Project Serpo: Postings by "Anonymous" -- Breaking news?

The Victor/Bill differences between of posts 13a/b is very interesting.

1. Does the fact that they both recieved the same/similar posts, mean in fact that anon 1/2 are the same person. If not they obviously have access to the same information.

2. When did Victor recieve his version of 13 a/b? and has he discussed with Bill the differences? and asked him (If he did), why he edited his version?

3. If Bill is editing his versions why?

4. Has Victor recieved anymore contradictory posts from anon? i.e 14/15

5. Is it a possibility that Victor has added information to the posts himself, to bring himself back into the Serpo frame?

6. Does anon even know that Bill has edited the Serpo information, If that is the case?



[edit on 8-2-2006 by Whiterabbit29]

Ausable_Bill:

>If Anon was disappointed enough with Victor for these reasons to "fire" him, then why is Anon allowing Bill to do the same thing?

You're assuming Anon is the "original" Anon I have't read all the pages but you can see my view in the summary thread.

If this story were true, the original Anon is probably in a nice padded cell somewhere spinning out on lots of drugs...or dead.

Cheers

JS

Someone care to explain how a Jpeg works ? ( I know personally) but as an exercise for people who must beleive I think it would be great to have the technical matter of fact explanation of how exactly any digital object becomes a "jpeg".


There is a point to this trust me. And it specifically applies to Serpo.

[edit on 8-2-2006 by robertfenix]

Yes Bill, he is doing the same TYPE things Victor was doing.
Remember Victor was editing to make the point clear.
Bill is editing to allow some cliffhanger revelation that keeps us glued to the set.

Victor's editing was not to withhold information. So it would seem possible there could be another change if Anon finds some displeasure with the way things are being done now. (This is all speculation as I have no way to know)

tek, you know your stuff. If I understand, the possibility exists that we could conclude if the information was being supplied from the same area at the very least?

Of course the voice recorder or the memory route would not account for having posted exactly as received. You can't tell a misspelled word when it is spoken, right?

This information is good. Back to research and development.

Thanks!

Once our scientists minds were open, the calculations were made to prove the team's data.

This is an interesting little bit from ANon post #5, it is not only subliminal messaging but also not something a rational Scientists would say.

How can you open your mind to something that does not go along with what your core logic says and then manipulate something that you yourself did not observe to then come to the conclusion that the "teams" observations than must have been correct...

Highly unlikely Dr. Spook would say


Phrase control object subject = OPEN MIND TEAM DATA PROVEN

[End- Mind control lesson


[edit on 8-2-2006 by robertfenix]

[edit on 8-2-2006 by robertfenix]

Originally posted by robertfenix
Someone care to explain how a Jpeg works ?

Perhaps these sites will help:

computer.howstuffworks.com...

computer.howstuffworks.com...

graphicssoft.about.com...

www.brycetech.com...

www.devx.com...

www.faqs.org...



[edit on 2006/2/8 by GradyPhilpott]

robert:

on jpg

sorta, it's a compression/encryption technique that can be used to compress/encrypt Anything, not just pictures...

I assume your getting at a text message encoded within an image??

twj

See, I told you I wasn't a very good investigator.

The assumption comes from Anon's praise of Bill on c2c then lo and behold Anon goes straight to Bill with the info.

I forgot about Centrist's post stating that Victor noticed a change in Anon's demeanor just before the "firing."

What doesn't make sense to me is if this person/people wanted to truly remain anonymous, then why bring in another player?

Potentially the more players there are, there's more notes to compare, willingly or coerced.

I still don't understand Bill's manipulation of the info for any other reason than personal gain. (cliffhanger effect)

I guess the bigger question would be,......

Since Bill is admittedly withholding information because of it's reliability, then why?

Will it blow the story out of the water?

Will it make Bill look like a fool?

Does it contradict the views of scientology?

Just what could be so unreliable that it would need to be withheld?

I guess only time will tell.

Either way I'll be watching because there's too many excellent investigative minds here that will fit the pieces together and get at the truth.

Later,.... Bill

There are a few programs out there that can do this.

Originally posted by torbjon
robert:

on jpg

I assume your getting at a text message encoded within an image??

twj

Okay robertfenix, I'm back. Had to go out sna d uhhh......get a haircut....yeah thats my excuse for working......LOL

You asked about a Jpeg. How's this?

As you may or may not know a J-peg is compiled using a mathmatical compression. It has no ability to retain layers or components. You can not "scan" something that is in digital format "into" another program.

Scanning requires a hardcopy of the "image" to be then digitized and then it can be imported into whatever program of your choice again as a single layer "object".

