promoting anything..and even if I were, I sure would not promote it here...


You know, every time you post you have your website in your signature...

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:56am, DrStern wrote:
Why would you think I laid down substantial time trying to say that the science related to the "Drones" might be terrestrial, if I don't follow it up?

Give it a real hard thought..

Merry Christmas,

Dr. Stern


Sorry, I actually don't know anything about your work.

I'm sure it's probably a rehash of a lot of Einstein's work.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 22nd, 2008, 11:18am

Another interesting tidbit.....The PI's didn't have a website until after hearing from Tomi. Their website was created in February of 2008. Only one month after being contacted by Tomi.

Domain Name.......... tkdavisinvestigations.com
Creation Date........ 2008-02-17
Registration Date.... 2008-02-17
Expiry Date.......... 2009-02-17
Organisation Name.... Todd Trayer
Organisation Address. P.O. Box 2602
Organisation Address.
Organisation Address. Saratoga
Organisation Address. 95070
Organisation Address. CA
Organisation Address. UNITED STATES

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 22nd, 2008, 11:19am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 11:05am, neveleeleven wrote:
I know how to read, you are just contradicting yourself.



"We" means "you", along with others, decided on Tom and Frank. When you say "decided" that means you "chose" them, or "hired" them.

When I said this:


I deliberately planted that message to see who would get offended by it, because that would uncover who exactly the London woman was.

Since it offended you, that means you ARE the London woman who called the P.I.'s

Just making sure...

The P.I.'s claimed to be "hired" by that woman, am I correct?



for crying out loud... where have you been for a year..
everyone knows I made contact with the PI's and the DRT (including myself) decided to "hire" them.
And no....... nobody is going to "out" the contributors who provided the warbucks to fund the investigation.

If those who funded the PI's want to some day let the world know that they spent their money on this research it's their business. But nobody had any hand in starting something like a hoax then paying PI's to investigate it... Does this make sense??

And I am in the same boat as you and everyone else in DRT and the ppl intrigued enough even support the PI's.... we want answers.. the PI's want answers.. we all want answers.. till then it continues.. you want to implicate the PI's in this, then you implicate me.. logic tells you that..

I'm just a normal as you put it.. over 42 years old female and I come from the states, I used to own a business over in the states and I shipped 25 dollar a liter cans of varnish to owners of log cabins in them there woods... what do you think they were growing .. turnips??


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 22nd, 2008, 11:22am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 11:14am, neveleeleven wrote:
You know, every time you post you have your website in your signature...



Sorry, I actually don't know anything about your work.

I'm sure it's probably a rehash of a lot of Einstein's work.


Oh..I do? Is it that what bothers you..you know what, I'll remove it and replace it with the DRT reference...as I'm sure that would please you more to ridicule...

So, no...sorry,

If you refer to Einstein, you need to look harder, as his work still is appreciated in the science world.

Dr. Stern


Ps: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-entangle/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Dq454iFp2c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQe0oiaBssg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWXJUNkkKj0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5CMOZSXIzA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWyTxCsIXE4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 22nd, 2008, 11:27am

The question, Tomi, is not about funding an investigation into the drones. The question is becoming whether or not the funding of the investigation is actually funding of a hoax. For example, do you and Lat have a history of interest in Ufology? I do. I was involved in the Serpo case at ATS. Got myself banned there for my troubles. That was 2005. Newcomers fresh to the scene showing only interest in the drones, forming groups related to the drones, throwing money at the drones, well, you see the complexity of that, right?

And when this same group refutes and denies all evidence of a hoax and continues to promote the drones as having a basis in reality, it appears that the "investigation" is not after the truth, but only promoting a hoax.

Why didn't TK Investigations feel the need for a website before the drone case? Did the funding they received pay for the new site? Were they told to create a site? And the site itself promotes the drones, and supplies links to LMH, UnknownCountry.com and Isaacaret.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 22nd, 2008, 11:36am

Another interesting find:

When you do a California PI License check on #22165
What turns up is the name "Davis Tommy Kent" from Saratoga.

However, on another section of CALI-PI it says this:

TOMMY 'T.K.' K. DAVIS | TK DAVIS INVESTIGATIONS
Saratoga, Ca 95070 (Santa Clara County)
Phone: 408-253-2402 - tom@8thday.com
License: PI22165

Interesting that the e-mail address is tom@8thday.com. So is the real name "TOMMY KENT DAVIS"?

8thday.com??

Quote:
http://www.8thday.com/
8th Day is a computer consulting firm that is run by Michael Fariss and has been serving the Silicon Valley since 1991.


8th Day specializes in the support of network and computer resources for schools in the bay area. Services include the setup of security and network systems. Such systems include transparent ubiquitous file access systems and messaging. These services are created through the use of carefully planned human interfaces and system infrastructure.


Hey look at the Resume:
http://www.8thday.com/resume/index.html

Graphic Arts?



TOMI?


Drones crashing and burning?

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:06pm

Also, tkdavisinvestigations.com, and 8thday.com are both registered from Yahoo.

They both are from Saratoga as well!
Registrant:
8thday
18983 Saratoga Glen Place
Saratoga, CA 95070
US

Domain Name: 8THDAY.COM

Administrative Contact:
michael@8thday.com
Fariss, Michael
Self
18983 Saratoga Glen Place
Saratoga, CA 95070
US
(408) 257-3524 fax: 999 999 9999

Nearly identical phone numbers as t.k. davis also...

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:11pm

Hmm, doing a search for "@8thday.com" returns this:


Palo Alto
Avenidas, 450 Bryant
Contact: Ellen Mastman, MA, CCC/A, FAAA
ellen@8thday.com
(408) 973-1352
Mon: 12:15 Adv; 1:45 Beg; 3:15 Int.
Thurs: 1:30 Post Adv.



PALO ALTO??

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:24pm

Given that TK Davis used an email address @8thday, this implies he was computer savy enough to know about the internet and competent enough about computers and email. But no TKDavis Investigations website existed until after he is contacted by Tomi. Hmmmmmmmmm.....
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:25pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 11:27am, Jeddyhi wrote:
The question, Tomi, is not about funding an investigation into the drones. The question is becoming whether or not the funding of the investigation is actually funding of a hoax. For example, do you and Lat have a history of interest in Ufology? I do. I was involved in the Serpo case at ATS. Got myself banned there for my troubles. That was 2005. Newcomers fresh to the scene showing only interest in the drones, forming groups related to the drones, throwing money at the drones, well, you see the complexity of that, right?


There is enough to worry about in this drone case then to implicate Lat or myself in orchestrating it or perpetuating it. Which is ridiculous.. IMO

Seriously........ Seriously..... as intelligent as you are Jeddyhi... think about this logically...

The article I posted, the author gives details of the LAP and the work in it.. if created by hand he postulates it would have originated at the scale of 15 feet +....

Now.. you going to attibute that to me or Lat?? You have got to be joking... the amount of detail, work, expenditure and effort of numerous bodies if not groups of ppl with sophisticated machines beyond the scale of our home computers would have to have engineered this.. And you think one of them could be ushuh
NO... the DRT is just lucky to have enough resources provided to help figure it out..

Obviously, if I joined a ufo forum in 2004, then I must have an interest in the subject before the drones..
But what I think happened is that the drones reignited a lot of ppls interest that may have been put aside for the time being.. as in my case.

Quote:
And when this same group refutes and denies all evidence of a hoax and continues to promote the drones as having a basis in reality, it appears that the "investigation" is not after the truth, but only promoting a hoax.



Well, some ppl within the DRT have strong feelings it true. Others, like I said, are on the fence. Ppl's subjective appraisal of the evidence will evolve and when more facts are in the "reasonable man" principle will surely take over.

That is why I think peer review is very important here for everyone. Example being.. some may want to believe Chad, others need to state he lied. The truth maybe somewhere inbetween. If you were DRT, you would hardly think it was sensible jephordizing an investigation by postulating that "Chad Lied", thereby alienating those who maybe able to provide more information regarding Chad... So, its frustrating.. but the best posture, IMO, for DRT to take is a friendly pro or neutral one. There are enough ppl to hold the truth to the fire outside of DRT. DRT has the advantage to learn what it is first for us. So respectful regard of that delicate position would be the more "enlightened" approach IMO...

Quote:
Why didn't TK Investigations feel the need for a website before the drone case? Did the funding they received pay for the new site? Were they told to create a site? And the site itself promotes the drones, and supplies links to LMH, UnknownCountry.com and Isaacaret.


Well the PI's, as has been said before, feel that information is the key to discovery. And information comes from people. So the need for a website was impt if the publicity would happen. Publicity gets information, information comes via web presence.. Thats the simple cigar.. hope you enjoy smiley


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Radi on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:25pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 07:09am, tomi01uk wrote:
However, I've never been there so don't start accusing me of either maijuana growing or setting some hoax senerio up tongue



Where did I accuse you of growing the marijuanahuh
If I accused you setting up a hoax scenario then you must be employed by FOX according to my posted scenario...YOU had nothing to do with the scenario that I posted.... smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:28pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:24pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
Given that TK Davis used an email address @8thday, this implies he was computer savy enough to know about the internet and competent enough about computers and email. But no website existed until after he is contacted by Tomi. Hmmmmmmmmm.....


The interesting part is that somewhere along the way, T.K. Davis changed their e-mail address. Since their new e-mail address is tk@tkdavisinvestigations.com, and they didn't have that .com untill Tomi contacted them. It's safe to say they changed their e-mail address right when they were contacted by Tomi.

Trying to hide an e-mail address?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:45pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:25pm, tomi01uk wrote:
There is enough to worry about in this drone case then to implicate Lat or myself in orchestrating it or perpetuating it. Which is ridiculous.. IMO


As ridiculous as it may seem, if it was true I don't suspect neither of you would admit it. The response given is what is expected, given the circumstances.

Quote:
Seriously........ Seriously..... as intelligent as you are Jeddyhi... think about this logically...


I always do! wink

Quote:
The article I posted, the author gives details of the LAP and the work in it.. if created by hand he postulates it would have originated at the scale of 15 feet +....

Now.. you going to attibute that to me or Lat?? You have got to be joking... the amount of detail, work, expenditure and effort of numerous bodies if not groups of ppl with sophisticated machines beyond the scale of our home computers would have to have engineered this.. And you think one of them could be ushuh
NO... the DRT is just lucky to have enough resources provided to help figure it out..


You could be the promoters, not the artists or writers or even the planners.

Quote:
Obviously, if I joined a ufo forum in 2004, then I must have an interest in the subject before the drones..
But what I think happened is that the drones reignited a lot of ppls interest that may have been put aside for the time being.. as in my case.


I can buy that. But your motives for your deep involvement in the drones is unclear as is the willingness for you or your financeer to spend thousands of dollars

Quote:
Well, some ppl within the DRT have strong feelings it true. Others, like I said, are on the fence. Ppl's subjective appraisal of the evidence will evolve and when more facts are in the "reasonable man" principle will surely take over.


When more facts come in, they will just be explained away.

Quote:
That is why I think peer review is very important here for everyone. Example being.. some may want to believe Chad, others need to state he lied. The truth maybe somewhere inbetween. If you were DRT, you would hardly think it was sensible jephordizing an investigation by postulating that "Chad Lied", thereby alienating those who maybe able to provide more information regarding Chad... So, its frustrating.. but the best posture, IMO, for DRT to take is a friendly pro or neutral one. There are enough ppl to hold the truth to the fire outside of DRT. DRT has the advantage to learn what it is first for us. So respectful regard of that delicate position would be the more "enlightened" approach IMO...


Excuses for why Chad lied is not helping the investigation but instead prolongs it. He lied about the location. That is something a hoaxer would do. Especially when the hoaxer feels that the true location will never be found. Speaking of the true location of the Chad sighting, the DRT still has never explained how they came to know the location.



Quote:
Well the PI's, as has been said before, feel that information is the key to discovery. And information comes from people. So the need for a website was impt if the publicity would happen. Publicity gets information, information comes via web presence.. Thats the simple cigar.. hope you enjoy smiley


Well how did the PI's ever get along without a website prior to the drones? How did they receive tips, clues, information? Probably a good old fashioned telephone. How nice to make a website for a case that concerns anonymous internet witnesses and anonymous internet photos.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 22nd, 2008, 1:37pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 08:48am, tomi01uk wrote:
btw... just came across a very interesting article.

here is a part of it:

"Though Plato had the most profound influence on Western Culture, his Allegory in particular was largely ignored if only it was somewhat subversive to the growth of scientific and mechanical cultures, which largely divorced mind from Nature and developed the "scientific" cult of "objectivity." Science and mechanism dominated the idea of the real, which became a thing which could be measured, and such measurements could be agreed upon by social and intellectual consensus. This formed a consensus culture which largely agreed that what could be measured and predicted, organised and investigated, had laws which represented the laws of "reality."

Have only just begun to read it.

http://charlesbalves.spaces.live.com:80/blog/cns!F548A18D15F89438!376.entry

Hi Tomi, surely that’s not the first you’ve seen of Bennett’s dissection of the Drones?

It was posted at RealityUncovered not long after UFO magazine ran it (July 2007).

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:56am, tomi01uk wrote:
btw.. that article.. very interesting. The guy lives in London and I imagine he is pretty well respected out there. Very verbose... that's for sure..
So... he is speculating that either some supreme PTB created this or it is part meme protrayed by aliens.. huh

Bennett is more Fortean than Ufological in his thinking and this comes across in his writing, actually I’ve been throwing something together on Isaac and as I didn’t want to republish Bennett’s article in full I ripped a selection of quotes I intended to use.

They are as follows:

Quote:
Linda Moulton Howe http://www.earthfiles.com/ in her usual thorough manner, has collected a mass of data concerning witnesses and origins of these spectacular photographs. She continues to update this information.

Quote:
"Yes, both SERPO and the CHAD game are "phony," but to leave it at that is to misunderstand the game that is being played. As the Alchemist said to his Apprentice: "the game may be fixed, but it's the only game in town."

Quote:
SERPO and CHAD are examples of products of the first generation of ruthless cyber mythologists. They are both performance memes.

Quote:

In this case however there is no physical product; the product is a state of mind.

Quote:
Aliens will have long past such practical-looking mechanisms. As far as light electro-mechanical engineering is concerned, this particular "motor" and its constituent parts look very low-tech indeed…..The item seen is an image from an electro-mechanical Past. If even 20% real, it probably smells of graphite bearings and 3-in-one oil. Such technology will have long gone from extraterrestrial cultures as sail and steam have gone from our own.

Source: Reality Uncovered (Meme Wars: We Have an Agenda)
http://www.realityuncovered.net/ufology/articles/memewars.php
Originally by Colin Bennett (www.combat-diaries.co.uk)
July, 2007 for UFO Magazine


Cheers!! kiss

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TheShadow on Dec 22nd, 2008, 2:05pm

@tomi, I dont think anyone has ever accused you of being involved in the hoax...you are one of the DRT members that i believe has been sucked in as a believer by those promoting a KNOWN HOAX......don't drink the Kool-aid and you will be OK.

@ Lat, now that i have outed our private exchange and everyone knows what you told me... why not tell the story......unloading this truth could lift a burden and make you a bit less testy!! grin



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 22nd, 2008, 2:33pm

Yes we are waiting, Normally he would be quick as a flash and call someone a liar. What is the sudden shyness. Certainly coming from a military family. that would be the last thing anyone expected.

I dont't think he would lie about something like that to dissuade anothers point of view. But, then again, someome one like that would be quick to do whatever was necessary to force a disclosure of what happened to his father, even latching to a hoax and making sure it stayed on course.Being the point man in Ca with the PIs right next door, near the scene of the crime, website master to hook them up, and a kind lady from UK, must have been an absolute God send.

I tried checking AF listings of personnel who died in mishaps all the way from early 1900s to date...but sadly I saw no mention of that anywhere. Maybe he can fill us in, and we can shed some real light on area51. Certainly those that passed on would have wanted it that way.

@Nevereleven..you have been busy..smiley
The curiousities keep mmounting and are quite fortean.
@Dr.Dil..Lev and Collins said it right, it was the meme that counted, The alien is under construction.








Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 22nd, 2008, 2:36pm

Well.. all I can say is that is what happened, what the facts are that I know. Just trying to help clear up misperceptions. Anyone can choose to believe me or not.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 22nd, 2008, 2:37pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 09:18am, neveleeleven wrote:
No I read your edit, I just don't know how to turn myself into an idiot to understand it the way you do.

Thank you for the compliment. I see that you like to use insults in most of your posts, which is quite interesting for define your psychology.

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 09:18am, neveleeleven wrote:
I don't see how the amount of supporting evidence can change from day to day. That is really moronic. It's been the same since day one, pro-real has less than ZERO evidence. Pro-hoax has multiple evidence, and it's not changing as far as I can tell....[...]

Of course it's not a "day to day" change rolleyes It's only an analogy; things that you don't seem to understand.
Regarding the "amount of supporting evidence", the only "evidence" (according to your point of view) that I see still standing is the shadows "issue" in both pics 16 and 17. Maybe not for any more longer? Who knows?? cheesy

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 09:18am, neveleeleven wrote:
Do your own research.

Ahh! Too easy cheesy rolleyes What are you afraid of?? cheesy
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 22nd, 2008, 2:40pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:42am, neveleeleven wrote:
So wait, you DID hire the P.I.'s?

