[HOAX] Isaac CARET - Drones [HOAX]

FxRiot/45letters he is a music/audio phile and a cropcircle analyst. He's not accused of anything. I am merely following why and where were cropcircles being associated with the drones. why certain other people dropped hints at certain times. I do have to go thru thousands of posts..its not easy..Cropcircleexplorer, cropcircleship sites. Cropcircles also mentioned in a Pdf file listed on my profile that referenced LMH exclusively in that area, then LMH interviews Reyes, to bolster the drone case.which like circular logic bolstered her cropcircles..then all stopped.WE might not want to call it a viral, but someone is pushing to sell an idea or something here. There are others that have capitalized already. But if you want my recap. based on the poor quality of evidence, lack of witnesses, and Professional observations by mufon, and others, like nick pope, and the unethical behavior of the principls pushing the story..its a hoax, mot a 50 50, or just cant tell, its a hoax.

If you want to know who, well we are still looking at the principles, and going over peoples, some still active who may be the sockpuppets or herders steering the story to be found true. But staying at the center (from the beginning), and what transpired before the release of pictures, is our safest course of action. we may never know. But I doubt this will be the new Roswell some like LMH want it to be. She killed that herself.

Being truly openminded if not misguided, we are looking at a musical connection which may be just serendipitous coincidence, synchronicity, or maybe pot luck, but just getting into it. But my lord, I love the music I am finding, and the artwork . If you are looking for closure, I am afraid I cant give it to you, than I have for myself. The reaasons the other forums may not be looking for people, is because then that would imply or mean a hoax. Hoaxes dont sell when exposed. most of the time.

Ufology is a field which interests the military because most events seem to happen near bases, and make no mistake. Espionage by ufo buffs does occurr, a and counterops to flush occurr also. They are free in this hidden war to do whatever it takes to plug a leak, or push an agenda.
Universities engage in behaviour, lingusitics, group studies.
its a nice neat multicultural audience we are
Moost importantly, it draws plain old fashioned hoaxters, like the recent phoeneix lights, thousands were already saying, this is the big one, the sign,,
but right now, the ones for me with the most egregious and suspicious behavior are the ones at the center when it started, LMH, C2C, and UnknownCountry. Others by much lesser degrees.
I would recommend you interview them , more than us.
what they wont tell you speaks volumes, such as cancelled interviews, retention of hi res evedince, non cooperation with mufon, etc etc etc.
This is best I can do for you.
But hit my profile and see some of the exhibits in the comments sectionfor connections to varied areas and pre existing work.

I feel nostalgic all of a sudden, This reminds me so much of the followup questions I used to make up when doing our psych studies, like an assesmment period --albeit-- some call it SOAP
(subject, objective,assesment and planning) those were the days.

Cheers!



[edit on 23-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 23-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

Motion : for Dr. Dil to be Chief historian and head of documents
Division :approved unanimously.
I recommend placing all timelines and analyses in your comments
section Doc. it will make a dandy easy reference point for quick
retrieval, and congratulations.



[edit on 23-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

I just thought I'd let you guys know I watched a show called "UFO Hunters" and they totally had this drone on there speculating on it. Of course no definitive answers - but instead just like us it just dug up a million more questions.

One thing they did note is that it "grew" parts the more recent the pictures. This either means the drone "grew" parts. OR, the person who was creating the Computer Graphics continued to work on it and came out wiht more complex images.

Just mainly wanted to let you guys know that this made television.

I'll add "Project Beta" by Greg Bishop to my reading list. I haven't felt that this came from anywhere as serious as the military or government, but I'm open to all interpretations.

Sys_Config thanks for clearing that up for me about fxRiot/45letters. I'm unaware of how the crop circles played into this, and did not have the patience to read all of the crop circle posts, yet you did so for that I applaud you.

One question I have is out of all the players involved, aside from Alienware, who has profited from this?

LMH invested money in this by hiring the investigators, but did she make any sort of profit to cover that loss?

What about C2C? I noticed they only gave a small amount of airtime for audience questions about this, there was no lengthy discussion about it. Was their website buzz enough to bring them in any sort of profit worth starting this?

