[HOAX] Isaac CARET - Drones [HOAX]

Originally posted by BugZyZuncle
Most of you would not recognize disclosure if it slapped you in the face!

Isaac is the real deal!

Most everyone (a couple have picked up on it) here totally missed the real clues as to Isaacs truthfullness and will continue to label him with whatever generaliztion that they can think of to try to make themselves look smarter!

It's hilarious really!!

It IS quite hilarious, I grant you. This is the kind of post I love to keep around until the inevitable forensics stage of this nonsense when we get to see this kind of attitude twist in the wind for all to see.

Originally posted by BugZyZuncle

Most everyone (a couple have picked up on it) here totally missed the real clues as to Isaacs truthfullness and will continue to label him with whatever generaliztion that they can think of to try to make themselves look smarter!

Why be cryptic? Come out and say it.

If he did'nt post bogus CGI renderings I'd be inclined to believe him..

[edit on 28-6-2007 by Mogget]


lol... nowhere in his letter does Isaac claim to be a linguist! He simply stated that he was a civilian with various degrees in electronics that worked with other civilians with exact, or better credentials, in a secret millitary project which tried to decipher ET technology! He stated that he, in the past, had worked for the DoD and this helped him reach a posiion in management.

Some of you need to improve your reading comprehension!

This is a legit situation that some people will not recognise because they are too caught up trying to impress each other with their ability to seriate information which they have totally misinterpreted. I guess you are just trying to make internet friends or something, or make yourselves feel better!


Most of you would not recognize disclosure if it slapped you in the face!

Isaac is the real deal!

Most everyone (a couple have picked up on it) here totally missed the real clues as to Isaacs truthfullness and will continue to label him with whatever generaliztion that they can think of to try to make themselves look smarter!

It's hilarious really!!

On a side note, the linguistic analysis primers remind me somewhat
of particle collision traces from ion colliders (if only because of the spirally design):


The mirroring of photo 1 is a very well observed find.
This discredits the photo images, in my opinion.

It is hard to believe someone who has gone through as much trouble, over such a long time, to pull a hoax, would make such a mistake, to save himself 30 minutes.

Originally posted by wildone106
HOAX..those perfect renderings of the device parts is right out of Alias Maya or Renderman, holy cow perfect pristine CGI renderings that are supposed to be photographs..are we that stupid to this dude?

Furthermore, if he knows so much about advanced tech..he should submit himself to some kind of scientific review on what he actually knows and see if his knowledge about advanced material has any credibility..only THEN would I even consider this..but Im guessing he wont because all he knows how to do is render CGI objects.

What a tool..

I'm *not* saying this is real (I fall into the "skeptical but interested" camp) but the fact is, if this IS real, then there is no expert here that can corroborate his technical facts concerning this technology.

If this technology uses principles and processes unknown or undiscovered by humans, it will sounds like bull# to us. In the same way that describing a television set to a person in the 1600s would sound like bull# to him or her ("Say what? You somehow make pictures and sound fly through the air and appear in a little window of a closed box? There is no model for that to work in human knowledge, lol hoaxx0r n00b!")

Think about it. If it was really technology centuries (or millenia, or eons) beyond ours, we have as much hope of understanding it as a chimp does of becoming an auto mechanic. Just because we can't explain it does not mean it's invalid.

If I were to test "Isaac's" knowledge, I'd do so by asking him pointed questions in his field, mathematics and computer science. If he provides canned answers to those questions, his credibility is damaged.

I can see one way in which the technology he describes could work. If every molecule in an object were entangled at a quantum level, the entire object could become a quantum computing device. All that would be needed to control the device would be an interface, which the "language" may provide at some level we don't understand yet.

Fascinating ideas, hoax or not.

Its not the photo that's mirrored as such, its the 3d MODEL which is mirrored..in making the object he simply duplicated that half of it then rotated it 180 and stuck the 2 parts together

Originally posted by osaitax



The mirroring of photo 1 is a very well observed find.
This discredits the photo images, in my opinion.

It is hard to believe someone who has gone through as much trouble, over such a long time, to pull a hoax, would make such a mistake, to save himself 30 minutes.

A few things, if I may.

1) The progression of the drones is very odd. If my memory serves me, the drones were photographed from least sophisticated to most sophisticated. Why? Chance?