Who's paying for the P.I.'s?

-not answering is exactly like answering.


Not your business.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 22nd, 2008, 2:42pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 2:33pm, TeachersPet wrote:
and a kind lady from UK, must have been an absolute God send.


Oh Pleazzze... LOL grin

Sys/es... you have really gotten the train off the track on that one. I'm just a persistent, tenacious hip chick coming down the escalator...

Nice lady in london grin grin grin grin grin tongue

I'm a geek who fixes computers to keep my end going.. I can no more afford PI's then .. the man on the moon..
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 22nd, 2008, 2:43pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 2:37pm, elevenaugust wrote:
Thank you for the compliment. I see that you like to use insults in most of your posts, which is quite interesting for define your psychology.


Of course it's not a "day to day" change rolleyes It's only an analogy; things that you don't seem to understand.
Regarding the "amount of supporting evidence", the only "evidence" (according to your point of view) that I see still standing is the shadows "issue" in both pics 16 and 17. Maybe not for any more longer? Who knows?? cheesy


Ahh! Too easy cheesy rolleyes What are you afraid of?? cheesy


Dont sidetrack the issue we are addressing now!!!! Its not pixel analysis. Its behavior, as you yourself lacked the courage to say in public why it was necessary to put foward a misleading description. Rather, you would whisper it someones, Jakes ear,..
What are you afraid of?
so cut the crap out.!!

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 22nd, 2008, 2:46pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 12:28pm, neveleeleven wrote:
The interesting part is that somewhere along the way, T.K. Davis changed their e-mail address. Since their new e-mail address is tk@tkdavisinvestigations.com, and they didn't have that .com untill Tomi contacted them. It's safe to say they changed their e-mail address right when they were contacted by Tomi.

Trying to hide an e-mail address?


grin grin
Yeah! Sure! TK Davis is Chad!!
You have just found the hoaxer!!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 22nd, 2008, 2:48pm

Eleven August Dont sidetrack the issue we are addressing now!!!! Its not pixel analysis. Its behavior, and wanting the answer to the question posed to latitude. as you yourself lacked the courage to say in public why it was necessary to put foward a misleading description. Rather, you would whisper it in someones, Jakes ear,..
What are you afraid of? Was it that embarassing you could not say it in public..?
So cut the crap out.!!
And let himm answer it himself.
All of you are just running interference for him..its so blatantly obvious.

And for Gods sake take that giant billboard off or reduce it, it makes you look silly.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 22nd, 2008, 3:19pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 2:37pm, elevenaugust wrote:
Regarding the "amount of supporting evidence", the only "evidence" (according to your point of view) that I see still standing is the shadows "issue" in both pics 16 and 17. Maybe not for any more longer? Who knows?? cheesy


elevenaugust, you seriously think that the only evidence I have is raj pics 16 and 17? LOL!!!

You think I want to spoil MY investigation, and tell YOU, what I have found during my investigation? If DRT and the PI's won't share their investigation material, why the hell would you think I would?? Who do you think you are dealing with? I know how to play that game too...

F.Y.I. there is multiple, provable, lighting inconsistencies with ALL of Chad's images, and I can prove it because I know the exact location the images were taken, and the Sun Azimuth and Altitude of those images. I haven't even scratched the surface to how many errors are on the rest of the Raj images either.

I have been focusing on the Raj images because it is actually a covert way to fish for the hoaxers, and it's working quite well....

...you see, how it works is:

1: I figure out multiple ways to prove the drone as a fake. (done)

2: I only pick 1 out of all those ways to truly debate about (raj image 16 and 17).

3: I sit back and watch the hoaxers defend what they think is their only mistake.

4: When they create disinformation about my evidence, then I will show them another set of evidence. Then repeat the process until the source of the disinformation is found.

I'm sure you don't understand this type of interrogation, its ok.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 22nd, 2008, 3:19pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 2:40pm, elevenaugust wrote:
Not your business.



So, elevenaugust, YOU are paying for the P.I.'s GOOD TO KNOW!


It seriously is like fishing...lol!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 22nd, 2008, 3:27pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 2:46pm, elevenaugust wrote:
grin grin
Yeah! Sure! TK Davis is Chad!!
You have just found the hoaxer!!


Funny, why on Earth would you say that? I don't recall ever saying TK Davis is Chad. Are you on drugs?


It's just odd that TK Davis has ANY links to ANY type of "Computer Consulting Firm" with a website that looks like its made by an amature. Also, TK Davis website looks like it was made by an amature too...

It's also funny that @8thday.com is NOT a very common e-mail address, and the only other person I found that uses that address besides TK Davis and Micheal Fariss, is Ellen M. who, VERY ODDLY, works in PALO ALTO. The same city that Isaac's PALO ALTO CARET laboratory is supposedly.

That is just a crazy coincidence...?

I don't remember saying anything about Chad.....


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 22nd, 2008, 3:27pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 3:19pm, neveleeleven wrote:
So, elevenaugust, YOU are paying for the P.I.'s GOOD TO KNOW!


It seriously is like fishing...lol!


Haha!! Too funny, really
Thank you for this moment, 1111.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 22nd, 2008, 3:32pm

I am glad we all feel cheerful, now can we get answers to shads question thank you, and maybe we can share some more good moments like this.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 22nd, 2008, 3:35pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 3:19pm, neveleeleven wrote:
elevenaugust, you seriously think that the only evidence I have is raj pics 16 and 17? LOL!!!

You think I want to spoil MY investigation, and tell YOU, what I have found during my investigation? If DRT and the PI's won't share their investigation material, why the hell would you think I would?? Who do you think you are dealing with? I know how to play that game too...

Don't you want to finish the work?? Huh??
Again, what have you afraid of?? Hmmm?


on Dec 22nd, 2008, 3:19pm, neveleeleven wrote:
F.Y.I. there is multiple, provable, lighting inconsistencies with ALL of Chad's images, and I can prove it because I know the exact location the images were taken, and the Sun Azimuth and Altitude of those images. I haven't even scratched the surface to how many errors are on the rest of the Raj images either.

I have been focusing on the Raj images because it is actually a covert way to fish for the hoaxers, and it's working quite well....

Good excuse!! cheesy
So you think the "hypothesis" hoaxer is in the DRT??
Interesting!!

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 3:19pm, neveleeleven wrote:
...you see, how it works is:

1: I figure out multiple ways to prove the drone as a fake. (done)

2: I only pick 1 out of all those ways to truly debate about (raj image 16 and 17).

3: I sit back and watch the hoaxers defend what they think is their only mistake.

4: When they create disinformation about my evidence, then I will show them another set of evidence. Then repeat the process until the source of the disinformation is found.

I'm sure you don't understand this type of interrogation, its ok.

Oh my God!! What a strategy!
Thank you again for the good laugh, 1111!!
I'm sure the hoaxer will appreciate it!

And what about you to be a good hoaxer?? Hmmm?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 22nd, 2008, 3:39pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 3:27pm, neveleeleven wrote:
Funny, why on Earth would you say that? I don't recall ever saying TK Davis is Chad. Are you on drugs?


It's just odd that TK Davis has ANY links to ANY type of "Computer Consulting Firm" with a website that looks like its made by an amature. Also, TK Davis website looks like it was made by an amature too...

It's also funny that @8thday.com is NOT a very common e-mail address, and the only other person I found that uses that address besides TK Davis and Micheal Fariss, is Ellen M. who, VERY ODDLY, works in PALO ALTO. The same city that Isaac's PALO ALTO CARET laboratory is supposedly.

That is just a crazy coincidence...?

I don't remember saying anything about Chad.....


Well, if you don't understand a joke, not my fault... rolleyes

About the "@8thday.com" thingy, then, like you used to say "do your own research"!!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 22nd, 2008, 3:44pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 3:19pm, neveleeleven wrote:
3: I sit back and watch the hoaxers defend what they think is their only mistake.



First you have to find them. When you do, let the rest of us know ok??

Quote:
4: When they create disinformation about my evidence, then I will show them another set of evidence. Then repeat the process until the source of the disinformation is found.

I'm sure you don't understand this type of interrogation, its ok.



Oy vey..... lol cheesy Sigh! I give up.. Got pies to bake..
seriously.. I do... smiley


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 22nd, 2008, 3:54pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 3:19pm, neveleeleven wrote:
...you see, how it works is:

1: I figure out multiple ways to prove the drone as a fake. (done)

2: I only pick 1 out of all those ways to truly debate about (raj image 16 and 17).

3: I sit back and watch the hoaxers defend what they think is their only mistake.

4: When they create disinformation about my evidence, then I will show them another set of evidence. Then repeat the process until the source of the disinformation is found.

I'm sure you don't understand this type of interrogation, its ok.


Edit to add:
Don't you play Poker??
Is it reasonable for a good strategist to say anything about his own strategy?

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 22nd, 2008, 3:55pm

Tomi and Eleven, it is this same old defending of the drones that you are doing right now that lacks a sensible reason for doing so.

Ignoring hard evidence of hoax and continuing to defend every aspect of the drone case is getting quite old and silly. Almost borderline obsessive-compulsion disorder. And it is such behavior that leads one to suspect that the DRT is working closely with the hoaxer, with or without realizing it. ElevenAugust responds to this scenario as if it is impossible.....hardly.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 22nd, 2008, 4:43pm

What happened to our Area51 witness Latitude?
He could crack the case wide open, even more than Tom Did.
Certainly his Father must have shared something with him before his early demise. I remember, Latttude, seemed to know in his early posts what the functions of all the drone parts were. Brilliant insight, I might add, simply brilliant. Maybe what we see here is how the DRT protects their witnesses, create as much noise and confusion, so people can lose focus of the original questions. That is a good strategy else where, like OM where the Admi intimidates even colleagues to back off, But not here.



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 22nd, 2008, 5:04pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 3:54pm, elevenaugust wrote:
Edit to add:
Don't you play Poker??
Is it reasonable for a good strategist to say anything about his own strategy?


The strategy is wroking:
http://droneteam.com/drt/index.php?topic=241.15

...when you are winning at poker, it's safe to tell everyone your strategy, just for fun.

Seems to me all the disinfo is coming from the DiRT.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 22nd, 2008, 5:13pm

If Lat's Father died at Area 51, I'm sure that many would want to interview him. Lets hear the tale.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 22nd, 2008, 5:25pm

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 5:04pm, neveleeleven wrote:
The strategy is working:
http://droneteam.com/drt/index.php?topic=241.15

...when you are winning at poker, it's safe to tell everyone your strategy, just for fun.

Seems to me all the disinfo is coming from the DiRT.

Hehe!!
Glad to see that you're still reading the Dirt forum. Hope you enjoy it!
BTW, did you see my reply #25?? Just hope you liked it too...

Anyway, thank you for sharing with us your strategy, always good to know how it works. cheesy

Are you sure you are 'always' winning at the poker?? grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 22nd, 2008, 5:43pm

Come on people, stop baiting each other and if you must persist then take it to PM’s as there’s still no amicable resolve in sight and many others don’t wish to read the constant back and forth(s).

And this is irrespective of which belief you currently hold.

Also, questions have been repeatedly asked, if the other party doesn’t wish to answer then that’s their prerogative but please try and refrain from further repeatedly asking the same question (even if phrased in a different way) as it ultimately makes whole sections of the thread incomprehensible unless you’re already aware of the cross-forum politics at play. (Or PM the other member to alert them).

Many thanks in advance.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 22nd, 2008, 5:45pm

Thats right, we shouldn't bait him to answer. Maybe when he is ready.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 22nd, 2008, 6:04pm

My apologies, DrDil! wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Dec 22nd, 2008, 9:26pm

Ok, one more time:

read my lips

stop drawing direction of sun rays in straight parallel lines!

EVEN POWER LINES IN THE PHOTOGRAPH ARE NOT PARALLEL TO EACH OTHER!

Draw a line parallel to any of the power wires in any image editor and move it around if you don't trust me.

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 22nd, 2008, 10:00pm

Read my lips, Why don't YOU draw them ABC.
Let me bring you up to speed, they completed their analysis, months ago. they have answered every question before during and after. and yes one more time, for the hundredth time you, and the same cast come back with the same thing.
Since you haven't done an analysis , Draw a picture and study like they did , and as you think they are and should be and explain as they did.
Then, for evryones benefit, you all will be on the same page rather than coming here and taking cheap shots they don't know what they did.
I am sure you can think, and draw what you are talking about.
why don't you do that.
Just as Others are not obligated to answer a question...Then why should they answer yours.
Its how the game is played Collins said. And frankly. I like the idea of Marvin 11 11 or any of the anylysts not having to feel compelled to answer anymore. Their choice. In fact..I think that should shortcircuit this clever little circular game once and for all.

Have a great holiday

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 23rd, 2008, 06:31am

on Dec 22nd, 2008, 9:26pm, ABCStore wrote:
Ok, one more time:

read my lips

stop drawing direction of sun rays in straight parallel lines!

EVEN POWER LINES IN THE PHOTOGRAPH ARE NOT PARALLEL TO EACH OTHER!

Draw a line parallel to any of the power wires in any image editor and move it around if you don't trust me.

ABC


Whether or not the lines are drawn parallel, the fact remains that the pole and the drone have two distinct light sources. Curving the lines will not make that go away and it will not change the way the shadows fall.

I have yet to see anyone show that all shadows, on the drone and the pole, go back to a single light source.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 23rd, 2008, 10:46am

This sums it up for me:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vuW6tQ0218

I feel like the guy returning the parrot... grin

Unless Drones like to kip on there back. wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 23rd, 2008, 2:10pm

I agree, Marvin. The whole silly episode always ends up in Notlob.

The parrot is still dead, too.

I'm curious about something, though. Actually, it is something I find amusing, and I have not seen it mentioned anywhere else. Can anyone tell me who did the cgi work on the Raj photo the PIs were using in their attempt to find the utility pole? Whoever it was did an awfully nice job of making the drone image disappear without a trace. My point is this: here we have an obvious photoshop job, or something like that, which was done not to fool anyone really, but just to remove the bizarre looking "object" so local folks could look at the utility pole and its associated wires and such without being distracted. One would not expect any great expenditure of time or money on such a thing, since it only needed superficial camouflage, yet what we have could easily pass as one of the original photos, the landscapes that had the drone images dropped iinto them. Doesn't this blow a big hole in the argument that "the photos are too good to be fakes?"

My apologies if this has already been covered somewhere, but I don't think it has. Lord knows I don't want to contribute to some more of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppK6sxz6epk
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Gort on Dec 23rd, 2008, 2:24pm

The pole is CGI, but the drone is real
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TheShadow on Dec 23rd, 2008, 2:53pm

SMOKING GUN PROOF LATITUDE IS THE HOAXER!!!

Picture of Raj pole (Pic 16 i believe) with no drone uploaded by 10538 (aka Latitude/Numbers) on the DRT forum

User Image

Now lets look at the exif data and take particular notice of the date the pic was taken

User Image

Notice the date the pic was taken.

CASE CLOSED!!!

You're busted Numbers!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 23rd, 2008, 3:47pm

That is the time that PICT0016 was taken. I'm not sure how that implicates Lat but like Double Nought Spy, I would like to know how the drone was removed so precisely. EXIF data reveals that the image was edited with GIMP. I presume so that the PI's could show a photo of the pole without looking like kooks.

After a brief examination of the Poleinfo photo, I did not detect any remnants of the drone, nor signs of cloning to remove it. Whoever did it was very precise and dillegent in their work. Why they were so precise is the question. If it was just to make a photo to show around in an effort to find the pole, why remove the drone so perfectly.

It almost seems like a copy of the photo before the drone was layered in.

Can anyone here (Marvin lol) detect signs of the drones removal? I realize the pic was resized to 800x600 but would that hide all traces of editing?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 23rd, 2008, 3:48pm

Oh my god! Numbers is the hoaxer!!shockedshocked

Glad to see that TheShadow our "disinfo master piece" is come back!!cheesy

You need to learn how to read Exifs before making false assumptions....
Do you want a tutorial??

1- We needed at one point of our research, last June, the pict16 without the drone.
2- Onthefence removed it with GIMP 2.4.2
3- Numbers used it again for its study.

That's all.

User Image

Edit for grammar and resizing picture.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 23rd, 2008, 4:51pm

!! we are in agreement, no wayyyyy that numbers could be the hoaxer, an acolyte devotee , or a facillitor to put politely.

But what puzzles me is, why did you not.. followup GafaMads excellent exif Analyses? Certainly he is no debunker, Though Lev the Known Liar accused him of that, nor Nekitamo who said possible multiple openings and computers.
http://droneteam.com/drt/index.php?topic=246.15
Junior Dronie


Karma: +4/-0
Offline

Posts: 21


Re: Some analysis with JPEG snoop
« Reply #26 on: August 05, 2008, 07:32:27 PM »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, let me explain what I found.

First I have only worked with Raj photo.
Second, we have found that at least, the pictures where saved with Photoshop CS2 windows.

At this point, the only thing that we can say is that the photo were not directly taken from the memory card and put on the hard drive. It passed throw Photoshop.

But there is more... I found this simply by examinating the files with Notepad !

When you save a Picture under Photoshop, it gets two Id: An InstanceId, and a DocumentId (I will talk only about the DocumentId)

But when you are saving AGAIN your work, it also keep track of the last documentId from where it came frome. You can find those data after the DerivedFrom tag.