If one then takes the Jpeg and imports it into the word program (one supplied by Anon), the basic fact still remains that a Jpeg "object" is a compressed mathmetical logrithm of the original image and thus can contain no independant layers or seperated objects which could then be moved around individually.

Does this help? I know I paraphrased in certain places, but it was too technical to grasp the entire concept. Maybe you can explain it better.

G

If anybody is interested in the process used, to convert the image from the file sent by anon, to the image posted on Serpo.org then this is according to Bill what happened. I have no idea not being that way technically minded if this is possible just thought somebody might be able to recreate it.

A Jpeg was recieved by E-mail (4.3Mb)

The Jpeg was then printed.

Scanned into a word program supplied by anon which resulted in a large word document where the components could be moved around individually!

A screen shot was taken of this using a Mac OS X program called Grab which created a TIFF image

That was then opened with a program called fireworks and exported unchanged into a GIFF (15k)

The image was then darkened using the contrast setting on the Fireworks program.

Image was posted

Edit to add Print!

[edit on 8-2-2006 by Whiterabbit29]

Ausable_Bill:

OK, I think we originally had this:

Anon - Victor - ATS

Then "Anon" was taken out (maybe not literally) and then we had this:

Disinfo Team (woever) - Bill - ATS

You mentioned:

>Since Bill is admittedly withholding information because of it's reliability, then why?

One strategy the dis-info agents *may* use is to have Bill "put across" that *maybe* Anon's info isn't very reliable (which it was originally but isn't now, due to the fact that Anon is now really the disinfo team). This would prob. be a better strategy to employ I would think rather than knocking down Bill...this way you can use Bill later on..PLUS, he now has more credibility

Cheers

JS

What we know

co-authors >> Victor >> Bill >> ATS


What we "think" is the case

if then>

co-authors >> Bill >> ATS

or goto>

fake co-authors aka (Bill) >> Bill >> ATS

co-authors:end [SERPO]

Heat = [abs]

then>

Bill >> ATS

Bill >> new forum


ATS>Bill


[edit on 8-2-2006 by robertfenix]

[edit on 8-2-2006 by robertfenix]

Originally posted by jumpspace

One strategy the dis-info agents *may* use is to have Bill "put across" that *maybe* Anon's info isn't very reliable (which it was originally but isn't now, due to the fact that Anon is now really the disinfo team). This would prob. be a better strategy to employ I would think rather than knocking down Bill...this way you can use Bill later on..PLUS, he now has more credibility

JS

I like that idea.......

Which would mean neither Victor or Bill is in the loop so to speak. They are just conduits of the information.

One step farther:

The UFO community has been expecting something big to occur. Many say it will happen in 2006. Last year a few on Victor's List were discussing a certain disclosure as early as February 2006, but allowed it could be pushed back to April or May.

Victor had several lists. And he is a prolific writer. But when the story grew faster and discussions broader his computer literacy held him back, the need became for a more energetic approach.

Enter Bill. Charismatic, team leader, management skills, speaking skills, etc.
But still a conduit to disseminate the info.

(This is, of course, a working hypothesis based on jumpspace prior posts.)

G

I think it fair to say, if Anon stopped screwing around and simply put forth all the information he had, rather than going through this ridiculous and wholly unnecessary cloak-n-dagger rigmarole, it would alleviate a lot of the vagueness surrounding his claim.

It's simple: you either have the evidence to back up your claim or you don't. Don't hand it out piecemeal, because all you do is extend the length to which you'll be scrutinized. And, if this information he has was, indeed, true and valid, I think the last place he'd want to make it known to the world is through the conspiracy community. Take it to a large newspaper or one of the news networks. I'm sure they'll be more than happy to validate the veracity of the claim. They were all over this whole NSA phone-bugging business, and I can only imagine how they'd salivate to to have a story like this... assuming it's true.

But because Anonymous hasn't taken his story to a reputable news agency, it only further leads me to believe he has ulterior motives in hocking this far-flung tale to a particular group of people, rather than those who are in a position to best substantiate his claim and protect his privacy and identity.

Who would give this story more credibility to the general public: Art Bell or someone like Bob Woodward? Late night conspiracy radio talkshows or the network evening news?

Anonymous is catering to a very specific demographic - those who believe. And in my line of work, the publishing business, that stinks of profit motive.

Eventually, I'm sure the only way anyone will be able to learn the entire "truth" to this so-called mystery is by purchasing the book. It's an age-old marketing technique and works surprisingly well.