2) As somebody pointed out, the bandwidth for the fortunecity page would be surpassed by the download of just a few of the scans. The page is obviously being paid for. This raises a number of possibilities:

a) somebody is using a credit card, which would render "Isaac's" supposed anonymity void. This leads me to believe this is some type of marketing or some form of "disclosure" for any number of reasons (testing public opinion, a primer for further revelations, or a way to poison the well--half-truths as it were)

b) "Isaac" is paying by non-traceable means. I'm not even sure if this is possible.

c) Fortunecity is being generous

3) If "Isaac" is a computer science wiz, why the ?quotes? Fortunecity artifact, perhaps?

4) He also claims to feel relatively secure in that the information so far revealed narrows him down to 30-40 people but with the back story provided, wouldn't that narrow him down quite a bit?

I will say this, the primer pages are quite imaginative and artistic. Having said this, the opus is too detailed and involved for someone to hoax unless they have TONS of time and money on their hands. Qui bono? I would say either the movie or video game industry. HALO, Transformers, Star Trek, Taken 2(?), Interstellar, etc. There are a number of possibilities. Heck, even C2C could be the beneficiary of all this. Perhaps a Steven Spielberg/ILM production?

Taking a general survey, there are too many items in the CON column and too few in the PRO. Ironic since this is a professional con job. Perhaps a master pro/con list is in order?

I want this to be the real deal as much as the next person. The universe is too vast and it'd be egomaniacal to assume we have it all to ourselves. However, this drone story doesn't fly (pun definitely intended).

The people pointing out the mirror like appearance of the part in the image..

Do a little test...

Hold your hands together... What do you see?.... Amazing isn't it...

[edit on 28/6/2007 by LoDGiKaL]

yea but the thing is, the text is ALSO mirrored..that would'nt be the case if it was a real built object..the text would be the right way around on both parts of it..but its not Sorry..

Originally posted by LoDGiKaL
The people pointing out the mirror like appearance of the part in the image..

Do a little test...

Hold your hands together... What do you see?.... Amazing isn't it...

[edit on 28/6/2007 by LoDGiKaL]

Originally posted by blowfishdl
Note this "scratch" or "hair" which appears on two of the supplied photographs. Hair on a scanner bed? or photoshop implemented distortion to make it look like a real photograph?

[edit on 28-6-2007 by blowfishdl]

I just joined the forum to point out that this lint, and the other dust on the color print also appears, converted into halftone, on the black and white reproduction on page 6.

Download this layered psd to easily flip between the color photographic print and the paper document:
/3c2czr

Meaning, that this is not "new" lint and dust. The lint and dust on the photographic print is contemporaneous with the production of the paper document (or else the paper document would not have converted those very same bits of lint and dust into a halftone pattern.

Whether you choose to believe the time frame is last month or 20 years ago remains an open question. I only wanted to point out the absolute certainty that the dust is not new dust from "Isaac"'s scanner that was recently introduced into the color images -- it was already there when the black and white version was created.

Originally posted by LoDGiKaL
The people pointing out the mirror like appearance of the part in the image..

Do a little test...

Hold your hands together... What do you see?.... Amazing isn't it...

[edit on 28/6/2007 by LoDGiKaL]

But don't you find it ODD that the "letters" are inverted? Maybe that's just how alien tech works, but it's awfully suspicious. It smacks of being created by a program.





[edit on 28-6-2007 by The Little Penguin]

H O A X

Originally posted by The Little Penguin

Originally posted by LoDGiKaL
The people pointing out the mirror like appearance of the part in the image..

Do a little test...

Hold your hands together... What do you see?.... Amazing isn't it...

[edit on 28/6/2007 by LoDGiKaL]

But don't you find it ODD that the "letters" are inverted? Maybe that's just how alien tech works, but it awfully suspicious. It smacks of being created by a program.

[edit on 28-6-2007 by The Little Penguin]

Originally posted by MrMorden
I'm *not* saying this is real (I fall into the "skeptical but interested" camp) but the fact is, if this IS real, then there is no expert here that can corroborate his technical facts concerning this technology.

Think about it. If it was really technology centuries (or millenia, or eons) beyond ours, we have as much hope of understanding it as a chimp does of becoming an auto mechanic. Just because we can't explain it does not mean it's invalid.