So let's see the story of a photo I took with my personnal camera:

-First photo taken from the Memory card: No Meta Data except the Exif data.
-Then I save this image with Photoshop: It gets a DocumentID. But NO DerivedFromcheesyocumentId
-Then I save it again with Photoshop: It gets a NEW DocumentID and it gets a DerivedFromcheesyocumentId ! And of course this last number is the same that the documentId where it came from.

Here is the results of test I have done:

User Image
User Image
Hope I made a mistake somewhere...
What's your opinion about all that ?

Gfamad



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 23rd, 2008, 5:02pm

Lev, while at the DRT, made a habit of jumping on any research that may have pointed at hoax. Like a Guardian protecting (and prolonging) a hoax. He did the same thing here didn't he? grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 23rd, 2008, 5:03pm

He GAFAMAD..goes further on to say after OTFs plausible explanation..
"Yes, it could be that. But don't forget (I have made some more test), the pictures must have been saved two times with:
-First time: Probably an adobe product.
-Second time: Photoshop CS2

I have try some test by saving the first time an original photo from my camera with a 'lambda' software, and then Photoshop, and there was no DerivedFrom Id. So, let's say the two products are photoshop:

Raj brother-in-law saved it with Photoshop
Raj received the mail and than saved it with Photoshop...

Well, for me it is no logic because I will only copy/paste the JPG file if I want to move it anywhere. But maybe Raj made those steps:
-He received the mail with attached pictures
-He saved the pictures
-He wanted them in another place, so he opened photoshop.
-He opened the Pictures with it
-He saved them in another location
..."

http://droneteam.com/drt/index.php?topic=246.15

Of course we know that he Told OMF Forums he had to travel bak to his Father inlaws, to get hi res pictures, odd, isn't it.which we know is not true, and odd as he is at a computer communicating..Maybe from work..with access to all..or he could not communicate with OMF, were already there in Flickr and accessible.
It would take him an hour or less travel I recall.
The evasion looks clear to me.
So he did not get them from email to himself.
So multiple openings and closings were in one spot, or one spot with multiple computers, and raj the newbie at all this, if truthful, would have had them right there with him, I would think.



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 23rd, 2008, 5:43pm

Chad, Raj, Stephen, Ty all had signs of Adobe Photoshop in their photos. The Tahoe photos did not list Adobe Photoshop but did list compression signatures that match with GIMP, NeatImage and Paint.net as image editors.

I remember before the drones ever came out back when Photoshop was a nail in the coffin for a UFO pic. And these were usually obvious fakes and when the EXIF data showed photoshop, it sealed the deal. But now, since the drones came along, the photoshop tag means nothing..... Look how clear these pics are, look how sharp.....the photoshop tag is just from saving the image, not from altering it.....Yeah, right.

I miss the old days! I still don't think a UFO photo with a photoshop signature is valid unless it comes with some serious supporting evidence, testimony, and eyewitness authentication.

Lat and Eleven took some photos of the Chad site. And guess what, they didn't have a photoshop tag. No drone...no photoshop lol.




Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 23rd, 2008, 5:52pm

My favorite part of all that was the load of hooey about Raj's soon to be father-in-law, the engineer, who never deleted photos from his camera's memory card because he didn't know how. You know, the same guy who always downloaded that same camera with Photoshop CS. Or something a lot like that. Whoever performed on line as Raj did a good job of milking it for about all it was worth.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 23rd, 2008, 5:58pm

Thats an excellent point Jeddyhi..

It would be interesting to know of the hundreds pix that mufon has ichosen nvestigated, how many went thru cs2 and adobe..
maybe perhaps we should turn to our fearless leaders.
And for sure for sure Chad is real, after all, Nemo stated back on May 18, 2007..just after Raj released his..
Joined: Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 803
Location: Paris, France
Karma: 343 Re: UFO -'best yet'? up close and detailed
« Reply #223 on May 18, 2007, 9:26pm »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
from Linda Moulton Howe, answering my few questions :
"I have not yet talked by phone with Chad, but he and I have exchanged about a dozen emails since May 14.
How would any of us know what the "real Chad" is if the only communication has been in emails with images?"
source openmindsforum.com

A Dozen!, not 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 a Dozen!
Surely Linda would never lie to us. Even if Raj is fake..why..Chad must be..he must..Real!
Why hasn't Nemo followed those emails up with Linda..She won't bite Him the 100% believer man..I am sure....

Hi Double, I agree.. I am having a gas going back in time..reviewing some of this stuff..I am not ashamed to say..the best stuff is coming from the founding fathers of DRT....smiley


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 23rd, 2008, 6:27pm

From my own research, it appears that every drone photo from every photo witness has been through some version of Photoshop. The Tahoe photos show compression signatures of image editors.

The photos by themselves have never held water. When you factor in that all the photos come from anonymous sources and show signs of Photoshop, then they start to take on water. Finish with the fact that Chad lied about the sighting location and the whole case sinks. Expert testimony concluding hoaxed images are the sharks circling the wreckage.

But for some reason, some have a different outlook. An outlook where all the strange, weird aspects and coincedences of the drones are either explained away with gibberish or ignored completely. Like the idea of the drones being hoaxed is completely and utterly impossible and such thoughts should not be entertained.

I'm waiting for someone to say that C2C added the photoshop tags when processing them to their server. laugh
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 23rd, 2008, 8:59pm

on Dec 23rd, 2008, 6:27pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
From my own research, it appears that every drone photo from every photo witness has been through some version of Photoshop. The Tahoe photos show compression signatures of image editors.

The photos by themselves have never held water. When you factor in that all the photos come from anonymous sources and show signs of Photoshop, then they start to take on water. Finish with the fact that Chad lied about the sighting location and the whole case sinks. Expert testimony concluding hoaxed images are the sharks circling the wreckage.

But for some reason, some have a different outlook. An outlook where all the strange, weird aspects and coincedences of the drones are either explained away with gibberish or ignored completely. Like the idea of the drones being hoaxed is completely and utterly impossible and such thoughts should not be entertained.

I'm waiting for someone to say that C2C added the photoshop tags when processing them to their server. laugh




Drones like to kip on their back… beautiful plumage. wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Samsara on Dec 24th, 2008, 09:34am

Californian Drones Mystery solved by
Sarah Connor Chronicles


(Apologies if this has already been posted ?)


http://screenrant.com/sarah-connor-chronicles-california-drones-mystery-brusimm-4647/
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by murnut on Dec 24th, 2008, 09:51am

User Image
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Dec 24th, 2008, 09:57am

Roswell crash solved by the "Independence Day'. Viral marketing gone wrong...

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 24th, 2008, 12:00pm

on Dec 24th, 2008, 09:57am, ABCStore wrote:
Roswell crash solved by the "Independence Day'. Viral marketing gone wrong...

ABC

Or 'Viral marketing' gone right? grin

Hi ABC, for once we’re in agreement, but unfortunately the screenrant article linked above was just the start, here are some other popular sites that range from stating it categorically as fact to offering the viral hypothesis as a possible solution.

Your UFOs. Giff dem to me.

Your UFOs Are Just Viral Marketing

Drone Mystery Terminated? | TDG

Caret drones - a Terminator viral?

It’s funny how many sources pick this up after it’s been quiet for so long, and the majority of the ones I’ve read that deal primarily with UFOs as a regular source have a distinct ‘I told you so’ feel to their posts.

As I say though I believe this SCC tie-in is by an opportunistic writer or someone involved in the production side that is aware of the Drones, one relevant point though is everyone saying that Fox wouldn’t use it if it wasn’t theirs as it’s a legal minefield, however (and by the same token) obviously the legal department of Fox will have advised on this aspect before starting filming, and more importantly they’ve obviously cleared its use…..

Cheers.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 24th, 2008, 12:02pm

on Dec 24th, 2008, 09:57am, ABCStore wrote:
Roswell crash solved by the "Independence Day'. Viral marketing gone wrong...

ABC




49 years in the making. wink



Merry Christmas to all. User Image
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 24th, 2008, 1:46pm

ABC,

I too am not convinced of the SCC angle. More evidence is needed I think. We will have to be patient a little longer before the source is exposed.

Keep in mind all of the work done to cover "their" identity (but there have been a few errors made). wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 24th, 2008, 11:44pm

Merry Christmas One and ALL!!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 25th, 2008, 03:58am

on Dec 24th, 2008, 11:44pm, TeachersPet wrote:
Merry Christmas One and ALL!!

Merry Christmas TP and Dronies everywhere!! grin

All The Best. smiley

Quote:
Some minds remain open long enough for the truth not only to enter,
but to pass on through by way of a ready exit without pausing anywhere along the route.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 25th, 2008, 07:36am

Merry Christmas to ALL. Drone believers and hoax believers alike.....just have a great day. From my family to everyone. Happy Holidays!


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 28th, 2008, 4:01pm

Quote:
Dec 22, 2008, 11:32pm, siddreader wrote:
Let's make this one clear first:

This whole story is a hoax. We agree here. And I am bored by those, who ignore all evidence, common sense, and opinions of others.




Quote:
Dec 22, 2008, 11:38pm, elevenaugust wrote:

Correction:
The whole story haven't been proved yet to be a (100%? ) hoax.



Hey 11A,

I did not get an answer back... If the whole story isn't 100% a hoax, then what part are you saying is a hoax (and why)?




Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Dec 28th, 2008, 4:12pm

Just a few questions then...

who did it?
how did they do it?
when?
for what purpose?

Answer all of the above and we'll consider case closed.

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 28th, 2008, 5:44pm

on Dec 28th, 2008, 4:12pm, ABCStore wrote:
Just a few questions then...

who did it?
how did they do it?
when?
for what purpose?

Answer all of the above and we'll consider case closed.

ABC




Are these your only parameters for being a hoax?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 28th, 2008, 5:57pm

on Dec 28th, 2008, 4:12pm, ABCStore wrote:
Just a few questions then...

who did it?
how did they do it?
when?
for what purpose?

Answer all of the above and we'll consider case closed.

ABC


When those questions are answered, everyone will consider the case closed. If you can't come to terms with the obvious fact that the drones were hoaxed by now, you probably never will.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 29th, 2008, 05:03am

on Dec 28th, 2008, 5:57pm, Double Nought Spy wrote:
When those questions are answered, everyone will consider the case closed. If you can't come to terms with the obvious fact that the drones were hoaxed by now, you probably never will.


I agree Double, and ABC, who is "we"?, if its DRT , the the"we" is supposed to showing us one shred of evidence its real..

As for Fox, lets remember they did not shoot the SCC, Warners did and "sold them to Fox.. Fox merely attempts to sell or promote .That they did. Merely go to fox terminator wiki sites and fan clubs.Warners was having a fit they might not get an order for additional season, ask Josh
Personally, I hope they eat each other alive.

Did anyone catch the Bruce Knapp and Mufon/Joiner/Friedman broadcast? It was great.
They caught the AF lying about the radar reports..
Heck if AF can lie, sure enough..Hollywood can.
Perhaps ABC should pose his "challenge to Mufon".
And then get back to us what they say.
We certainly can't do too much better than them.
Happy new Year!!


Double..I am still chuckling.
Z





Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 29th, 2008, 06:04am

on Dec 28th, 2008, 4:12pm, ABCStore wrote:
Just a few questions then...

who did it?
how did they do it?
when?
for what purpose?

Answer all of the above and we'll consider case closed.

ABC


Who are the witnesses?
Why did they disappear?
Why didn't they report their sighting to any authorities?
Why didn't at least one photo witness document their sighting by reporting it to a news agency?

Other than questionable photos, the drone case has offered nothing that points to realism. Rather the whole case seems more like exactly how an internet hoax would unravel. The case has more in common with a hoax than reality.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Dec 29th, 2008, 09:54am

on Dec 29th, 2008, 06:04am, Jeddyhi wrote:
Who are the witnesses?
Why did they disappear?
Why didn't they report their sighting to any authorities?
Why didn't at least one photo witness document their sighting by reporting it to a news agency?


Please define "authorities". Does Linda Moulton Howe qualify? Does she qualify as "news agency"?

To refresh your memory, there were more witnesses than the ones with photos.

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 29th, 2008, 10:11am

on Dec 29th, 2008, 06:04am, Jeddyhi wrote:
Who are the witnesses?
Why did they disappear?
Why didn't they report their sighting to any authorities?
Why didn't at least one photo witness document their sighting by reporting it to a news agency?


We have the names of three of the photo witnesses and Linda has two more. But you knew that.

Even if they disappeared on their own (may not have) can you blame them?

They may have reported to the authorities (and ABC is correct, Linda is an authority). You have no way of checking this so how could you know they didn't. Even if they did not call the cops. What good would that have done but possibly got them into more trouble. What is the percentage of UFO witnesses who call the cops?

Raj (or his brother inlaw) contacted the Santa Cruz Sentinel.

Now, I have a couple of questions of my own.

Why do you spread propaganda? I mean, I keep answering these questions for you and you already know the answers yet you continue parroting for another purpose.
Why is it so important to you that everybody believes the drones are a hoax? Isn't enough to simply let people look at the evidence and judge for themselves without having to put a slant on it?



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 29th, 2008, 10:54am

on Dec 29th, 2008, 10:11am, Latitude wrote:
I mean, I keep answering these questions for you and you already know the answers yet you continue parroting for another purpose.



grin Good one, Numbers!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 29th, 2008, 11:38am

on Dec 29th, 2008, 10:11am, Latitude wrote:
We have the names of three of the photo witnesses and Linda has two more. But you knew that.

Even if they disappeared on their own (may not have) can you blame them?



Is that the correct way to “look” at it? If someone in earnest wanted to report a sighting… do you report it in a way a hoaxer would? Or do you just come out publicly and tell people what happened?

This strikes at the very heart of the reason for releasing the photos in the first place. Why did they do it if there were no intent of sincerity and honesty in trying to clear the issue up?


Quote:
They may have reported to the authorities (and ABC is correct, Linda is an authority). You have no way of checking this so how could you know they didn't. Even if they did not call the cops. What good would that have done but possibly got them into more trouble. What is the percentage of UFO witnesses who call the cops?



Yea, they “communicated” with Linda… but she does not know “who” they are or “what they look like,” or “where they live.” What proof do you have that Linda was not duped?


Quote:
Raj (or his brother inlaw) contacted the Santa Cruz Sentinel.



Even you do not know who is contacting who. Raj, Chad, Stephen, Ty and Isaac may very well be the same person (and likely are IMHO). Its not like Lev does not take on multiple identities

.
Quote:
Now, I have a couple of questions of my own.

Why do you spread propaganda? I mean, I keep answering these questions for you and you already know the answers yet you continue parroting for another purpose.
Why is it so important to you that everybody believes the drones are a hoax? Isn't enough to simply let people look at the evidence and judge for themselves without having to put a slant on it?



Lat, this is where I am disappointed in you. If you are going to make such claims (as if you are the number one champion of the cause… so talk about putting out you own slants and propaganda) you need to have some scrap of objective evidence to back it up. A small tidbit will do. Not much really, just something small that will show any reality in the case.

We have been waiting for over a year for the evidence. Still waiting.

The reason this has not happened is because there is objective evidence for a hoax, and no evidence for it being real. Maybe, that is where our slant is coming from.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 29th, 2008, 11:39am

on Dec 29th, 2008, 10:11am, Latitude wrote:
We have the names of three of the photo witnesses and Linda has two more. But you knew that.


Let me try to explain things in a rational, thinking manner. Lat, none of the photo witnesses have been vetted. You have names( real or not) but no bodies.

Quote:
Even if they disappeared on their own (may not have) can you blame them?


Yes I blame them. And you should as well. It makes the case look like a hoax with no documentation at all. Have you or any other dronies actually studied any other sightings?

Quote:
They may have reported to the authorities (and ABC is correct, Linda is an authority). You have no way of checking this so how could you know they didn't.


Very early on the Capitola police department was contacted. No reports were filed. No reported sightings in Capitola. No reported sightings of any drones to any police departments. These reports, when filed, are usually picked up by a news wire. No news wires reported any drone sightings. Lat, you can paint it any way you want, but the facts remain.


Quote:
Even if they did not call the cops. What good would that have done but possibly got them into more trouble. What is the percentage of UFO witnesses who call the cops?


More trouble? How could documenting their sighting be trouble? Of course, filing a false report or hoaxing a police agency can get one into deep, deep trouble.

Some of the best cases in Ufology, which stand up to scrutiny and debunking, are the ones where the police were called. Remember the Illinios Triangle case? Cops became witnesses. Remember the Illinios Tinley Park case. The police and the National UFO Reporting center were flooded with calls. What about the Trumbell County sighting? You seem like a lousy Ufologist, Lat, but a wonderful dronie lol.


Quote:
Raj (or his brother inlaw) contacted the Santa Cruz Sentinel.

Now, I have a couple of questions of my own.

Why do you spread propaganda? I mean, I keep answering these questions for you and you already know the answers yet you continue parroting for another purpose.
Why is it so important to you that everybody believes the drones are a hoax? Isn't enough to simply let people look at the evidence and judge for themselves without having to put a slant on it?


Yes, I know the correct answers. Your answers are a warped version of a slanted reality driven by an agenda to promote the drones as a credible sighting.

You are putting the slant on it. You are the one denying everything rational. The only propaganda comes from you and the DRT. You have quite a nerve accusing me of what the DRT has done since day one. Spread BS and deny hoax, even in the face of overwhelming evidence. Your propaganda obviously has an agenda but guess what? It ain't working.