Another question is about the www.isaaccaret.com... site that was registered by a lawyer, particularly the graphic at the top that says Replicant. Does anyone have any guesses as to what that's all about?

reply to post by blowfishdl


I speculated in an earlier post probably 15 days or more behind, that the LAP from the isaac caret page looks like it is a reference to how drones might work, but suspiciously is too much complicated for depicting anything relevant to the first drone sightings, that is before the drones had started growing things out of them, the earlier models.

Originally posted by freelance_zenarchist
I'll add "Project Beta" by Greg Bishop to my reading list. I haven't felt that this came from anywhere as serious as the military or government, but I'm open to all interpretations.

Sys_Config thanks for clearing that up for me about fxRiot/45letters. I'm unaware of how the crop circles played into this, and did not have the patience to read all of the crop circle posts, yet you did so for that I applaud you.

One question I have is out of all the players involved, aside from Alienware, who has profited from this?

LMH invested money in this by hiring the investigators, but did she make any sort of profit to cover that loss?

What about C2C? I noticed they only gave a small amount of airtime for audience questions about this, there was no lengthy discussion about it. Was their website buzz enough to bring them in any sort of profit worth starting this?

Another question is about the www.isaaccaret.com... site that was registered by a lawyer, particularly the graphic at the top that says Replicant. Does anyone have any guesses as to what that's all about?

Thats news to us about her financing the investigators, kudos to you on that, though we suspected based on the intransigence of the OMF DRT to reveal their financing source. if so, the we can expect only data that will bolster her position on the "reality " of the drones. PI s loyalty is their employer, Not John Q Public, nor imatters of public policy, such as a hoax on the public. its alleged that 100 dollars per hour was spent, over months. Lots of money yet no results, but plenty of merchandising, buzz generates interest in dvds books, etc that indirectly or directly connect the drones to the areas I outlined, anti gravity, black ops, cloaking, Ets, and which in turn creates demand for tv and movies such as found in most sci fi. Look at history channel, and the Sci fi channel same material used.So the recoupment is indirect, but measurable in its impact long term.like the legend of an icon true or not , carries momentum for decades or even centuries.

Yes mysterious that C2C unloaded the story of the Milennia, within days to LMH, and not to Mufon, or any independent non profit organization dedicated and better prepared to adress the matter or event. and avoiding the matter on open hotlines, blowing off callers .
Reall hush hush, and I dont believe for a second it was the HS or NSA people silencing or intimidating anyone. after the whole event subsided news wise, it felt more like a viral attempt gone bad.

They are engaged more in selling/merchansising the Drone T shirts and organizing drone groups, to create buzz. Much the same way Microsoft did with the Society of ancients groups and mini ralleys. Remember that Whitley signed a june 15 2007 right at drone releases contract for his movcie 2012, that movie comes out in 2010 LMH C2C and UC work closely.. and he work closely. We are pursuing an Australian connection because one came up, and the last movies were done there. Lmh and whiley are only ones I know of backing the reality of the drones and the sciences around them ie cropcircles, parallel dimensions etc. and esoterica . This is not to say they are, its that circumstances make them suspects of "high interest". They were pushing this, .as opposed to lets
say Tom Hall, or Pisces. (Tom is silent and pisces was..fake) everyone else at high levels responded like Syd Meade, (bladerunners)Okuda,(star Trek) Frank Sternbach(you name it he s done it (star Trek)

Todd schawartz never responded to PM s from me , and I was his greatest poster no one else out of 30 or so members ever did significantly. Replicant means copy, and that they are..One would think it was a reference to the the movie where the replicants are clones produced to serve the military by the Tyrell Corporation.
Here the explanation is much more mundane. Its the name given to a series of templates produced by the Joomla website software. its obvious Todd is so inexperienced and frugal, he wanted to do it himself, which is why the site suffered, and cant accept more posts. here is the proof.

Todd is h2owind on his site. Not a once responded to my queries the other names Neo and morpheus allude to martrix. Other than that the Craft resembled the one posted my comment section, green image , cklick on site link for full view, I found no direct connection to matrix other than the identical Green drone design, and other movies and their designs of symbols that predate Caret
like star treks panel screen of the borg, and others.