Those are valid points. I do think that science could have investigated the materials. If it takes some non-terrastrial materials to work, how could the research be on going. Issac states they were working with the symbols and changes were drastically effecting the working. They were dividing materials to investigate the structure (the holographic effect). That make me believe they couldn't have just worked with what material was found. If some ET culture had given us a supply of materials to work, seem like at least some knowledge transfer would have occured. IE: The treaty/exchange often claimed. Seems like convenient lack of detail.

The only way it makes sense is if the technology got figured out after he left. He must have been in the early stages but they were ready to make profits in the private sector. The military should have at that point made use of it for weaponization, which means much progress must have been made before him.

Originally posted by wildone106
yea but the thing is, the text is ALSO mirrored..that would'nt be the case if it was a real built object..the text would be the right way around on both parts of it..but its not

Sorry..

Well, maybe you know more about the device than me, but where does it say that both halves of the device are the exact same piece? for all you know they could be seperate parts.. And if indeed the signs do have any function withtin a field of some sort, they might have to be oposed exacly to work..

Who knows..

I'm not saying this whole deal can't be a hoax. I just don't think that the mirroring of signs is enough proof to call it..

[edit on 28/6/2007 by LoDGiKaL]

One could render a hard copy and then scan the print to create imperfections seen in the posted photos.

I agree with SuicideVirus that the blacked out portions of the documents probably describe elements of the "very specific type of field" only briefly mentioned by "Isaac" in his introductory letter. I also agree that there is a level of deception going on in the way Isaac has presented his evidence. Though I tend to believe that this is not a hoax in the general sense of the word, I also do not believe Isaac is forthcoming as to why certain sections of the documents are blackened out. Linda Moulton Howe wrote that "Isaac" blackened out those sections. Whether he is the one to do so or not seems unclear from "Isaac"'s own statements (Earthfiles.com "Part 1: Explanation of the Recent "Strange Craft" Sightings"):

"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." - "Isaac"

Perhaps Linda Moulton Howe incorrectly assumed "Isaac" was the one to blacken out parts of the documents. But certainly those blackened out parts wouldn't identify "Isaac." If "Isaac" wanted to prevent controversy as to why parts of the documents had been blacked out, he could have informed us that those documents had been blackened out before he got them. I suspect "Isaac" knows more about why those documents have been blackened out than he is telling us. I believe that "Isaac" was burned out from working on CARET, and I believe that the artifacts are indeed real. What "Isaac" is not fully telling us is why he was burned out. I suspect that those working on CARET slowly and gradually came to realize through time working on the project that there was more going on with the artififacts than met the eyes. What I mean by this is that there is an invisible and perhaps "telepathic" aspect to their operations. After spending years trying to decipher how the artifacts worked, the group became disillusioned that there was an invisible aspect, i.e. the "very specific type of field" which makes the symbols "come alive," to their operations that they were not even close to understanding. This is my guess anyway.

As to why the main object would have mirrored halves, it doesn't seem too hard to speculate an answer. If an "anit-gravity" field (I'm not sure I fully buy the anti-gravity rhetoric) were emanating from the device, there may be a good reason why it needs to be symmetrical. If the symbols ("Isaac" was adamant that they were different from a language) in a peculiar way maintain the field then they too may need to be symmetrical, i.e. mirror images of each other. As for the proposed lighting anomolies of the images, I am not an expert on graphic renedition but I don't need to be to postulate an answer. If what "Isaac" says is true, that the artifacts have a cloaking capability, why couldn't they absorb, scatter, and reflect light in peculiar ways even when they are not fully cloaking themselves? Photographs of them would then exhibit lighting anomolies. I'm not saying that this is what has happened, only that it is a possibility.

But I agree with SuicideVirus that the release of information concerning the drones in general seems almost staged (carefully staged). On the other hand, I also tend to think that they are real objects.

As a side note: I find it strange that "Isaac" wants to contact witnesses to the sightings and "impart" some kind of information to help them deal with their experiences, when he himself claims to have no clear understanding of the "alien" connection.

Oh COME ON..thats REALLY stretching credibility..at this point you want to believe more than your willing to admit the things that just dont add up. For me these inconsistencies are very bothersome and I cant make up some supposed reason why they'd be so..because there is none other than a hoaxer who did'nt think it'd be spotted.


You guys are UNBELIEVABLE..your making up stories in your head to cover for the hoaxer's mistakes! I cant believe what Im seeing here.

Im not a skeptic when it comes to UFO's..I believe in it, but not an outright hoax which is so obvious in so many regards..