When you explored the Chad site, was Chad and his wife there to help? I'll answer that one....hell no! Did Chad even tell anyone where the sighting was located at?.....hell no! Has any photo witness come forward and helped at all?....hell no! Did any photo witnesses report their sighting to the authorities, and by authorities I mean local police departments?.....hell no! Does the Police Chief of Capitola think it is all a hoax?.....hell yes!
Does all of Ufology think it is a hoax?....hell yes! Has one CGI expert anywhere labeled the drone photos as authentic?.....hell no!

The drones are a hoax. The DRT investigation is a joke. I recommend that the DRT study some real, documented sightings with real people, real police reports, real witnesses. That may help you all to learn how to tell the difference between an internet hoax and an actual sighting. Perhaps then you won't waste a year and a half promoting a hoax.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 29th, 2008, 12:30pm

Jed,

Have you ever wondered why ufology does not have better evidence to make it's case? Why don't the Illinois Tinley people have some close up video or pics?

I have a hard time believing that it's never happened and have a sneaky suspicion it has on multiple occasions. Some of those incidences likely attempted to go public. For multiple reasons they were likely shot down (maybe labeled as hoaxes?).

Don't be so gullible. It's not a perfect world. Because of that things are often left as unexplained.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 29th, 2008, 12:36pm

on Dec 29th, 2008, 12:30pm, Latitude wrote:
Jed,

Have you ever wondered why ufology does not have better evidence to make it's case? Why don't the Illinois Tinley people have some close up video or pics?

I have a hard time believing that it's never happened and have a sneaky suspicion it has on multiple occasions. Some of those incidences likely attempted to go public. For multiple reasons they were likely shot down (maybe labeled as hoaxes?).

Don't be so gullible. It's not a perfect world. Because of that things are often left as unexplained.



"The Tinley Park sightings are among the most well-documented cases that we have seen," Peter Davenport, director of the center, said. "With (each event), you have multiple witnesses, multiple videotapes, eyewitness reports, and Federal Aviation Administration and law enforcement documentation.
The amount of footage -- particularly from Aug. 21, 2004 -- is striking. Three red lights are seen hanging in the air in various positions, seemingly indicating a form or structure.
There are numerous pieces of footage shot by area residents at the same time in different locations, which gives researchers much more data to work with than the usual isolated UFO sighting."

Source:http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=4672066


How can you tell me not to be so gullible? Study ufology a little bit. Study a case before you comment on it and make yourself look bad. The Tinley Park sighting has photos and numerous video that is still being studied. There were hundreds, if not thousands of witnesses. Police were overwhelmed with calls. You are really not worth replying to anymore. Go study up. Gullible? Man, that is a good one coming from you.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 29th, 2008, 12:51pm

on Dec 29th, 2008, 11:38am, Marvin wrote:
Is that the correct way to “look” at it? If someone in earnest wanted to report a sighting… do you report it in a way a hoaxer would? Or do you just come out publicly and tell people what happened?

This strikes at the very heart of the reason for releasing the photos in the first place. Why did they do it if there were no intent of sincerity and honesty in trying to clear the issue up?


These are good questions, Marvin.

Go back and read the emails from Raj to Bren and Ivo, especially the part when the flickr account set up by Spf33 was hacked. Read closely Raj's words when he's asking about the missing hi rez pics. Are those the words of a hoaxer? Try to picture it in your mind.

Yes, to understand witnesses and their actions you need to understand their motives. Also there was plenty of sincerity, probably misplaced though. People for the most part are honest and good. Sometimes they do stuff for good reasons only to realize later they made a mistake.




Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 29th, 2008, 1:00pm

on Dec 29th, 2008, 12:36pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
How can you tell me not to be so gullible? Study ufology a little bit. Study a case before you comment on it and make yourself look bad. The Tinley Park sighting has photos and numerous video that is still being studied. There were hundreds, if not thousands of witnesses. Police were overwhelmed with calls. You are really not worth replying to anymore. Go study up. Gullible? Man, that is a good one coming from you.

From the article you linked to:
Quote:
Three red lights are seen hanging in the air in various positions, seemingly indicating a form or structure.


Blurry points of light are not good video. I'm talking about clear, up close and personal without a doubt footage. Where is it?



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 29th, 2008, 1:24pm

One would think these geniuses would get tired of going 'round and 'round in their tiny little circles. Makes 'em dizzy.

You are right, Jed, they need to spend some time studying some actual unknown ufo cases. One has to wonder why such neophytes focus so tightly on this one "case." If they don't have ownership of some part of the hoax, they are doing wonderful imitations of people who have.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 29th, 2008, 2:12pm

on Dec 29th, 2008, 1:00pm, Latitude wrote:
From the article you linked to:


Blurry points of light are not good video. I'm talking about clear, up close and personal without a doubt footage. Where is it?




The three red lights are far from blurry. A triangle shaped craft flew slowly over the city, hovering for up to twenty minutes without moving. Multiple witnesses are on record and documentation exists to prove it really happened. There is footage from multiple angles. It is a real case. No chance of hoax. You really don't know what makes a sighting legitimate, do you? You act as if every case must have CGI photos with a visible alien language before you can consider it real. You are so lost lol! Keep promoting the drone hoax while Ufology moves on without you to investigate real sightings. rolleyes
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 29th, 2008, 2:29pm

Jed you are missing my point but that's OK, I've had enough abuse today. grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 29th, 2008, 2:38pm

on Dec 29th, 2008, 2:29pm, Latitude wrote:
Jed you are missing my point but that's OK, I've had enough abuse today. grin


No, your point was not missed. The point you are missing is that a sighting does not need crystal clear daytime photos in order to be labeled a legitimate sighting. Multiple videos from a mass sighting from people who actually come forward is way more convincing than drone photos with anonymous witnesses and no documentation at all.

The drones are being presented exactly the way an internet hoax would be presented, not as an actual sighting.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 29th, 2008, 2:50pm

on Dec 29th, 2008, 2:29pm, Latitude wrote:
Jed you are missing my point but that's OK, I've had enough abuse today. grin


Some people can dish it out all day long, but can't take it for a minute.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 29th, 2008, 4:38pm

In all fairness, the drone saga is not your average garden variety ufo case.. tongue

Isn't that why we are all still here.? (Except for those who want to save us from the drones grin)
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 29th, 2008, 5:49pm

What is a garden variety ufo?
You mean Caret or Carrot.
Most of us have some history with other cases..like the Colonel Rutledge or Reeds hoax..Garden variety hoaxes, and are fascinated or intrigued with the Texas Stephens cases that Joiner and Mufon looked at. We are not stuck on one case as you are in your garden at DRT , growing only one vegetable
This site and the majority like it see this thing now as mufon saw it hoax, after doing theirown analysis, which you yourself were a part of, and went your own way when things started looking grim for the photos..and the PIs..
We had no intention of protecting you from the drones,
its where the research and facts lead, whether you accept them or not. It is for us facts, and for you as even Josh put it..faith, which he said he did not want or mean his little escapade to disturb.

Garden variety hoaxes, are still hoaxes by any other name..
But you have a garden for it..tend it well..and hope something sprouts in the spring. With so many Gardeners there in one spot, surely something can be done with all those green thumbs , and no doubt,they can be put to some good use with a little imagination.
Let us know what comes of it and good luck. laugh







Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 29th, 2008, 6:49pm

on Dec 29th, 2008, 4:38pm, tomi01uk wrote:
In all fairness, the drone saga is not your average garden variety ufo case.. tongue

Isn't that why we are all still here.? (Except for those who want to save us from the drones grin)


You flatter yourself. We are not "all still here" because the drone episode represents anything extraordinary in itself, or because there is any chance the drones exist outside some contrived images (there is none), or even because we feel some need to educate a dozen or so hard core believers who are as obstinate as they are irrational. I can only speak for myself, but I don't care what you choose to believe or why. Since the drones are fake, there are thousands, yes thousands, of more interesting cases to explore.

The ARC keeps (in a spontaneous rotation) a few people on the case because the Internet has become a very powerful tool for those who would deceive, and while the drones have been shown to be a hoax, we hope to take the truth to another level and expose the people responsible. Most observers have figured that out, which is why we don't get very many people stopping by at ATS to heckle us about the thread still being active. Anyone with a few synapses still firing knows ufology has serious credibility issues. The drone hoax has helped to make us all look like idiots to the people who need to pay attention to the truth. Whether that was all or part of the motivation for the hoax or not, it has served to keep ufology way out on the lunatic fringe as far as most real scientists are concerned. The more you cling publicly to the idea that this was anything but a fiasco and a dumbing-down of the discourse in the field, the more foolish you look and the more damage you do to what you pretend to care about. You are not helping ufology, but rather damaging it.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 29th, 2008, 7:09pm

on Dec 29th, 2008, 4:38pm, tomi01uk wrote:
In all fairness, the drone saga is not your average garden variety ufo case.. tongue

Isn't that why we are all still here.? (Except for those who want to save us from the drones grin)


In all fairness, you are right. It is not your garden variety ufo case. The debate that has transpired over the many months is a testament to that fact. The research, analysis, and investigation set it way apart from garden variety.

It has actually been an amazing case just for the sheer attention it received. Of course, the photos were the main attention grabber.

The drones may be a dis-info campaign sanctioned by a government agency. Who knows?. The drones may be an elaborate hoax targeting a specific group. Who knows? The drones may be an abandoned viral marketing campaign for a TV show. Who knows?

What we do know is that the Drone case is full of problems from the get go. When digital hoaxery is factored into the equation as a reasonable suspicion, if only for the fact that digital hoaxery exists in the first place, then the anonymity factor immediatedly comes under suspicion. In other UFO cases, witnesses have come forward and been vetted. They have cooperated with investigations, even being interviewed in person but remaining publicly anonymous. You know the type, the person who only allows their silhouette to be shown and voice changed. There are ways to remain anonymous but still help an investigation.

Regardless of this, and even allowing for all photo witnesses to be anonymous, the photos still have serious problems and do not have one professional endorsement as authentic, unaltered photographs.

None of the testimony received from the photo witnesses has been vetted. Not even a neighbor that has said, "yeah, I knew Chad and his wife"!

The Drones came to us just the way an internet hoax would come. Isaac came along like a "John Titor" to really mix it up.

The case stinks of hoaxery. Until something real developes, like Raj, Ty or Stephen contacting a news agency to say, "Yeah I took that photo", it should be regarded as being exactly what a ufo internet hoax appears like.

There are holes in the story, problems with the photos and no witness verification.

It is like beating a dead horse's shadow.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 29th, 2008, 7:25pm

on Dec 29th, 2008, 7:09pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
It is like beating a dead horse's shadow.


User Image


Yea, something like that.



User Image
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 29th, 2008, 7:45pm

"It is like beating a dead horse's shadow."

Perfect. I love it!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by murnut on Dec 29th, 2008, 7:49pm

Hey Tuna!

Where's your Cowboy's now?





Getting back to da drones...one side is never gonna convince the other.

The real question is "Where did Lev go?"
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 29th, 2008, 8:01pm

on Dec 29th, 2008, 7:49pm, murnut wrote:
Hey Tuna!

Where's your Cowboy's now?





Getting back to da drones...one side is never gonna convince the other.

The real question is "Where did Lev go?"


Good to see ya, Mur. I never ever thought I'd type this, but: I miss Lev. Unlike most of the rest of us, he (or they) was (were) unpredictable.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 29th, 2008, 8:47pm

@es/sys: As you well know, unless you have chosen to forget... my situation with DRT had nothing to do with photos or the drones loosening their grip on reality for me..

It had everything to do with your obsessive interest smiley and supposed info about the case, and some ppl thinking (because I'm the nice guy who pm's with you occassionally)... that it came from me. Also I figured they needed a break from my incessent arguing... lipsrsealed

Now that that is part of the public record once more and cleared up yet again....... tongue A stark reminder to everyone how dangerous ES/sys can be shocked rolleyes

A lot of ppl want to know the genesis of this drone saga.
Prejudging it as a hoax or with the data available now, is hardly satisfying or everyone wouldn't be following this so closely would they?

The Drone Enigma... might it be half true and half fabrication? A little more one way than the other..
What would that imply?

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 29th, 2008, 8:56pm

Half true? Half Fabrication? Which part do you say is true?
Just what are you selling us now?


I need a rest..the number of biblical names is just daunting from Abraham Isaac Joshua and yes...Leviathan. ..God must be calling me home..

He should sue for SCCs use of interchangeable parts just like that scorpion drone..pic he had..
I still have pix of that and his last blog works. I think it was a mistake his taking that down..because although slightly skewed in view, it was not focused on one vegetable like the other..
It was more than attractive, he had some nice articles in there. His graphics were very good.
We will see him/ all parts of soon enough..I am sure.

Marvin ..your signature becomes you quite well..kudos




Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 29th, 2008, 9:03pm

Good Ol Lev..

He and I had some real rightous PM's all through this saga and he never once let his guard down..
Except for a couple of times wink..

like when he once yelled at me for a whole post because I explained how to sand, prime and paint, included grits of sandpaper as well as thinner dilutions to him too.. hehehehe wink

And I loved his phrase "cookie monster" as well. grin

There are certainly a number of distinct and gifted facets to lev(s) All very intriguing that's for sure....
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 29th, 2008, 9:13pm

on Dec 29th, 2008, 8:56pm, TeachersPet wrote:
Half true? Half Fabrication? Which part do you say is true?


My brain can't dismiss a few things when I think there is a mixture of facts in with this. You didn't buy the info from Palo Alto, source X, and unfortunately there isn't a way to convey it in the same way to you it was provided to us.. But also add to that, the fact I have a client who has given me insight that was confirmed later by others to the PI's about what went on with the mucky muck adults in the high tech industry there and ufo subject matter was part of it..

It does give one pause to think.. esp when you consider the LAP is orig over 15 feet and contains a well thought out alphabit... it kinda gets your brain spinning a bit..


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 29th, 2008, 9:15pm

on Dec 29th, 2008, 8:47pm, tomi01uk wrote:
Prejudging it as a hoax or with the data available now, is hardly satisfying or everyone wouldn't be following this so closely would they?


Nobody is but us. And thats only a handful. Everyone else has moved on to better, newer, more credible sightings. The only thing left of the drones is a small forum promoting them as possibly real and a few dissenting voices of dis-belief that cannot understand why the small forum insists on denying all hoax evidence and, for all intents and purposes, has become a drone hoax promoter.

I don't know if the DRT will ever investigate another case or not, but any reputation they may have had as unbiased, objective, scientific investigators is long gone. Their absolute refusal to accept numerous expert analysis on the photos speaks volumes. The exaggerations of danger at the Chad location to make it appear more cloak and dagger were downright pitiful. Finally, to condone Chad lying about the sighting location and even making excuses for why he did it is beyond comprehension.

There is no one left but us few. Amazed and dazed, we remain.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 29th, 2008, 9:26pm

Amazed and dazed, is what a small group of us are.. but there is endless interest out there about what this case is.. I'm sure of that or else they wouldn't be using this in computer marketing or a serial on tv..

Whatever the cause or cure may be for us dronies.. I'm pretty sure there will be endless gratitude to those who have the ability stamina and resources to get to the bottom of this mystery. They will be the heros..
I'm sure of it smiley I just hope there is a way to solve it..

But in my mind everyone is helping to get to the bottom of it, because contrarian opinions help everyone think this out thoroughly.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 29th, 2008, 9:49pm

on Dec 29th, 2008, 9:13pm, tomi01uk wrote:
My brain can't dismiss a few things when I think there is a mixture of facts in with this. You didn't buy the info from Palo Alto, source X, and unfortunately there isn't a way to convey it in the same way to you it was provided to us.. But also add to that, the fact I have a client who has given me insight that was confirmed later by others to the PI's about what went on with the mucky muck adults in the high tech industry there and ufo subject matter was part of it..

It does give one pause to think.. esp when you consider the LAP is orig over 15 feet and contains a well thought out alphabit... it kinda gets your brain spinning a bit..



Is that like being a little bit pregnant?

Please stop with the secret information you can't tell us about. LMH is rubbing off on you. The DRT had very little credibility even before the lies about the Chad location were exposed. Now it's zero.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 29th, 2008, 10:10pm

on Dec 29th, 2008, 9:49pm, Double Nought Spy wrote:
Is that like being a little bit pregnant?

Please stop with the secret information you can't tell us about. LMH is rubbing off on you. The DRT had very little credibility even before the lies about the Chad location were exposed. Now it's zero.


There is nothing in this story regarding source X and the "octopus" description, that the DRT didn't publish and disclose thoroughly. You chose not to believe it. All that the DRT learned is published as it was given to us.

And I think I've been quite candid about the client and the other sources from Palo Alto, except I forgot to mention that I spoke to one of those ppl who grew up then/there as well personally on the phone. I wanted to collaborate what the woman I know here told me with what he experienced growing up there as well. They did hear a lot from the adults.

Now, if you dismiss this aspect of the investigation are you shorting the truth? Think about it. You can't be a little bit pregnant either wink
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 29th, 2008, 10:37pm

You've got nothin'. Get over it.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 29th, 2008, 11:11pm

on Dec 29th, 2008, 10:11am, Latitude wrote:
Why do you spread propaganda?