Now just in a little while ago,
You and fellow ARCs will like this plus an additional observation by Zeropoint on witness reports.
I must post this now, as a poster, Arkhangels found something that we already new based on email comparisons, that chad and raj are linked,
-------------------------------------Arkhangels--------------------------------


Arhangel, who also found the designs used by Syd Mead
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't remember seeing this posted anywhere, and I don't recall anyone pointing this out since day one. But I think this thread is the place for it, at least in the present days. If you already knew that, at least you will remember it...

The inscriptions are not present JUST in the main arm of the Chad and Rajinder drones, they are present in the small arms as well:
PS: look how the inscriptions are apparently the same from the only visible arm of the chad's drone and the first of the three of Rajinder's drone I posted here.
Those both arms with the 'same' inscriptions are the arms 90º counter-clockwise from the main ring, looking the drone from the bottom. I would risk saying that the other 2 arms from Chad's would be a match as well

Regards Ark unquote
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now , here is Zero point, this is delicious..just like the emails now witness reports quote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the 2002 sighting,"My wife freaked out because we were still about 40 minutes from takeout"

From the Lake Tahoe sighting, " I was definitely a little freaked out but my husband didn't seem very bothered by it"

From the Capitola sighting, "At one point a car stopped to look as well. No one had any idea what this thing was but everyone in the car was visibly freaked out by it"

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

I don't know about other people, but "freaked out" is not a phrase I use at all. I find it very improbable that three separate witnesses would use the same phrase. But a single hoaxer would.
unquote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

correct, or a small tight group that know each other for a long time.

I will try to answer your questions tomorrow as I have to leave now. But if you read the pdf I posted in comments, you see where they were trying to go with this, look at how they reference themselves..its short but telling reading..for a draft.

enjoy.

Please feel free to share your findings or leads , this is one place you wont be attacked..its not one of those do or die threads, and we do love input.

Peace
Sys

If you like conspiracies and knowing a viral only costs an av of 15k and a few sockpuppets, like ammo marketing susidiary of CARAT FUSIOn and CARAT international did in EAs prg, what if a small group of business with closely related "products" and websites, shared the expense. say 3 or 5 people, the cost would be even more affordable.. But honestly, it costs to keep the puppets employed year round, and little things tell me me a little more money was put into it than that. There was a lot of scaling to put what I found in there, and I only scratched the surface of the lap







[edit on 23-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 24-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 24-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

Hi guys, just thought about why i have really not taken the drones on the coast to coast web site seriously. I am not saying that this is a HOAX in any way but at the time the pictures came out, I was really into video.stumbleupon.com. I was stumbling and came across a video of a guy who had a remote controal drone exactly like the ones in the picture. The only thing that was missing was the metal spiral on the top, it was only the white section with the spikes and it was only like 6ft long. I saw this video at the time the pictures came out, after watching it all interest left me on the subject. Thinking about it now (because of a recent ufo hunters episode) I just thought of that video. As it has attracted a lot of attention over the last year, I was wondering if anybody has seen that video. I don't know where the video came from because i was using stumbleupon.

Any input guys???

Originally posted by xuxfxo
Hi guys, just thought about why i have really not taken the drones on the coast to coast web site seriously. I am not saying that this is a HOAX in any way but at the time the pictures came out, I was really into video.stumbleupon.com. I was stumbling and came across a video of a guy who had a remote controal drone exactly like the ones in the picture. The only thing that was missing was the metal spiral on the top, it was only the white section with the spikes and it was only like 6ft long. I saw this video at the time the pictures came out, after watching it all interest left me on the subject. Thinking about it now (because of a recent ufo hunters episode) I just thought of that video. As it has attracted a lot of attention over the last year, I was wondering if anybody has seen that video. I don't know where the video came from because i was using stumbleupon.

Any input guys???

it would help if you narrowed it down to what were you looking for while you were into stumble. uav,drone,caret,ufo, hobbies etc. after you saw it, didnt you think it worth posting? somewhere? That was when it was hot.just curious. there is a fan type Ruav but no spikes, and propellors at each of the wing tips. We will look into it. Thanx

reply to post by Sys_Config


Sounds like maybe it was Kris' first video, the one before the iron (my personal favorite) that looked like a small remote controlled craft "shot" in front of some military looking buildings. Isn't that linked in Doc's timeline piece? One really should put an hour or two into the past several pages here for the best and most current information. I put up a link to Part 1 of the Mufon report, which is another excellent source of information. We don't mind answering questions here, but we are not tutors and the forum is designed for participation. That means some homework, I am sorry to report.