But I do admit I find the story interesting as fiction, too bad he messed up on the images.

Originally posted by cliffdweller
If the symbols ("Isaac" was adamant that they were different from a language) in a peculiar way maintain the field then they too may need to be symmetrical, i.e. mirror images of each other. As for the proposed lighting anomolies of the images, I am not an expert on graphic renedition but I don't need to be to postulate an answer. If what "Isaac" says is true, that the artifacts have a cloaking capability, why couldn't they absorb, scatter, and reflect light in peculiar ways even when they are not fully cloaking themselves? Photographs of them would then exhibit lighting anomolies. I'm not saying that this is what has happened, only that it is a possibility.

[edit on 28-6-2007 by wildone106]

[edit on 28-6-2007 by wildone106]

Originally posted by LoDGiKaL
I'm not saying this whole deal can't be a hoax. I just don't think that the mirroring of signs is enough proof to call it..

The fact that both sides of the objects physical mesh and the texturing are exactly identical, yet mirrored, is absolute evidence of a CG 3D model. It is very very common of 3D artists to save some time and clone and mirror half of a symetrical object to make it whole. Most people usualy texture their objects after mirroring, but its 100% evident that this 3D modeler textured the object, then, mirrored it. Another reason for a 3D artist to have mirrored textures, is to save room on the texture map. Video games and other software like to use as little resources as possible, so they will have limits to texture sizes and stuff. So if the 3D artist only gets a 512x512 gif image to put all his textures on, he will use parts of that texture on multiple parts of the object.

In this case, he cloned and mirrored an entire half of the object. This is very common, and a well known rule of thumb is to keep logos and language away from the texture when doing it, or it will be backwards. For example, a video game made a model of a helicopter, and for realism they add a few tail numbers on it. Of course, these tail numbers read "8081808" or something similar, because when you mirror that, it is still the same number.

There is no getting pass this, it is definetly CG. Normal people with brains could see just by looking at the entire image that it is a render from software just by looking at the soft shadows the objects create on the fake white enviornment. Now we are pointing out obvious flaws in the 3D render and you STILL dont see it is faked... its getting pretty bad.

I believe UFO's exist, and that we possibly have some of their technology, but this particular instance is FAKE.

Please move on people.

Your 1000% right on there 11 11, like I said..anyone who works in the CG industry and has posted here, has pointed out all the signs and knows its a fake. The people that are somewhat ignorant to the state of the art in rendering are totally bedazzled and believe its real. Its not totally their fault but they ignor the errors which have been pointed out and choose to make up excuses for the hoaxer, its delusional.

Originally posted by 11 11

Originally posted by LoDGiKaL
I'm not saying this whole deal can't be a hoax. I just don't think that the mirroring of signs is enough proof to call it..

The fact that both sides of the objects physical mesh and the texturing are exactly identical, yet mirrored, is absolute evidence of a CG 3D model. It is very very common of 3D artists to save some time and clone and mirror half of a symetrical object to make it whole. Most people usualy texture their objects after mirroring, but its 100% evident that this 3D modeler textured the object, then, mirrored it. Another reason for a 3D artist to have mirrored textures, is to save room on the texture map. Video games and other software like to use as little resources as possible, so they will have limits to texture sizes and stuff. So if the 3D artist only gets a 512x512 gif image to put all his textures on, he will use parts of that texture on multiple parts of the object.

In this case, he cloned and mirrored an entire half of the object. This is very common, and a well known rule of thumb is to keep logos and language away from the texture when doing it, or it will be backwards. For example, a video game made a model of a helicopter, and for realism they add a few tail numbers on it. Of course, these tail numbers read "8081808" or something similar, because when you mirror that, it is still the same number.

There is no getting pass this, it is definetly CG. Normal people with brains could see just by looking at the entire image that it is a render from software just by looking at the soft shadows the objects create on the fake white enviornment. Now we are pointing out obvious flaws in the 3D render and you STILL dont see it is faked... its getting pretty bad.

I believe UFO's exist, and that we possibly have some of their technology, but this particular instance is FAKE.

Please move on people.

Originally posted by osaitax
On a side note, the linguistic analysis primers remind me somewhat
of particle collision traces from ion colliders (if only because of the spirally design).

A little bit, I guess. It also is reminiscent of someone trying to express or map a fractal or holographic pattern using the available symbols. But without having the entire device, the pattern would naturally be incomplete.