HAH! I can't believe YOU said that. You, after all, have a link to a video in your signature. That video, in the beginning, says this:
Quote:
Over the next two months more than a dozen witnesses would come forward.

http://home.comcast.net/~dl1027/files/object/Drones2.wmv

Wow, look at that propaganda. More than a dozen!? A dozen is 12!

Come forward? You mean hide behind the curtains and withhold evidence?

Then you say this:
on Dec 29th, 2008, 10:11am, Latitude wrote:
We have the names of three of the photo witnesses and Linda has two more. But you knew that.


You have 3 fake names, and Linda has two more fake names. Thats 5. How do you get 12+?

Looks like you have been caught yet again spreading disinformation, and propagating this HOAX.


on Dec 29th, 2008, 10:11am, Latitude wrote:
Why is it so important to you that everybody believes the drones are a hoax?


Because it is a hoax, and it is very important that we stop this hoax from spreading, or the unethical, untalented, no good, lying, son of a b**ch's who made this hoax could possibly profit from it. Now we don't want anybody of that manner profiting off of gullible people. It seems to be whats happening.

Also, it's better to spread the truth that it is a hoax, instead of lying and saying it is real.

on Dec 29th, 2008, 10:11am, Latitude wrote:
Isn't enough to simply let people look at the evidence and judge for themselves without having to put a slant on it?


That would make your job of propagating this hoax more easy wouldn't it?

You see, the problem is that you are an admin at DRT. DRT is known, and publicly states, that they only promote or discuss the "reality" of the drones. THAT is a SLANT.

So if we just "let them look at the evidence" and they happen to go to the DRT website, because "Drone Research Team" sounds "official", they will see people only discussing the "reality" of the drones. So they will only see HALF of the "evidence", and they might get the impression that they are seeing all the evidence. We can't have that now, that goes against exactly what you are asking for.

You are asking for us to "just show them the evidence", well our evidence proves this to be a hoax. Why does the DRT hide any and all information that points to a hoax? That is like hiding evidence. Hiding evidence makes YOU and DRT an accomplice to a crime. Yes, the DRONE HOAX is a CRIME.

So it is proven that DRT is misleading and purposely hiding evidence, which helps propagate a hoax.

So it is proven that DRT is misleading and purposely hiding evidence, which helps propagate a hoax.

So it is proven that DRT is misleading and purposely hiding evidence, which helps propagate a hoax.

So it is proven that DRT is misleading and purposely hiding evidence, which helps propagate a hoax.

So it is proven that DRT is misleading and purposely hiding evidence, which helps propagate a hoax.

On that note:

The "witnesses" only contacted by telephone and e-mail... Have you ever herd of a "Prank Call? It's quite easy to trick people into thinking you are serious, you should watch the show called Crank Yankers it is quite funny.

However, prank calls are illegal too. Heres a quote from wiki:
Quote:
Prank calls that waste the time of emergency services are a criminal offense in most countries and is considered telephone harassment in the US.


When someone makes a prank call, and "services" have to act upon said call, these services cost money and someone has to pay for it.

What the drones hoaxers don't realize, is that many countries have "services" that act upon UFO sightings. Kind of like a prank call.

They research the reality of the sightings, to make sure that no enemy country has some "advanced technology" that can sneak into the country undetected. It is for the sake of national security.

I wonder how many "services", and how much money, these criminal drone hoaxers have racked up? I think its about time to put them in jail and make them pay for it.

It will be soon.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Dec 29th, 2008, 11:44pm

on Dec 29th, 2008, 2:50pm, Double Nought Spy wrote:
Some people can dish it out all day long, but can't take it for a minute.


Since you've joined, your posts can be summarized in one sentence - "you guys are idiots". Have you joined solely for that purpose?

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by neveleeleven on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:15am

on Dec 29th, 2008, 11:44pm, ABCStore wrote:
Since you've joined, your posts can be summarized in one sentence - "you guys are idiots". Have you joined solely for that purpose?

ABC


Why would he join just for that purpose when you do a great job on your own?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:28am

Thats so amusing..am I to understand then that the drone case was proven hoax by a group of idiots.

The drone case was proven hoax by a group of idiots..

hmm..That would say to even an idiot like me, there was no case for the drone to begin with.

so what else is there to bolster proof, let alone credibility..Is that the best shot they can give?
I expected more..

But quite honestly...I like this.".Even a village fool could see thru this hoax.."

Lets leave it at that Eleven..It makes for a great epitaph for Isaac and his fallen worshippers...
no editing or encouragement necessary ..
smiley





Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:40am

on Dec 29th, 2008, 11:44pm, ABCStore wrote:
Since you've joined, your posts can be summarized in one sentence - "you guys are idiots". Have you joined solely for that purpose?

ABC


ABC, there are 3 people here who get off by antagonizing and trying to bait others into an argument. I won't name names, but I'm sure you can tell who they are...

Tuna
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:44am

on Dec 29th, 2008, 7:49pm, murnut wrote:
Hey Tuna!

Where's your Cowboy's now?


Eh, they just wanted to get a head start on next season! tongue
Congrats to Philly, the NFC is up for grabs!

Tuna
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 30th, 2008, 01:50am

That is good advice Tuna, at least in sports players on both sides must follow the rules. Perhaps that is why we are so drawn to them, everyone gives their best..within that framework.



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 05:26am

My first post is below, from a week ago. It should not take too much brain power to figure out why I joined. I'm still waiting for an answer from the DRT about that one, too.

Why was such a thorough job of making the drone vanish done for the purpose stated? And doesn't that doctored picture refute the DRT argument that the drone photos are too good to be fake? Any DRT members care to address those two questions? That would actually tell us something, instead of wasting time on the same bogus arguments that have been laughable for a year and a half.



on Dec 23rd, 2008, 2:10pm, Double Nought Spy wrote:
I agree, Marvin. The whole silly episode always ends up in Notlob.

The parrot is still dead, too.

I'm curious about something, though. Actually, it is something I find amusing, and I have not seen it mentioned anywhere else. Can anyone tell me who did the cgi work on the Raj photo the PIs were using in their attempt to find the utility pole? Whoever it was did an awfully nice job of making the drone image disappear without a trace. My point is this: here we have an obvious photoshop job, or something like that, which was done not to fool anyone really, but just to remove the bizarre looking "object" so local folks could look at the utility pole and its associated wires and such without being distracted. One would not expect any great expenditure of time or money on such a thing, since it only needed superficial camouflage, yet what we have could easily pass as one of the original photos, the landscapes that had the drone images dropped iinto them. Doesn't this blow a big hole in the argument that "the photos are too good to be fakes?"

My apologies if this has already been covered somewhere, but I don't think it has. Lord knows I don't want to contribute to some more of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppK6sxz6epk
rolleyes rolleyes
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 30th, 2008, 05:58am

on Dec 29th, 2008, 10:37pm, Double Nought Spy wrote:
You've got nothin'. Get over it.


Excuse me.. but that is such a rude answer.
It seems to me that you have an agenda, and your way of slipping this agenda through is to make a lot of noise that the DRT has an agenda.

Pretty transparent, your affiliation to government disinfo, if in fact, there is a connection here that is linked to more serious stuff than what you want to so easily dismiss as a hoax.

Now I'm speculating about your militant stance on this... in the same way and manner you have speculated about those of us interested in digging as deep into this as possible. If in fact you are just an average civilian, with an opinion like the rest of us, you can laugh (with the rest of us) being accused of something absurd..


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 30th, 2008, 06:10am

on Dec 29th, 2008, 11:11pm, neveleeleven wrote:
So it is proven that DRT is misleading and purposely hiding evidence, which helps propagate a hoax.

I wonder how many "services", and how much money, these criminal drone hoaxers have racked up? I think its about time to put them in jail and make them pay for it.

It will be soon.


Oh Gee.... you are such a smart detective..
Please tell us who done it... so we can get ours back too...

You have all the answers.. Why don't YOU tell us the who and what and why thenhuhhuh

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 06:21am

I am happy to hear you understand the accusation is absurd. It's always amusing when the DRT lectures someone else about manners, too!

Now about that photo. I'm afraid I will not be content with just making the DRT try to ignore it. Either someone connected to the DRT spent a lot of time on that photo, or it was in fact an original, pre-drone landscape. The latter would be much easier to put out, if it were available.

I am not the only one to suspect people in the DRT of being somehow involved in the hoax, probably at a low level. Until this matter is cleared up, it will continue to cause us to wonder. It's not the only thing, of course, but it is significant either way.

Now of course the usual suspects are sure to dive in here with a lot of obfuscatory nonsense, so I'll point out here that all that would need to happen with a pre-drone shot is to either run it through Gimp with some trivial modification so the exif data looked appropriate, or just to modify the exif data.

If OTF or whoever it was could do such a slick job of making the drone go away without spending much time, then that tells us something, too.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 30th, 2008, 07:42am

on Dec 30th, 2008, 06:21am, Double Nought Spy wrote:
I am happy to hear you understand the accusation is absurd. It's always amusing when the DRT lectures someone else about manners, too!

Now about that photo. I'm afraid I will not be content with just making the DRT try to ignore it. Either someone connected to the DRT spent a lot of time on that photo, or it was in fact an original, pre-drone landscape. The latter would be much easier to put out, if it were available.

I am not the only one to suspect people in the DRT of being somehow involved in the hoax, probably at a low level. Until this matter is cleared up, it will continue to cause us to wonder. It's not the only thing, of course, but it is significant either way.

Now of course the usual suspects are sure to dive in here with a lot of obfuscatory nonsense, so I'll point out here that all that would need to happen with a pre-drone shot is to either run it through Gimp with some trivial modification so the exif data looked appropriate, or just to modify the exif data.

If OTF or whoever it was could do such a slick job of making the drone go away without spending much time, then that tells us something, too.


Just what is so unusual about that picture? I've got a lot less time at cgi programs than many and I created one for the PI's myself, as well, without a drone in it.

It is very simple to do. This is hardly a smoking gun.

It is seriously funny, (not)... that you can not find tell tale artifacts in a photo without the drone, but you swear they are in a photo with the drone...


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 30th, 2008, 08:11am

Does it seem sensible...
To disregard witnesses who grew up back in the 60's & 70's in Palo Alto reporting ufo subject material being discussed by the adults (their parents) who were the mucky mucks around the tech companies we have today?

And my client who is an expat nutritionalist and could care less about ufo's telling me about one friend of her parents, highly placed in the military at Moffitt Field, saying the same thing to her parents?

Now.. you may choose to ignore this.. but it ties into the LAP and what Isaac wrote a bit too much in my book to be ignored in evaluating this drone saga..


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 08:15am

You are familiar with the concept of coincidence, I hope.

Are you trying to say a hoaxer would never think to locate a fictional laboratory in Palo Alto? Really? Please. This is yet another instance where some background in ufology would serve the DRT well.

Now about that photograph...
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 30th, 2008, 08:50am

on Dec 30th, 2008, 08:15am, Double Nought Spy wrote:
You are familiar with the concept of coincidence, I hope.


Yes, of course.. I know the concept of coincidence...

Quote:
If there is some real connection to the mythical lab, then what is it? Or is this just more smoke?


Bingo... ! That's the kicker.. It is not only the ppl who grew up in the afluence of Palo Alto back then and had parents wispering about this kind of thing..

There is also an old timer known as Source X who provided first hand accounts of a facility described by Isaac and also identified the drones in his own words as.. octopus type parts. Now is this coincidence??

You know that the PI's are liscensed to uphold integrity in their work. They have a very long professional standing. They would hardly fabricate any of this source X info or use someone not vetted by them for the information. They are professional cops to put it bluntly, now working as detectives.. within a network that keeps integrity within their ranks as the highest priority.

Add to that, what the DRT also reported.. that the PI's found through further investigation that certain buildings within the Palo Alto area are off limits, no blueprints available about them and not to be entered or saved by firemen..

Now... where do we draw the line on coincidence??

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 09:03am

So that's it? The revelations that can't be ignored by responsible people? Yet another anonymous expert? Have you done any reading about the UFO subject at all? The fact that you know someone who grew up in Palo Alto informs your whole idea of this place.

See my revised message above.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by GForce on Dec 30th, 2008, 09:03am

Did anyone catch a UFO program last week that dealt with the United States attempts to build circular aircraft? I saw MAYBE the last 15 minutes of it. The reason I bring this up is they showed a photo of what appeared to be a doughnut or what looked very similar to the core of the drone. I don't know IF the two are related but I found it interesting. I've always thought IF the drone was real then it was MAN MADE not alien!

If its alien then its their version of the Edsel! laugh Personally I still believe its a hoax. But if it's a hoax why keep it up? I don't see anything else to be gained! I also don't see a problem with the DRT doing research. You don't have to agree with their findings nor do you have to support them. IF they're part of the hoax then at some point that will come out. But I don't quite understand why most want to use them for verbal punching bags. UNLESS you're too lazy to do your own research.

DEBATE THEIR FINDINGS! QUESTION THEIR INTENTIONS! BUT STOP WITH THE PERSONAL JABS! IT GETS OLD AND APPEARS CHILDISH for those of us who are only slightly interested in this subject.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 09:12am

The DRT serves the hoaxers. Whether it is intentional or not, whether the hoaxers have purposely manipulated them or not, they serve the hoaxers. Some of us are trying to find the culprits. The DRT does provide us with some useful information, even when they try to blow smoke and cover up their lies. That is why we engage them. It is certainly not because we like their brand of BS.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by GForce on Dec 30th, 2008, 09:48am

on Dec 30th, 2008, 09:12am, Double Nought Spy wrote:
The DRT serves the hoaxers. Whether it is intentional or not, whether the hoaxers have purposely manipulated them or not, they serve the hoaxers. Some of us are trying to find the culprits. The DRT does provide us with some useful information, even when they try to blow smoke and cover up their lies. That is why we engage them. It is certainly not because we like their brand of BS.


I've always considered LMH to be the biggest culprit since she was not forthcoming with information early on. I think she's only involved in UFOlogy for one reason. HOWE to make money! However DNS I would agree with you that I would like to see all the findings by the DRT even the BS so we all could look for discrepancies. But I don't consider them(DRT) the enemy. They hoaxers may be playing them but I'd like to be able to reach my own conclusions after reviewing the evidence. What about it DRT?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 30th, 2008, 10:05am

on Dec 30th, 2008, 09:03am, Double Nought Spy wrote:
So that's it? The revelations that can't be ignored by responsible people? Yet another anonymous expert? Have you done any reading about the UFO subject at all? The fact that you know someone who grew up in Palo Alto informs your whole idea of this place.

See my revised message above.


Ahh hah!.... I was waiting for you to answer me (now I sound like 1111 smiley) so flippantly.. Caught you ! grin

How can you possibly consider yourself a ufo researcher and dismiss the information I have reinterated here that the DRT has provided to you?

Now, the easy way out is to say that everything I have said here is phony and I'm a phony and the DRT is not in earnest to figure this out...

That is the easy answer, or a web of disinfo by calling those in earnest disinfo.. Hardly a top calibre way of researching something is it??

And like I have said to 1111, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.. if you muddle up the wheat with the chaff you are truly lost in figuring out the truth in this case.

Let me make it easy for you to take the right path and help productively... I am being completely honest here with everything I have said that constitutes what is the reasoning for considering the aspects of this case.

If you want to muddle up my personal integrity into this, your judgement is already handicapped and you have no hope of figuring it out. I am being honest in what we have learned.

When ppl ask for more information, if they can't digest the info already provided because of lack of trust.. what good does it do to provide more? If you can't accept and properly analyse these discoveries about the case.. how in hell can you even begin to figure out the rest of this?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 10:10am

Not everyone shares your assumptions, let alone agreeing with your analysis. That's as politely as I can put it. If you find these revelations compelling, well, again that tells us something.

Now about that photograph. Is it possible to establish a chain of custody?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 30th, 2008, 10:16am

Hi Gforce,

Thanks for bringing some civility to this thread. I hesitate to post here because it's often like a jungle with barbs and accusations and all kinds of nastiness.

The truth is that DRT came together because we shared a common mindset that we were not satisfied with what we considered a premature hoax conclusion. We sought to find out more. We have never lied to anybody. We report what we find in an unbiased way. Sure, we do often speculate about the what if it's all true. I think that is only natural given the fantastic nature of the subject. But we also have our skeptical side and for that reason we never said for sure the drones are real (even though the hoax side was absolutely certain). There was always that small doubt in the back of my mind. Anything is possible even though the entirety of the case made me ask the question, "if it is a hoax, why would somebody go to this extreme?"

The PIs which were employed by DRT, have always been impartial and not being UFO people have since day one kept an extremely open mind to the possibility of hoax. I'm glad they did because we wanted to make sure they did not overlook anything.

When we visited the Chad location, sure I was thinking a hoaxer would be even less likely to go down into the private property to take pictures. But at the same time I was thinking maybe we might stumble onto a hoax perpetrated by one of the inhabitants. It goes both ways.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 30th, 2008, 10:22am

on Dec 30th, 2008, 10:10am, Double Nought Spy wrote:
Not everyone shares your assumptions,


What assumptions? I haven't made any assumptions.
I am not the one who has a label for this case, am I??

Quote:
let alone agreeing with your analysis.



What analysis? I haven't made any analysis, label or conclusion. All I've done is reinterate why a conclusion at this point is hard to draw...

Quote:
If you find these revelations compelling, well, again that tells us something.