Amen to that Doubles, I was feeling like a doormat for a second there.
You will love this, marketing buzz gears up, and msnbc carries the story but no report on progress..odd..but Shirley, yes our very own, I mean DTRs very own American Shirley is on!


video.msn.com...:q:UFO:mk:us:sf:Relevance:vs:1&from=MSNHP&tab=s2>1=42003
The woman seen between 01:49 and 02:03 is Shirley, the Sequoia National Forest drone witness

Hey..if its on TV it MUST be Real Right? History channel, Sci fi channel, why may even make it to You've been Punked someday!
And absolutely nothing wrong with NBC plugging a story its affiliate History Channel covers. Busines is Business..I don't want to hear another word attempting to question this "story" again. Truth has no place in this business. You try selling truth, likely to barely get enough Busfare to Hoboken, NJ. So hush!




[edit on 24-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 24-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

Rats, I guess we were wrong. Fifty-one percent from the PIs.

I wonder what the dot was that American Shirley pointed to.

Also, I love how it's big news that there is a real spot on Earth where the trees in the BB photos actually exist! The trees are real! Must be more like 80% and they are just being polite to us passionate disbelievers. I suppose we have some overwhelming need to disbelieve now. Hmm. How did I miss that?

Mhm, I never saw anybody mention, that Shirley had photos, too.

This one convinces me:



THAT is a drone! And she is right: You don't need any CGI for that one!

Originally posted by Siddharta
Mhm, I never saw anybody mention, that Shirley had photos, too.

This one convinces me:

THAT is a drone! And she is right: You don't need any CGI for that one!

How could it be anything else! My God gentlemen, look at the detail on that dot, its incredible !(literally) . It seems to me we owe somekind of apology to Shirley, and ..err..Linda..ahhh ..hmmm..well..lets step back for a moment..Just where are the even more detailed Hi res 3d HD Blue Ray photos from Ty..what happened?. That would make it international news! Global..PottsDam Treaty , you know, UN Security Council kind of stuff. A Slam Dunk proof positive! Is NBC asleep on the Job? How could they forget to ask?


No she did not have a camera per LMH herself!
4) Earthfiles 05/25/2007 =97
Two More Eyewitnesses of Aerial "Drones" in 2005 and 2006
Sequoia National Park, May 2005: Shirley P., retired California
state mental health worker. She wants to apply for another state
job and does not want any of the "drone" controversy to
negatively affect her current application. But she became very
upset when all the CGI and Photoshop arguments were being made
and she knew she had seen with her own eyes, while standing next
to a Sequoia Park Ranger while asking for driving instructions
out of the park, a strange aerial object that matched the Chad
images of May 6, 2007. Shirley saw the same drone a second time
when she stopped to get further driving instructions from a road
crew. She did not have a camera with her either time. I have her
full name, address, phone, and professional background.

News fabricating News guyz..another disgrace fabricating another disgrace!
I guess the silent majority is gonna take it in the pokey with a smile
Perhaps its time we question what the Real news is all about!


[edit on 24-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

The one thing that bothered me about the Today show report, it was not exactly clear that all of these photos witnesses are anonymous....they can't even be proved to exist.

51% real...lol....way to go out on a limb

Just took a look at this:

Sequoia National Park, May 2005:
Ten years after that in May 2005 in Sequoia National Park, California, a retired California state mental health worker, told me she saw a dragonfly-shaped aerial craft. She has asked me to call her “Shirley P,” but I have her full name, address, phone, and employment background. She became very upset with internet rumors that all the drone photographs were faked CGI and Photoshop creations. She knew she had seen with her own eyes a strange aerial object that matched the Chad images of May 6, 2007. She saw the aerial machine while standing next to a Sequoia Park Ranger who was giving her directions and who told her the drone was used to look for fires. Shirley saw the same drone a second time in the park when she stopped to get further driving instructions from a road crew. She did not have a camera with her.

...but presents dots to NBC. I guess, she was too scared and ridiculed to tell them, she had no camera with her that day.