Here's another good question,....

Since Anon "supposedly" given Bill strict orders to relay all info exactly as it appears to him,.....

Why would Bill go against Anon's orders and edit out information that Bill "decides" is not reliable?

Since Bill is "all for true disclosure" then why risk whizzing off Anon by not strictly following Anon's orders? (regardless if it's Anon 1, 2, or dis/agent)

Isn't Bill directly contradicting himself or am I missing something?

And if That contradiction is true, wouldn't that implicate that Bill knows that there will be no consequences? (Anon clamming up or using someone else)

So if that is true, does that mean,either Bill has had a change in orders by Anon, or knows how Anon thinks?

If this is all irrelevent, please, say so, and I will shut up.

Originally posted by torbjon
IP2Location:

anyway, IP2Location has NOT been a very reliable tool in my experience...
rock on
twj

In my experience too.

As we know IP addresses & email headers can be masked / falsified. You can use proxy software on a 3.5' disk (linux based) go to an internet cafe, (who will be using their own proxy/gateway sec methods), set up 5 web based email accounts with forwards to other accounts that ultimately forward it to your recipient - you won't get much useful info from that point. All this isn't too hard to do - just gotta know a little about proxies.

Anyhow, I am still reading over this thread, there is much to digest.

Perhaps there are many lessons to learn for all us.
Perhaps some of our preconcieved ideas on how such disclosure 'should' play out may need some fine tuning. I have faith we are learning.
We are dealing with an event that has no set rules. Proof / Evidence these days may not be in the form we'd expect.
I must applaud some of our fine members & admin's with their due diligence and research skills that made this experience enjoyable for me.
Strong focussed community. The summaries were great - thanks guys.
I hope BR and the Serpo crew will post again in the future.

Whiterabbit29:

None of the information you provided is on the serpo site.

This statement in particular:

“Scanned into a word program supplied by anon which resulted in a large word document where the components could be moved around individually!”

requires further clarification…

A “word program” that generates a “word document” implies Microsoft Word.

Implication is implication. phooey.

What Exactly was the mystery program called? Version numbers? Copyright date? specs specs specs.

Of course, I’m sure he deleted the mystery program now, yes? Along with the original 4.3MB jpg, so there’s no way for anyone anywhere (including bill) to recreate the experiment.

So much for the scientific method.

So much for keeping the data intact.

We will NEVER know what was Really encoded in the original jpg. (if anything)

I’m no slouch when it comes to image manipulation. I cannot recreate the effect he describes on his web site (see my post on page 239). I have a mac running osx and a pc running windows me 2000, I have a buncha other hardware and software for image capture and manipulation, too.

I work with LAByrinth theater company. I ran this by some of them. Whereas I’m no slouch, these people are PROs. They tell me it’s bogus, can’t be done, not even with some kind of magic mystery program.

I don’t give a rats tail about serpo or bill or aliens or anything else.

I want to know more about this magical mystery program that can take a single layer jpg and somehow magically break it up into very specific component layers… how does it know which line goes with which component? which pixel goes with which line??

This magical mystery program is THE most startling, innovative, groundbreaking, phenomenal achievement in science, engineering and programming to come down the pike since sliced bread.

But he doesn’t have any specs on it, does he?

And the original unedited jpg evidence from Anon? That’s not available either, is it?

And I offered the guy Free Bandwidth, too. 4.3MB is NOTHING, hell the little serpo orbit animation that I made is bigger than that *laughs*


bah.

phooey

mmmph.

rock on
twj

Hi torbjon!

Your correct my statements are not on the ATS or the Serpo website but they are taken from what Bill said himself yesterday!

The 4.3 Mb file is still available, Bill is considering posting it ,but as you can apparently still manipulate the image he is worried that it will turn up in different guises all over the internet. This is basically what he has said I can not quote him as I'm not allowed!

wether any of this is true or not is still to be decided I'm just passing on Info!

By the way miles off topic so sorry I think it was you, did you ever work out who was scanning your pc I had the same IP recorded scanning mine monday night found your post by googling the IP? U2U me If you have any Info

Originally posted by Whiterabbit29
Your correct my statements are not on the ATS or the Serpo website but they are taken from what Bill said himself yesterday!

Did Bill mention printing the file before scanning it?

Here on ATS (on p 209), and on the serpo site, he said he printed it, scanned it and that the objects still moved around. He even talked about the printer/scanner he had there in Switzerland.

How could a scanned drawing from a piece of paper, still have individually moving components in the new file? After being scanned from a paper? That's what's got me stymied.

I guess I'll never know.