Exactly what does it tell you? That I trust my own reasoning, eyes and ears?? Pray tell??

Quote:
Now about that photograph. Is it possible to establish a chain of custody?


Let's see if I've got this right? You think that it is important for an edited picture, to be analysed to prove that it is edited? If you guys are so great look for the artifacts yourselves. They should be easy to find..

You take a few sky pixels and you put them where the drone used to be.. What you want DRT to do that for you too?



Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 10:27am

Have you looked closely at that picture? Maybe you should. It might also be a good idea to avoid making assumptions about what others have or have not done.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 30th, 2008, 10:30am

on Dec 30th, 2008, 10:27am, Double Nought Spy wrote:
Have you looked closely at that picture? Maybe you should. It might also be a good idea to avoid making assumptions about what others have or have not done.


Why don't you post the picture with what you suspect are real pixels where a drone should be...

oy vey... does this get ridiculous or what .. tongue
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 30th, 2008, 10:38am

on Dec 30th, 2008, 09:48am, GForce wrote:
I've always considered LMH to be the biggest culprit since she was not forthcoming with information early on. I think she's only involved in UFOlogy for one reason. HOWE to make money! However DNS I would agree with you that I would like to see all the findings by the DRT even the BS so we all could look for discrepancies. But I don't consider them(DRT) the enemy. They hoaxers may be playing them but I'd like to be able to reach my own conclusions after reviewing the evidence. What about it DRT?


Therein lies the problem, GForce. The DRT only seems to be interested in keeping the hoax going. If the DRT did not exist, the drones would have faded into oblivion long ago.

All the cloak and dagger stuff with 'Source X', the second hand heresay testimony, the friend of a friend said this, it does nothing but add fluff to a hoax.

I , or any other observer of the drone case, must weigh logical expert analysis of the photos against anonymous, secretive sources that would have us believe in the concept of "Rigid Spatial Relationship", of anti-gravity devices controlled by a self executing "language" that acts as software and hardware. That a guy named Isaac commited espionage over 20 years ago and just happened to catch the tale on the internet and decided to explain the drones with his material he has held in limbo for 2 decades.

When weighing these facts to come to any reasonable conclusion, one must also acknowledge that every witness who submitted a photo has not been found, has not been vetted, has not been interviewed, has not helped or participated in any investigation. Surely someone around the infamous Chad location would have surely known Chad and his wife. They hiked around the area all the time. They were able to trod about "dangerous and scary places" without fear. Yet no testimony has surfaced that even hints to Chad even existing in the first place.

The DRT, however hopeful they may be, attempts to keep the hoax going by playing cloak and dagger games, blowing smoke, ignoring serious questions, and trying to hype the case into something more than a hoax.

There is not one photo expert, CGI expert, or special effects expert who is willing to endorse these drone photos as credible. There is not one photo witness who has been vetted. There is no indication that the drone sightings even took place. No documentation at all. The icing on the cake is that Chad has been shown to have lied about his sighting location.

I know the drone case is a hoax. I have seen enough and researched the case long enough to come to this decision based on the circumstances surrounding the drones. My only other current interest pertains to why the DRT evolved into a "deny hoax at all costs" group, when the evidence surely points to hoax. Why does the DRT endorse a case so full of holes has having any legitimacy when there is no logical reason to do so. That is the burning question for me. Real cases including mass sightings with multiple vetted witnesses are ignored. Video tape footage from multiple angles are scoffed at by Lat for being just blurry lights. Their only interest is in the drones. It almost seems like the DRT are the caretakers of a dis-info story designed to distract and pre-occupy the arm chair ufologist. Either that or the DRT is a very gullible group that does not need nor care for real evidence.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 30th, 2008, 10:52am

on Dec 30th, 2008, 10:38am, Jeddyhi wrote:
Therein lies the problem, GForce. The DRT only seems to be interested in keeping the hoax going. If the DRT did not exist, the drones would have faded into oblivion long ago.

Either that or the DRT is a very gullible group that does not need nor care for real evidence.


Speaking personally I have to disagree with you. Had it not been for the DRT, there would be far less information available. You are assuming (projecting?) how others regard the drone case. I doubt Droneteam.com had anything at all to do with the iconic nature of the drone saga being used by Alienware or SCC.

Next item... who is gullible? Gullible isn't the word for it.
for instance: discreet is a better word. Reporters need to be discreet. Researchers too. PI's especially.

edit: my spelling !!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by GForce on Dec 30th, 2008, 10:54am

Lat, on a personal note I would like to see all the information come forward. Not only from the DRT but others as well. It would be nice to see a thread with all the evidence that's out there to question and debate instead of all the back biting, name calling etc. I understand the anger from those that are anti-drone/hoax group. Before I washed my hands of it(drone) I was ticked that people in the know sat on information. If you guys(DRT) want to discuss your findings and answer questions on a new thread I will make sure there's no personal attacks on you guys. However that excludes members asking questions even tough questions on your findings. But if a post gets personal I will delete it! I THINK WE ALL ONLY WANT TO KNOW THE TRUTH! AT LEAST I DO! Dan
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:06am

on Dec 30th, 2008, 10:38am, Jeddyhi wrote:
They were able to trod about "dangerous and scary places" without fear.


Who the heck are you quoting, Jed? Certainly cannot be 11august or I. Yes, we were set upon by dogs while there. That did happen. We were given the stink eye while traipsing around. We were in effect trespassers. We never distorted any of that and I take offense at you suggesting it. You try to attack us but until you yourself have walked down there your words are nothing. What have you done for this investigation but sit behind your keyboard and cast aspersions? The DRT has put money and time into getting answers.


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by GForce on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:07am

on Dec 30th, 2008, 10:38am, Jeddyhi wrote:
Therein lies the problem, GForce. The DRT only seems to be interested in keeping the hoax going. If the DRT did not exist, the drones would have faded into oblivion long ago.

The DRT, however hopeful they may be, attempts to keep the hoax going by playing cloak and dagger games, blowing smoke, ignoring serious questions, and trying to hype the case into something more than a hoax.



Jeddyhi I would agree with you that the DRT has kept the drone going! But isn't that THEIR rights to do so? Maybe it is all a hoax. Maybe they're part of it in some way. But we'll never know unless ALL the information comes out. I've been skeptical of Issac and the Caret documents from the onset. That could very well be a hoax! My gut tells me at least some of it is. I also agree there's a lot of BS floating around but I also think there's an iota of truth to it somewhere. That IOTA is what I'm interested in. I don't think all the photo's nor all of the witnesses are hoaxed/hoaxers. Some surely are! Others?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Gort on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:09am

on Dec 29th, 2008, 6:49pm, Double Nought Spy wrote:
You flatter yourself. We are not "all still here" because the drone episode represents anything extraordinary in itself, or because there is any chance the drones exist outside some contrived images (there is none), or even because we feel some need to educate a dozen or so hard core believers who are as obstinate as they are irrational. I can only speak for myself, but I don't care what you choose to believe or why. Since the drones are fake, there are thousands, yes thousands, of more interesting cases to explore.

The ARC keeps (in a spontaneous rotation) a few people on the case because the Internet has become a very powerful tool for those who would deceive, and while the drones have been shown to be a hoax, we hope to take the truth to another level and expose the people responsible. Most observers have figured that out, which is why we don't get very many people stopping by at ATS to heckle us about the thread still being active. Anyone with a few synapses still firing knows ufology has serious credibility issues. The drone hoax has helped to make us all look like idiots to the people who need to pay attention to the truth. Whether that was all or part of the motivation for the hoax or not, it has served to keep ufology way out on the lunatic fringe as far as most real scientists are concerned. The more you cling publicly to the idea that this was anything but a fiasco and a dumbing-down of the discourse in the field, the more foolish you look and the more damage you do to what you pretend to care about. You are not helping ufology, but rather damaging it.




Well you hit the nail on the head; some of these people are laughing their heads off as we go into every finite detail on CGI aspects of the drone. Probably just some kids in one of those schools for graphic arts and design. You know the type, body piercing, pink, spiked hairdos. The rich parents send them there to get them out of their hair, they teach them CGI and then with nothing better to do they pick a field that's ripe for the taking.

Quite frankly there will never be disclosure, the average public thinks that only crazy people are involved with UFOs and for the most part I'm beginning to think that's true.

Here you can claim anything, my trip to Venus were they forced me to have wild wanton sex with these female Venusians to help repopulate their planet.

That's what's unique about these UFO bulletin boards. Anyone can claim anything and they seem to attract mostly crazy people with their wild stories about abduction and telecommunications with extraterrestrials. Don't misunderstand me I'm sure that some have these experiences, but in all probability they are not going to be on the Internet bragging about it.

Just look at that Mufon bulletin board for example. Talk about hypocrisy. There are more crazy people on that board spewing their alien adventures, no wonder anybody in their right mind would think that the topic belongs in the fringe. And yet mufon goes on TV talking about an objective and scientific approach to the topic of UFOlogy.

These forum members even talk about the medications they’re on. One repeat abductee in particular, talks about waking up with sore genitals. Then latter on she describes how her teenage sons jump into bed with her when they are frightened by UFOs. Now you don’t have to be Einstein to think, “What is wrong with this picture”? Others are in telecommunication at all times with aliens, and others describe a lifetime association with aliens at a closed military base in San Francisco. Then they talk about 4th degree depinoids, etc. Hell, with all these ambassadors we should just ask them what the drones are used for.


Others think that their DNA has been altered by the aliens, and it just goes on and on and on. Anybody with a rational mind even if they believed in ET would have to ask what is going on with these bulletin boards.

As gravity seems to be a universal force, UFO bulletin boards likewise attract crazy people far greater than any force in the universe. I never knew there were so many crazy people!

So it's no surprise that a few of these types are going to hold out for the drones. Some will even latch on to a blotch on a photograph.

Disclosure, not any time soon.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:11am

Here is a simple basic question pertaining to the drone case and whether or not it is a "real" sighting. Lets see how this is answered.....

Isaac felt most confident in that he could only be wittled down to about one of 40 or 50 people. So confident that he had no problems sharing stolen material that he came into possesion of while committing espionage. Photos, diagrams, and his personal assessment were willingly shared via the FortuneCity website. C2C has an email address for Isaac. I believe somebody spoke to him on the phone......everyone still with me here?

The question is why would Isaac incriminate himself when any government alphabet agency could find his personal information simply by contacting FortuneCity for the info of the creator of the site? Or by contacting C2C for email headers? We, the common armchair investigator have no way to access that information without a court order, but the people that would be most interested in finding Isaac could easily have him in a noose. Why did Isaac ignore that fact and upload supposedly stolen government secrets like he had no fear of being found? That is how a hoaxer would act, not a government insider guilty of espionage.

OK, lets here the excuses and reasons for Isaac's stupidity.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:25am

on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:06am, Latitude wrote:
Who the heck are you quoting, Jed? Certainly cannot be 11august or I. Yes, we were set upon by dogs while there. That did happen. We were given the stink eye while traipsing around. We were in effect trespassers. We never distorted any of that and I take offense at you suggesting it. You try to attack us but until you yourself have walked down there your words are nothing. What have you done for this investigation but sit behind your keyboard and cast aspersions? The DRT has put money and time into getting answers.



On to the point of rehashing your words....If Chad was hiking around there all the time, somebody knew him and allowed him to be there. Yet no one has even confirmed Chad even exists. No neighbors, scary or not, have said that they know or remember Chad and is wife. You guys were right there at the location, for Pete's sake, and you couldn't find one shred of proof that Chad's story is true.

You wouldn't even acknowledge the possibility that a hoaxer Chad could have easily pulled into the Restaurant parking lot and walked down a paved pathway to snap a few landscape pics and left without hiking, without being a resident, without "trespassing",
without attracting attention to hmself. That would surely explain why no one in the area knew of him. But that kind of stuff is ignored, while stories of danger and marijuana growers run rampant.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by GForce on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:26am

Great question Jeddyhi! Especially since the government can track an IP or phone records without anyone knowing it. Issac if he existed WOULD have known that as well. That was one of the reasons I doubted Issac and the Caret documents. However what IF Issac had died and left the documents to some friend or family member. They might not know they were about to feel the weight of Uncle Sam or know they were commiting espionage. I don't see any ex-government employee being so stupid!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:28am

Hey Gort,

Man, I know what you mean about that Mufon board. I can barely stomach a steady diet of the relatively sane boards that I frequent, and I stopped looking at the Mufon thing shortly after I started. It is sad. It boggles my mind that there seem to be two Mufons. I have never been a huge fan of the main body, but at least they do real investigations and they have standards for evidence and testimony. The Internet has none of that. That would spoil all the fun!

This sorry drone mess has only made me more skeptical, which is probably good. I have had my own sightings and experiences, and I was not desperate to believe before that, so I know there is something very interesting going on. For a hoaxer, the Internet provides the proverbial fish in a barrel, free for the shooting. It does little for one's hope for humanity. If we can nail the bastards behind this bad joke, maybe that will help.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:29am

on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:11am, Jeddyhi wrote:
Here is a simple basic question pertaining to the drone case and whether or not it is a "real" sighting. Lets see how this is answered.....

Isaac felt most confident in that he could only be wittled down to about one of 40 or 50 people. So confident that he had no problems sharing stolen material that he came into possesion of while committing espionage. Photos, diagrams, and his personal assessment were willingly shared via the FortuneCity website. C2C has an email address for Isaac. I believe somebody spoke to him on the phone......everyone still with me here?

The question is why would Isaac incriminate himself when any government alphabet agency could find his personal information simply by contacting FortuneCity for the info of the creator of the site? Or by contacting C2C for email headers? We, the common armchair investigator have no way to access that information without a court order, but the people that would be most interested in finding Isaac could easily have him in a noose. Why did Isaac ignore that fact and upload supposedly stolen government secrets like he had no fear of being found? That is how a hoaxer would act, not a government insider guilty of espionage.

OK, lets here the excuses and reasons for Isaac's stupidity.


This is what I love about the platform of serious debate about the issues here. This is another one of your valuable questions. A good one. I could only speculate on the answer myself that's for sure..
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Latitude on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:33am

on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:25am, Jeddyhi wrote:
Are you trying to deny that you considered the place dangerous and scary? Scary and dangerous with marijuana growers were in the area? That no hoaxer in their right mind would even attempt to take a photo from that area? Your words are over at the OM forum. I can copy and paste them for you if needed.


Please do copy and paste. You (and everyone else) will see how you are falsely accusing me. I may have said that I found it more unlikely that a hoaxer walked down there to take his hoax pictures. But that's all. That's my opinion. Why am I not allowed to have one?


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:35am

on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:26am, GForce wrote:
Great question Jeddyhi! Especially since the government can track an IP or phone records without anyone knowing it. Issac if he existed WOULD have known that as well. That was one of the reasons I doubted Issac and the Caret documents. However what IF Issac had died and left the documents to some friend or family member. They might not know they were about to feel the weight of Uncle Sam or know they were commiting espionage. I don't see any ex-government employee being so stupid!


If I were Isaac (And I'm not, so don't get suspicious grin)
I would go to an internet cafe and pay cash each time I posted something on the internet. I would use various internet cafes encompassing a wide area.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:39am

If Isaac were real, he would never have communicated with C2C or LMH more than once. Even Agent 86 could have handled that assignment!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:49am

on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:33am, Latitude wrote:
Please do copy and paste. You (and everyone else) will see how you are falsely accusing me. I may have said that I found it more unlikely that a hoaxer walked down there to take his hoax pictures. But that's all. That's my opinion. Why am I not allowed to have one?



Man, you live in a bizarre little universe!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:51am

on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:11am, Jeddyhi wrote:
The question is why would Isaac incriminate himself when any government alphabet agency could find his personal information simply by contacting FortuneCity for the info of the creator of the site? Or by contacting C2C for email headers? We, the common armchair investigator have no way to access that information without a court order, but the people that would be most interested in finding Isaac could easily have him in a noose. Why did Isaac ignore that fact and upload supposedly stolen government secrets like he had no fear of being found? That is how a hoaxer would act, not a government insider guilty of espionage.

It’s sheer ludicrousness of Isaac to claim that he couldn't be traced, period.

Quote:
• I should be clear before I begin, as a final note: I am not interested in making myself vulnerable to the consequences of betraying the trust of my superiors and will not divulge any personal information that could determine my identity.

• However my intent is not to deceive, so information that I think is too risky to share will be simply left out rather than obfuscated in some way (aside from my alias, which I freely admit is not my real name).

• I would estimate that with the information contained in this letter, I could be narrowed down to one of maybe 30-50 people at best, so I feel reasonably secure.

Quote:
I've taken the proper steps to ensure a reasonable level of anonymity and am quite secure in the fact that the information I've so far provided is by no means unique among many of the CARET participants.

Let's have a brief look at just how unique this information actually was.

Isaac said before the DoD he did:

Quote:
• Graduate and post-graduate work at university in electrical engineering.”

• My background lent itself well to this kind of work though. I'd spent years writing code and designing both analog and digital circuits.”

• (Before taking a) Scenic route through the tech industry and worked for the kinds of companies you would expect, until I was offered a job at the Department of Defense

So it's fairly easy to ascertain so far the areas in which he worked, what his grad work was, what his areas of expertise are and the fact that he was offered a job at the DoD.