Unfortunately, what spills out of out tv sets is much more like sausage than, say, pork chops. Everything is done in a big hurry, and editing is done with a slick finished product to feed to the machine in mind. Little care is given to accuracy or to logical programming. American Shirley might well have been commenting on someone else's photo, or one of her own from some other event, which might be interesting enough, but we have no way of knowing given the sloppy work done in tv land. Or maybe her story continues to evolve. I dunno. The Today show doesn't even bother to claim anything about "investigative journalism." At least they are clearly about entertainment.

Originally posted by Sys_Config
Motion : for Dr. Dil to be Chief historian and head of documents
Division :approved unanimously.
I recommend placing all timelines and analyses in your comments
section Doc. it will make a dandy easy reference point for quick
retrieval, and congratulations.

While I genuinely appreciate your faith I fear I’m undoubtedly NOT the man for the job, I would upset far too many, because as Sidd expected I put little-to-no onus on the Australia connection (except at a push the Chris Kenworthy connection), Dopefish et al, in fact very little of what has been covered I feel is relevant except perhaps as a list of things investigated and dismissed. I know this goes against the grain of this huge thread but I’ve never been anything other than honest in regarding my opinion.

I also personally don’t believe LMH contributed to the funding and the DRT said pretty much straight away that $100 was an exaggeration.

In my opinion Todd Schwartz was an inexperienced opportunist who thought he was on the cusp of a quick buck. I say inexperienced as he initially forgot to opt out from divulging his whois data for the site. But after answering queries as to whether or not he was Isaac this was quickly remedied. Also when challenged he made his intentions clear.

Cheers!!

That's my Dil, as I expected him!

Always staying with the visible facts. That is just the reason, why you must do the chronological report, if you wish or not.

And yes, doubles, could be they took Shirley's sentence, before even spoken. But it doesn't change my impression of her, that she has a dot to show to the public. It rather strengthens my image of her.

Still the same: no witnesses at all...

Originally posted by DrDil

Originally posted by Sys_Config
Motion : for Dr. Dil to be Chief historian and head of documents
Division :approved unanimously.
I recommend placing all timelines and analyses in your comments
section Doc. it will make a dandy easy reference point for quick
retrieval, and congratulations.

While I genuinely appreciate your faith I fear I’m undoubtedly NOT the man for the job, I would upset far too many, because as Sidd expected I put little-to-no onus on the Australia connection (except at a push the Chris Kenworthy connection), Dopefish et al, in fact very little of what has been covered I feel is relevant except perhaps as a list of things investigated and dismissed. I know this goes against the grain of this huge thread but I’ve never been anything other than honest in regarding my opinion.

I also personally don’t believe LMH contributed to the funding and the DRT said pretty much straight away that $100 was an exaggeration.

In my opinion Todd Schwartz was an inexperienced opportunist who thought he was on the cusp of a quick buck. I say inexperienced as he initially forgot to opt out from divulging his whois data for the site. But after answering queries as to whether or not he was Isaac this was quickly remedied. Also when challenged he made his intentions clear.

Cheers!!

Hi Doc, no one said to back dopefish, arthur, tom, Pisces, king tut, or anyone.. just post your timelines, or memos, emails like shirley, and witnesses, thats all..no position or opinion required..at all..just facts as we get them in one place..thats all..everyone still has right to look at the facts, make their own mind up..
if we had all the emails and correspondences like this shirley thing, we can compare to what is stated later..as it seems the story is being re written before our eyes.
I already knew your opinions, are different, its the collection of data I am looking at.
it has nothing to do with taking sides.

Cheers!

I never said LMH funded Drt that new guy did. It was a surprise he said that, and I expected him to provide details..but he didnt.
I posted already same conclusion to Todd, in most recent post.
I followed Kris kensworth and The other, as possible colluders.
thats just normal lead following doc, the same way we followed Alienware and Carat,how are we in disagreement?
we just document when we kick one out the bucket, and go to the next.
Basic fact finding.
But thats ok..you dont have to I should have asked..my comments section is getting big, and I needed someone else to handle the text documents, in theirs.
I understand.







[edit on 24-4-2008 by Sys_Config]

Originally posted by Siddharta

Still the same: no witnesses at all...

Good point, Sidd. That's what it boils down to. We still don't have one person associated with the photos. Not one.