Quote:
My time at the DoD was mostly uneventful but I was there for quite a while. I apparently proved myself to be reasonably intelligent and loyal. By 1984 these qualities along with my technical background made me a likely candidate for a new program they were recruiting for called ‘CARET’.

A NEW programme, further reinforced by the statement:

Quote:
So, in 1984, the CARET program was created.

And the following text tells us that there were 30+ others recruited at the same time from the DoD, as we know it was at the inception of the CARET programme we know where he worked prior, what his speciality was, when he was hired, where he was recruited from and that he was part of a batch of at least 30 others.

Quote:
My time at the DoD was a major factor behind why I was chosen, and in fact about 30+ others who were hired around the same time had also been at the Department about as long, but this was not the case for everyone. A couple of my co-workers were plucked right from places like IBM and, at least two of them came from XPARC itself.

Still, perhaps he's safe as he could have worked anywhere at PACL, right?

Quote:
I worked with these symbols more than anything during my time at PACL, and recognized them the moment I saw them in the photos.

Just in case we missed it:

Quote:
A running joke among the linguistics team was that Big-O notation couldn't adequately describe the scale of the task, so we'd substitute other words for "big". By the time I left I remember the consensus was "Astronomical-O" finally did it justice.

“LINGUISTICS TEAM” & “WE'D SUBSTITUTE”

So now we know specifically which ‘team' he worked for at PACL and what he worked with more than anything else.

Quote:
I also had a personal affinity for combinatorics, which served me well as I helped with the design of software running on supercomputers that could juggle the often trillions of rules necessary to create a valid diagram of any reasonable complexity. This overlapped quite a bit with compiler theory as well

So we know he helped create the software capable of disseminating the diagrams.

Quote:
I worked at PACL from 1984 to 1987, by which time I was utterly burned out. I left somewhere in the middle of a 3-month bell curve in which about a quarter of the entire PACL staff left for similar reasons

Somewhere in the middle” is a strange choice of words as surely, 3 months = 12 weeks, the middle of which is 6 weeks so let's assume that, “somewhere in the middle” is 5 to 7 weeks in the middle of this curve when they lost a quarter of their (approx) 200 staff as Isaac stated when he wrote:

Quote:
Inside, we had everything we needed. State of the art hardware and a staff of over 200 computer scientists, electrical engineers, mechanical engineers, physicists and mathematicians. Most of us were civilians, as I've said, but some were military, and a few of them had been working on this technology already.

He worked there for 3 years and X amount of months, if someone were trying to trace Isaac then the quarter of staff who left at within the 3 month bell curve' would make this easy to pinpoint.

So they'd know when he started and when he left.

Quote:
So, about 3 months before I resigned (which was about 8 months before I was really out, since you don't just walk out of a job like that with a 2 week notice). I decided to start taking advantage of my position. As I mentioned earlier, my DoD experience got me into an internal management role sooner than some of my colleagues, and after about a year of that kind of status, the outgoing searches each night became slightly less rigorous.

This tells us that he was in a management position for at least a year BEFORE he handed his notice in which was 8 months before he left.

So let's work on the average and give Isaac 6 months of the year he left (1987) and say he started in June 1984 (when in actual fact it could have been anywhere up from January to December 1984).

So June '84 to June '87 = 3 years.

Isaac felt comfortable stealing the documents 3 months before tendering his resignation which in turn was 8 months before he actually left.

So if it was June '87 then Isaac handed his notice in around Oct '86.

3 months PRIOR to this Isaac felt comfortable stealing documentation, which is June '86.

Before he felt comfortable he had to have been in management AT LEAST a year.

Which means he was promoted to management at the absolute latest in June '85.


Which means we now know:

• What his graduate and post-graduate work involved.

• Specifically what his specialities and area of work was prior to joining the DoD.

• He worked at the DoD quite a while before being recruited by PACL.

• He was one of approximately 30 people recruited from the DoD at the same time.

• This was at the inception of PACL.

• He was employed for his skills as an electrical engineer.

• He was part of the PACL, “Linguistic team”.

• He helped create the software capable of disseminating the diagrams.

• He was promoted to management within (and at most) 18 months.

• He tended his resignation 8 months before being allowed out.

• He left around June '87 which is irrelevant as if access to employment records was possible then it can be pinpointed EXACTLY when he resigned as he left, “Somewhere in the middle of a 3-month bell curve” (which seen a quarter of 200 employees leave).

Surely when you're working with a base set of approximately 30 people, when you have complete access to ALL employee's records and you factor the above variables into the equation then it MUST be possible to narrow the identity of Isaac down to at MOST a couple of employees and very likely down to just the one who fulfils all of the above criteria?

The only possible discrepancies in what I detail above are firstly that he left in June '87. This could have been anywhere between Jan & Dec '87 so is averaged out, however with access to records and the fact we know that Isaac left in the middle of a three month bell curve in 1987 which saw a quarter of the approximately 200 staff leave then we could isolate specific candidates from the employees with great ease.

And secondly Isaac could have began his tenure at any point in '84 (rather than June) in which case I believe that the same rationale as in the first instance above can safely be applied and so by averaging it out it could be a couple of months earlier or later. But also remember that employee records would show when the group of 30+ that Isaac enlisted with as it was at the inception of CARET. So coupled with the 'bell curve' of people leaving CARET then in the real world this would lead to this margin of error being removed.

My only point was to show what I personally could deduce from the word of Isaac alone, and without the employee history then I can still narrow the parameters down significantly. This is as well as gleaning a fair idea of his previous employment history and also defining peaks in a collective employee history that would betray specific names & dates, that's not a bad assessment considering that's working with JUST the word of Isaac.

So as I mention above if anyone had access to the employee records then it is a simple process of elimination to pinpoint EXACTLY who Isaac was.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:07pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:33am, Latitude wrote:
Please do copy and paste. You (and everyone else) will see how you are falsely accusing me. I may have said that I found it more unlikely that a hoaxer walked down there to take his hoax pictures. But that's all. That's my opinion. Why am I not allowed to have one?


Quote:
"Not so easy for these photos. One glaring difference of the Chad location is it is on private property. Having been to the exact spots of these photos (within a foot or two) I can tell you that you don't simply go wandering around down there. If you do, you are asking for trouble. We were only allowed on this area because we were given special permission and escorted. When we strayed beyond the restrictions we were immediately set upon by large dogs and were made to feel very unwanted.

So you need to ask yourself, of all the public locations to choose from why does a hoaxer take chances like this? It makes little sense for a hoaxer to use this location for photos. Then while there I looked around the horizon and noticed on the mountain top a military looking installation of towers and radar domes. Who knows?"

Source: Open Minds Forum

Quote:
Have you been paying any attention at all? I have posted many times that you don't simply pull over and take these pics. You must walk down onto private property and take a risk.

Source: Open Minds Forum


You "imply" how scary it is. The risk one must take because of the danger. The risk a hoaxer would take. But an authentic Chad took no risk. If he actually lives there he would be known by the owners of the scary dogs. But no one confirmed that Chad exists, did they? I won't bother posting the references to marijuana growers in the area that could increase the "danger".

Logic seems to take a back seat while blowing smoke drives the car. It has been like this since the beginning of the investigation.

Even when it turned out that the drone would have been hanging around a restaurant on a busy highway, (a restaurant and highway that Chad never mentioned, mind you), that was ignored and whitewashed.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:13pm

Really good analysis DrDil. smiley

Would they pin point him down? And who is "they" after all this time?

Funny your words from Isaac you pasted struck me just now.. probably complete serrendippity..

"(Before taking a) Scenic route through the tech industry and worked for the kinds of companies you would expect, until I was offered a job at the Department of Defense"

Seems to me this is the drone saga... scenic route ending up at some MIL connection...
how and whyhuh
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:18pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 05:26am, Double Nought Spy wrote:
My first post is below, from a week ago. It should not take too much brain power to figure out why I joined. I'm still waiting for an answer from the DRT about that one, too.

Why was such a thorough job of making the drone vanish done for the purpose stated? And doesn't that doctored picture refute the DRT argument that the drone photos are too good to be fake? Any DRT members care to address those two questions? That would actually tell us something, instead of wasting time on the same bogus arguments that have been laughable for a year and a half.

rolleyes rolleyes



00,

Is this the photo you are referring to?


on Dec 23rd, 2008, 2:53pm, TheShadow wrote:
Picture of Raj pole (Pic 16 i believe) with no drone uploaded by 10538 (aka Latitude/Numbers) on the DRT forum

User Image




Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by GForce on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:21pm

Geez Doc you'd make a great PI! Sure you're not a government plant? grin So we can deduce from your work Issac wasn't very smart at covering his tracks and his identity is known by Uncle Sam.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:23pm

Yes, Marvin, that's it. That photo has bothered me for a long time. Maybe it's just me, but I think it bears a close look.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:29pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:23pm, Double Nought Spy wrote:
Yes, Marvin, that's it. That photo has bothered me for a long time. Maybe it's just me, but I think it bears a close look.




Then, FYI:

This is the original EXIF data from Pict0016:

EXIF.Make / Software EXIF.Model Quality Subsamp Match?
---------------------------- ----------------------------- --------------- --------------
SW :[Adobe Photoshop ] [Save As 10 ]

ASSESSMENT: Image is very likely processed/edited


This is the EXIF data from Lat’s version (Drone removed)

EXIF.Make / Software EXIF.Model Quality Subsamp Match?
------------------------- ----------------------------------- ---------------- --------------
CAM:[SONY ] [CYBERSHOT U ] [ ] Yes
SW :[Adobe Photoshop 7.0 ] [Save As 07 ]
SW :[Apple Quicktime ] [0466-0467 ]
SW :[Digital Photo Professiona] [05 ]
SW :[IJG Library ] [075 ]
SW :[MS Paint ] [ ]
SW :[MS Visio ] [ ]
SW :[ZoomBrowser EX ] [low ]

The following IJG-based editors also match this signature:
SW :[GIMP ] [075 ]
SW :[IrfanView ] [075 ]
SW :[idImager ] [075 ]
SW :[FastStone Image Viewer ] [075 ]
SW :[NeatImage ] [075 ]
SW :[Paint.NET ] [075 ]
SW :[Photomatix ] [075 ]
SW :[XnView ] [075 ]

ASSESSMENT: Image is very likely processed/edited

Position Marked @ MCU=[ 32, 14](0,0) YCC=[ 816, 90, -27]

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:33pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:21pm, GForce wrote:
Geez Doc you'd make a great PI! Sure you're not a government plant? grin So we can deduce from your work Issac wasn't very smart at covering his tracks and his identity is known by Uncle Sam.



I hate to say this GForce, but for a number of us... this is old news. There are many aspects of Isaac's story that has more holes in it than a colander.


User Image
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:36pm

Thanks, Marvin. Jeddyhi did a very nice job of explaining our questions about the photo way back on page 33 or thereabouts, so I have quoted it below. What do you think?


on Dec 23rd, 2008, 3:47pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
That is the time that PICT0016 was taken. I'm not sure how that implicates Lat but like Double Nought Spy, I would like to know how the drone was removed so precisely. EXIF data reveals that the image was edited with GIMP. I presume so that the PI's could show a photo of the pole without looking like kooks.

After a brief examination of the Poleinfo photo, I did not detect any remnants of the drone, nor signs of cloning to remove it. Whoever did it was very precise and dillegent in their work. Why they were so precise is the question. If it was just to make a photo to show around in an effort to find the pole, why remove the drone so perfectly.

It almost seems like a copy of the photo before the drone was layered in.

Can anyone here (Marvin lol) detect signs of the drones removal? I realize the pic was resized to 800x600 but would that hide all traces of editing?

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrDil on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:41pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:13pm, tomi01uk wrote:
Really good analysis DrDil. smiley

Would they pin point him down?


Thanks Tomi. smiley

By, “Would they” do you mean would they want to?

If so, then it’s a moot point, I was highlighting the fact that if Isaac believes that the information he supplied is NOT enough to narrow him down then he’s not as clever as he thinks.

I was also hoping to show that IP addresses, email headers, Fortunecity stamps etc. are all massively irrelevant apart from for physically locating Isaac’s whereabouts at present, which again is moot as Isaac claimed (and I was questioning) the statement that he couldn’t be ‘identified’, not ‘located’ i.e.:

Quote:
I should be clear before I begin, as a final note: I am not interested in making myself vulnerable to the consequences of betraying the trust of my superiors and will not divulge any personal information that could determine my identity.

on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:13pm, tomi01uk wrote:
And who is "they" after all this time?

Well, “they” would be the persons at the highest levels of security within the respective department whom are trusted with enforcing NDA’s, plugging sensitive information leaks and orchestrating damage limitation should a security breach occur.

Surely if CARET is now defunct (perhaps they solved the alien artefact riddle kiss) then this regulatory obligation would be transferred rather than simply abandoned, surely?

Just my humble opinion (as always) of course….. smiley

on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:21pm, GForce wrote:
Geez Doc you'd make a great PI! Sure you're not a government plant? grin So we can deduce from your work Issac wasn't very smart at covering his tracks and his identity is known by Uncle Sam.

Cheers Gforce and right back at ya’. wink
(Especially the government plant part as I've seen your pro-NWO rants elsewhere on this board!! laugh)

Maybes this is why Isaac disappeared?

Maybe the genius was having an off-day when he wrote his letter and was found within hours of posting the documents.

Cheers. smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 1:00pm

It seems to be standard operating procedure for "them" to keep close track of people who have held the sort or position "Isaac" claims to have held. There are many, many stories in the literature of credible former military officers or civilian employees who worked in secret programs who have contacted established UFO researchers, only to clam up when the researcher tried to follow up. Usually, the researcher has not told anyone but maybe a fellow researcher or two, which leads them to think their phones are monitored. The witnesses sometimes describe visits or phone calls that let them know in no uncertain terms that they have crossed the line.

One of the good things LMH has done for us is to provide many of Leonard Stringfield's reports and other documents on her web site. Stingfield had a long career as a ufologist, and there are some very amusing stories in there about this sort of thing.

If there were any reality to this at all, with drones blossoming all over the Internet, there would have been a proactive effort underway to control any further leakage. By the time "Isaac's" stuff appeared, someone would have already been watching him.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 30th, 2008, 1:16pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 12:36pm, Double Nought Spy wrote:
Thanks, Marvin. Jeddyhi did a very nice job of explaining my questions about the photo way back on page 33 or thereabouts, so I have quoted it below. What do you think?






Maybe this is helpful:


User Image



Edit to add link to individual photos:


http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff290/instantmartians/16a.jpg

http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff290/instantmartians/lat.jpg
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Katterfelto on Dec 30th, 2008, 1:18pm

I thought Issac was dead? grin
Since the info was already leaked it was too late to pull it all back. Same fate probably eliminated all the other characters. That's as plausible as most other explanations with most of this script. rolleyes
Regarding that picture of the pole minus drone. I do not think it that difficult to remove the drone. Is there a hi-rez version of it available?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TheShadow on Dec 30th, 2008, 1:19pm

Same old arguements that lead no where. Lets face facts...the DRT will continue to propagate this hoax til the end of days and anyone with a shred of common sense has known for some time the drones do not exist......so the question has to be.....WHY IS THE DRT SO INTENT ON KEEPING A KNOWN HOAX ALIVE??

I am sure we also are still waiting patiently for my old buddy Numbers to answer a few imperitive questions that have been asked (and ignored)!!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 30th, 2008, 1:21pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 1:19pm, TheShadow wrote:
Same old arguements that lead no where. Lets face facts...the DRT will continue to propagate this hoax til the end of days and anyone with a shred of common sense has known for some time the drones do not exist......so the question has to be.....WHY IS THE DRT SO INTENT ON KEEPING A KNOWN HOAX ALIVE??

I am sure we also are still waiting patiently for my old buddy Numbers to answer a few imperitive questions that have been asked (and ignored)!!

Your lack of imagination is impressive!!
Try again.... cheesy
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TheShadow on Dec 30th, 2008, 1:30pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 1:21pm, elevenaugust wrote:
Your lack of imagination is impressive!!
Try again.... cheesy


Thank you Compliments are always appreciated!!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 1:32pm

Have you guys noticed Marvin's animation up there? I put on my best glasses, and then cleaned off my monitor, and I think Numbers ain't the only one who has some 'splainin' to do!

How long did OTF spend erasing the drone?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 30th, 2008, 1:44pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 1:32pm, Double Nought Spy wrote:
Have you guys noticed Marvin's animation up there? I put on my best glasses, and then cleaned off my monitor, and I think Numbers ain't the only one who has some 'splainin' to do!

How long did OTF spend erasing the drone?

Mmmm, let me think... Something like 3 seconds?? grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 30th, 2008, 1:48pm

Here is an enhancement:

User Image
Click on image for enlargement.


What do you think 00?

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 30th, 2008, 1:48pm

Can you supply a copy of the photo before Numbers added in the text? One like the PI's received.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 1:52pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 1:48pm, Marvin wrote:
Here is an enhancement:

User Image
Click on image for enlargement.


What do you think 00?


I think maybe those things can turn invisible! Is there no end to the magic of the drones?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 30th, 2008, 1:58pm

What is the purpose of this?
To show that OTF is a hoaxer?rolleyes

Believe me, men, you're on a wrong track!!

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 30th, 2008, 2:03pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 1:18pm, Katterfelto wrote:
I thought Issac was dead? grin
Since the info was already leaked it was too late to pull it all back. Same fate probably eliminated all the other characters. That's as plausible as most other explanations with most of this script. rolleyes
Regarding that picture of the pole minus drone. I do not think it that difficult to remove the drone. Is there a hi-rez version of it available?


Thinking that 20 years after a relatively small research center closes down, that people could be tracked to such a degree.. watched.. monitored.. with all the other crapolla going on in the world... not to mention if even 10% of what is out there about gov involvement in ufo research is true.. this would make the LAP disclosure (and finding Isaac) relatively small potatoes .. IMO.

Or else... there might be a more complex explaination...
Why these pictures were released to begin with.. without witnesses showing up after the fact..

It may not be part of a gov disclosure scheme, it might be something that on the surface looks like a hoax, but deeper into it you find connections ..

For instance.. if this was a hoax, then the hoaxer (s) who did the LAP expected and this is obvious to me.. they expected the LAP to be so analysed that its true orig scale would be realised and add to the depth of the intrigue about this story...

Or else.. it was released and co-executed with pictures and witnesses in such a credible manner, by way of true witness personalities and accounts of sightings.. for a reason...

See, at this stage.. there is so much to consider before drawing conclusions IMO.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 2:11pm

Where the heck is Zorro? It's looking like he's found "Isaac."

Gosh, I hope They haven't gotten to him...
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Marvin on Dec 30th, 2008, 2:12pm

Just for you 00:


User Image
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 30th, 2008, 2:16pm

I'm surprised that the DRT hasn't experimented with exposing the glyphs to certain fields..... rolleyes

I'm sorry, Tomi. Fake photos with photoshop tags in every instance of exif data examined, combined with professional analysis that concluded hoax makes it very hard for me to swallow any more of the bait that is offered. The LAP does not impress me. If the photos are doctored, why would I believe any of Isaac's tales? The LAP is not wooing me over to giving the drones any chance of reality. It is an internet hoax.

How would an internet hoax work? Exactly, and I mean exactly like the drone case, thats how!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 2:22pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 2:12pm, Marvin wrote:
Just for you 00:


User Image



Aw shucks, Marvin, that's nice of you, but Jeddyhi ran across the picture and brought it back into the sunlight for us to puzzle over. I was just the ***hole attorney!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 30th, 2008, 2:33pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 2:16pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
I'm surprised that the DRT hasn't experimented with exposing the glyphs to certain fields..... rolleyes



Ummmmmm.... tongue undecided
Although.... I did notice a little jump now and then when dousing over them with a needle and thread (Sicilian fashion of course..) grin


Quote:
I'm sorry, Tomi. Fake photos with photoshop tags in every instance of exif data examined, combined with professional analysis that concluded hoax makes it very hard for me to swallow any more of the bait that is offered.

How would an internet hoax work? Exactly, and I mean exactly like the drone case, thats how!


What you see as bait I see as intrigue ... and on a scale that begs to be uncovered.. smiley
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by hotteris on Dec 30th, 2008, 3:03pm

u are forgetting that caret shut down and so did most of the other places he worked!!!!!! laugh grin shocked angry huh cool
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TheShadow on Dec 30th, 2008, 3:09pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 3:03pm, hotteris wrote:
u are forgetting that caret shut down and so did most of the other places he worked!!!!!! laugh grin shocked angry huh cool


Hard to shut down what never was!!! CARET never existed.....just as Isaac, Chad Raj and all the other nitwitnesses never existed.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 30th, 2008, 3:15pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 3:09pm, TheShadow wrote:
Hard to shut down what never was!!! CARET never existed.....just as Isaac, Chad Raj and all the other nitwitnesses never existed.


Whether CARET existed or not.. We do not yet know.
You may think it didn't exist but.....
What we DO KNOW is that facilities similiar to described did exist. Along with goofy looking Octopus style objects.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 3:18pm

That's right. And power lines exist, and guys named Chad and Raj.

Sure is quiet here, alla sudden. I keep thinking I hear the sound of wagons circling. Might be a good time for some review. As I understand it, the photo without drone and with text and helpful red lines, up there in Marvin's animation, belongs to Lattitude, as he is known in these parts. Like Jeddyhi, I would sure like to have a digital copy of the image provided to (or perhaps by) the Private Investigators. Also, I was not being facetious about the chain of custody earlier today. That needs to be established. As I see it, either Lat or OTF had possession of a pre-drone landscape photo, and was lazy enough to palm it off as a manipulated Photo 16 for the use of the PIs in looking for the utility pole. If the DRT stonewalls, then the inevitable conclusion of reasonable observers will be that the DRT is an integral part of this hoax.

This has gone on far, far too long, folks. Let's get it over with.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 30th, 2008, 4:24pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 3:18pm, Double Nought Spy wrote:
That's right. And power lines exist, and guys named Chad and Raj.

Sure is quiet here, alla sudden. I keep thinking I hear the sound of wagons circling. Might be a good time for some review. As I understand it, the photo without drone and with text and helpful red lines, up there in Marvin's animation, belongs to Lattitude, as he is known in these parts. Like Jeddyhi, I would sure like to have a digital copy of the image provided to (or perhaps by) the Private Investigators. Also, I was not being facetious about the chain of custody earlier today. That needs to be established. As I see it, either Lat or OTF had possession of a pre-drone landscape photo, and was lazy enough to palm it off as a manipulated Photo 16 for the use of the PIs in looking for the utility pole. If the DRT stonewalls, then the inevitable conclusion of reasonable observers will be that the DRT is an integral part of this hoax.

This has gone on far, far too long, folks. Let's get it over with.


You can't really be serious? huh No.. you are serious grin grin grin Why don't you take that picture and enlarge it in a program like photoshop and see if you can see where the drone just might possibly be covered up with transplanted sky material... geeeze.

You do pick the strangest things to focus on.. an edited picture for crying out loud.. if I do one, will you believe it can be done?? Why don't you try?
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 30th, 2008, 4:29pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 3:18pm, Double Nought Spy wrote:
then the inevitable conclusion of reasonable observers will be that the DRT is an integral part of this hoax.

This has gone on far, far too long, folks. Let's get it over with.

Sure, you're only a reasonable observer... grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by DrStern on Dec 30th, 2008, 4:38pm

Well, dear fellow investigators of this "charade"!

I'm truly disapointed of the "steamroller" way this issue has turned into...

Now it's not "allowed" to think that this case is real.

You, the ones that has taken the "side" of hoax, won't allow anyone to believe there might be at least some truth in this whole schabang...

And furthermore is persistantly depraving anyone of fair open thougt their simple questions, hammering them down to make them fit into "your belief"...

I'm downright ashamed of my fellow human beings!

How can this happen? In a so called "open minded forum"?

I think there is a name for this...disinformation!

If this case is as open and shut as presented here, there only remain the humble questions of the "usual" depraved and utterly weakminded, and even those you want to belittle, so they never show their face here again.

To even suggest that the DRT is "illegal" and that anyone that spends a few hours on this issue also is breaking standing laws, - is fostered in a twisted mind, only setoff to tamper with someone that will shut their mouth and silently follow the "mainstream" here...

Dan, I agree 100%.

Please make notes in your book, I don't name names, those of you concerned will know...

Dr. Stern

Ps: I know this will cause severe ridicule and punishment on yours truly, but I had to let the steam fly out...otherwise my head would blow into a thousand pieces!

Happy New Year 2009!


Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 4:52pm

It does not matter what you think or what I think, the evidence speaks for itself. Others will duplicate Marvin's work. DRT members will be angry. The world will go on, somehow.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 30th, 2008, 4:59pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 4:52pm, Double Nought Spy wrote:
It does not matter what you think or what I think, the evidence speaks for itself. Others will duplicate Marvin's work. DRT members will be angry. The world will go on, somehow.

DRT members will have a good laugh, that's for sure!!
cheesy
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 30th, 2008, 5:05pm

If the shoe fits wear it!
and Tomi you should have brung more matresses for yourself and partners, for the fall you all took and deny.
Yes DS, make sure everything is in bold caps too!
Since DRT is essentially funded by thousands of dollars to essentially steer this case to one and only one conclusion other than the truth, by hook or crook, like perhaps telling Linda don't say anything more, and for Gods sake no more release of pictures,
No one throws money out for an independent investigation that yielded nothing, when the facts of hoaxing became apparent with Tom., unless they are part of the hoax setup themselves, or total imbecilles.
I don't think viral marketers, movie or not, colluding website or not, are imbecilles..dishonest yes, but not imbecilles.

But I'll tell you what..Anyone especially those who have worked without pay and without agenda, like we have, are well within their rights to tell you Go take a hike!!.TEXT

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 5:14pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 4:59pm, elevenaugust wrote:
DRT members will have a good laugh, that's for sure!!
cheesy


Yesterday your credibility was zero. Today you are in negative double digits. Yeah, I'd be worried too, if I were in your position!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 30th, 2008, 5:21pm

That's all you have to say??grin

Could you remind me the good work you've done on the drone case??
I searched, but it's seems it's very well hide!!

What about your credibility?? grin

Edit: Now I have negative triple digit grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 5:31pm

I hate to bust your bubble, but I guess it's the day for it. This was not for your benefit, but rather to expose a hoaxer to the world. As I said, the evidence needs no help. Now it's out there for all who are interested to see and appreciate.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 30th, 2008, 5:36pm

Just be patient..... That's all I have to say for now.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 5:38pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 5:36pm, elevenaugust wrote:
Just be patient..... That's all I have to say for now.



I ain't scared, 'cause I got my hip waders on. You really don't expect anyone to be surprised by your next salvo of BS, do you? Gawd, this game is getting old.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TheShadow on Dec 30th, 2008, 5:54pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 5:36pm, elevenaugust wrote:
Just be patient..... That's all I have to say for now.


Yes be patient!! 2 years is not nearly enough time to investigate this.....perhaps in another 10 or 12 years someone will invent a flying drone that looks similar and the DRT will be vindicated!!

PUH-LEASE!!!!!! The only disinformation is being put out by the DRT!!!!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by elevenaugust on Dec 30th, 2008, 6:15pm

Glad to see that TheShadow is back!!
How are you going? Ready to begin a new dronish' season?? grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by tommi01 on Dec 30th, 2008, 6:42pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 5:05pm, TeachersPet wrote:
and Tomi you should have brung more matresses for yourself and partners, for the fall you all took and deny.


Where I come from that's not what they are used for cheesy
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Gort on Dec 30th, 2008, 7:00pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 5:38pm, Double Nought Spy wrote:
I ain't scared, 'cause I got my hip waders on. You really don't expect anyone to be surprised by your next salvo of BS, do you? Gawd, this game is getting old.




You cannot reason with these people. Take for example the woman on the Mufon board who talks about her multiple alien abductions. Then she tells us about the medications she is on. Then she tells us how when her teenage boys are frightened by a UFO they jump in bed with her.

Then she tells us after her abductions her genitals are sore.

Do you think for even a moment she would even contemplate what her teenage boys might be doing to her?

Do you think for even a moment these dronies could contemplate the realization of the truth, much like the poor women with sore genitals? If you shattered their reality, telling them the drones are fake? Might as well tell the poor women about her incestuous relationship. She wouldn’t believe you any way.

Just imagine the denial this woman would be going through if you even suggested that the cause of her sore genitals was not alien abduction.

Why anyone would allow teenage boys to get in bed with them, sick sick sick.

As sick as it may sound it is a prime example of how the debilated mind works.

You can not present logic to a demented mind and expect a logical response. These people are in a world all their own separate from normality.

Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 7:46pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 7:00pm, Gort wrote:
You cannot reason with these people. Take for example the woman on the Mufon board who talks about her multiple alien abductions. Then she tells us about the medications she is on. Then she tells us how when her teenage boys are frightened by a UFO they jump in bed with her.

Then she tells us after her abductions her genitals are sore.

Do you think for even a moment she would even contemplate what her teenage boys might be doing to her?

Do you think for even a moment these dronies could contemplate the realization of the truth, much like the poor women with sore genitals? If you shattered their reality, telling them the drones are fake? Might as well tell the poor women about her incestuous relationship. She wouldn’t believe you any way.

Just imagine the denial this woman would be going through if you even suggested that the cause of her sore genitals was not alien abduction.

Why anyone would allow teenage boys to get in bed with them, sick sick sick.

As sick as it may sound it is a prime example of how the debilated mind works.

You can not present logic to a demented mind and expect a logical response. These people are in a world all their own separate from normality.


Oh, I think some of them have enough sense to figure out there is a hoaxer among them, or at the very least that they have been cynically used by the brains of the outfit. Might take a while for it to sink in...

Anyway, the important thing is the truth is there for all to see, if they can get past their denial. For most of us, it's not really much of a surprise.

Nasty business. I think I'll take a hot bath.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TeachersPet on Dec 30th, 2008, 8:28pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 6:42pm, tomi01uk wrote:
Where I come from that's not what they are used for cheesy


Well I never was too good at charades, and being well past the story's bedtime..I hardly doubt a natural use..
Ahh, yes, trampolines, I should have guessed that, its so obvious..cheesy


For those of us that still have a family , may I indulge in a little "Buzz" and viral marketing of my own..
Bedstime Story is out in theatres now, and I just went along with my granddaughter..she suggested it.. to see it.

It was hilarious..Please dont miss it. You will thank me later..!!

Make sure you buy your food, snacks outside and hide them.maybe even those flexible pouch drinks like capricorn cherry or what not.fit right in the old purse.BUT.please note also, do not forgo popcorn inside there..Thats part of tradition kids enjoy..
have fun..!!











Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Jeddyhi on Dec 30th, 2008, 9:47pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 5:36pm, elevenaugust wrote:
Just be patient..... That's all I have to say for now.


Thats what I imagine the PI's are saying! grin
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TheShadow on Dec 30th, 2008, 9:55pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 9:47pm, Jeddyhi wrote:
Thats what I imagine the PI's are saying! grin


LOL!! Yea right before they hand the DRT their monthly bill!!!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by ABCStore on Dec 30th, 2008, 10:59pm

DrStern, right on the money!

Now, here's something I don't understand. You don't believe drones could be real and you come here and start dogging people left and right.
At the same time if don't believe in, say, ghosts, you don't go to the 'ghosts' forum and behave the same.
WHY?
Some people actually do make pretty good money off the 'ghost' subject, exactly what you're accusing the pro-drone group of maybe someday going to.

Drones are a highly controversial subject and, unless you can say who, when, where and why, please respect other members' opinions.

ABC

ABC
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by Double Nought Spy on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:07pm

There is actually some evidence for the existence of ghosts. Also, the witnesses are usually not imaginary.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TheShadow on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:31pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 10:59pm, ABCStore wrote:
DrStern, right on the money!

Now, here's something I don't understand. You don't believe drones could be real and you come here and start dogging people left and right.
At the same time if don't believe in, say, ghosts, you don't go to the 'ghosts' forum and behave the same.
WHY?
Some people actually do make pretty good money off the 'ghost' subject, exactly what you're accusing the pro-drone group of maybe someday going to.

Drones are a highly controversial subject and, unless you can say who, when, where and why, please respect other members' opinions.

ABC

ABC


I may not believe in drones but i do believe in UFOs. My interest is in finding substantial VERIFIABLE evidence in favor of the existence of such things.....the drones offer none of this and have become a cultish belief system which endangers the search for the real evidence that we are not alone and have been visited.

Hope that sufficiently answers your question.
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:58pm

on Dec 30th, 2008, 10:59pm, ABCStore wrote:
DrStern, right on the money!

Now, here's something I don't understand. You don't believe drones could be real and you come here and start dogging people left and right.
At the same time if don't believe in, say, ghosts, you don't go to the 'ghosts' forum and behave the same.
WHY?

ABC


Everyone that posts on the drones forums every day and multiple times a day, either THINKS the drones COULD exist or KNOW they exist! No two ways about it! Unless someone has some mental issues and would sit at a pre-school playground and argue that santa does not exist with them day after day after day after... I don't see anyone posting on the Haiti video board still...

Tuna
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by TheShadow on Dec 31st, 2008, 12:22am

on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:58pm, newtothis wrote:
Everyone that posts on the drones forums every day and multiple times a day, either THINKS the drones COULD exist or KNOW they exist! No two ways about it! Unless someone has some mental issues and would sit at a pre-school playground and argue that santa does not exist with them day after day after day after... I don't see anyone posting on the Haiti video board still...

Tuna


Sorry Tuna That assumption is wrong!!

See my post above!
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 31st, 2008, 12:24am

on Dec 30th, 2008, 11:31pm, TheShadow wrote:
I may not believe in drones but i do believe in UFOs. My interest is in finding substantial VERIFIABLE evidence in favor of the existence of such things.....the drones offer none of this and have become a cultish belief system which endangers the search for the real evidence that we are not alone and have been visited.

Hope that sufficiently answers your question.


Heya Shads,

Cultish is a little out there due to the fact that the DRT is not recruiting people and trying to make others believe in the drones, they are only investigating... There has never been a cup of cool-aid handed to me...

They offer what they offer, pro-hoaxers offer what they offer, and both sides SHOULD let any interested persons make their own decisions, no?

Tuna
Re: #7 The Drone Enigma A Global Search For The Tr
Post by newtothis on Dec 31st, 2008, 12:30am

on Dec 31st, 2008, 12:22am, TheShadow wrote:
Sorry Tuna That assumption is wrong!!

See my post above!