Drone Debunked

reply to post by Vector J


the drone program language symbols, if genuine, likely are not a written language like we are familiar with, any more than our computer program languages could be related to by cro-magnon people if presented to them on their own.

if they are a product of a very well planned, highly resourced hoax produced by a collection of very talented people with plenty of time on their hands then they are symbols that also represent incomprehensible gibberish, only without any real meaning.

I don't know about writing..But it is another thing to explain how they fly- unless of course the various photos are CGI.

The C2C Drone was debunked ages ago by 11 11. You all were to ignorant to believe him.

Alienware (a really big company) would NOT risk copyright problems by using images and characters from another source, they would make their own illustrations. So they probably are the creators of the drone.

I'm willing to bet that graphics team that created all the images and illustrations for the contest decided to release or "leak" some of the material to create a "following" for the contest, which turned out to be Isaac, and all the drones. They slowly let out the drone images and other material so people would get interested.

When a major company creates a contest, it is usually planned way in advance. The Chad images, and all that, came before the contest because the graphics team probably thought it would be cool to leak some of it before the contest starts.

[edit on 26-10-2007 by 0ne0ne]

What I think is that a design team was approached to create an alienesque campaign for these new new computers.
What better way to design a campaign than to use information already out there? It's EASY for them.
Even the graphics used aren't any different than what has already been provided to the general internet. The Palto docs are the backgrounds? THAT IS VERY LAZY. I'm sure they are charging big time for the "graphic work"
The font? Plenty of people have redrawn the characters in a high res format and publicized them. In 15 minutes I can download a FREE program, use it to change my hand written letters into an actual font and then start using it in notepad.. From there type a simple paragraph and voila', you have a code to be cracked by kids..

The OP is the first person to bring it here but now it looks like we'll all see it in a Dell campaign soon. Maybe on prime time TV between "Dr.Phil" and "Survivor - China"

Drones = Real
This thread's topic = a PERFECT example of a lazy design team using impossible to copyright information. Irresponsible as well imo.

I'm split on how I feel about this though...
Does this laziness offer a backdoor way to get the info out/ pull more whistleblowers into the open or is it a huge blow to the movement of disclosure by way of turning a significant event into petty marketing?


B

reply to post by BlackProjects



i have followed this case very closely, and have yet to see telltale cgi indicators in the caret photos. i work in the cgi industry, and have been in the field for over 10 years.

its a lazy copout to simply declare something is cgi, there are too many non-cgi features in isaacs photographs. they may not be e.t. hardware pics, but they are genuine pics of real objects. there are too many details that give it away as real objects, unless they are cgi models rendered on the molecular scale, its obvious they are real, solid objects that exist.

a real ufo could land on the whitehouse lawn, be reported on the 6 oclock news and there'd still be people who'll say its cgi... guaranteed.

i'd love to find anything that credibly closes this case as a hoax, but so far, nothing fits the bill. thats not to say something won't occur to reveal it as a hoax someday, but so far nothing convincing has.

i'm still waiting

Originally posted by 0ne0neAlienware (a really big company) would NOT risk copyright problems by using images and characters from another source, they would make their own illustrations. So they probably are the creators of the drone.
[edit on 26-10-2007 by 0ne0ne]

who would sue them? the aliens if its real, the hoaxer if its a hoax?

either way, the publicity from either scenario alone would pay for any litigation that came up...

they are not using the caret photos, or the witness photos, you might notice. why not? if they are behind them, they'd be free to use them. but they are not, the photos were not produced by alienware, they cant use them because they do not own them.

thats very telling.

I agree with planetfall,

If the CARET data is false and a viral campaign the marketing firm responsible would already have claimed responsibility for it by the announcement of what ever product or service it was created to support. It has been many more months than a typical viral promotional lifecycle; when you consider how long ago the first drone image became published in the net.

Many of you skeptics have called it a viral campaign for:

transformers (wrong)
jose escamilla (wrong)
MYST computer game (wrong)
Spielburgs "Taken" (wrong)
Halo 3 (wrong)
insert-fav-ATS-viral-theory-here (wrong)

As far as I can tell it is a real "thing", what it is, who/what made it, its' purpose? Are all questions I am still researching.

Skeptics should consider this:

"There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." - Søren Kierkegaard

"The discovery of truth is prevented more effectively, not by the false appearance of things present and which mislead into error, not directly by weakness of the reasoning powers, but by preconceived opinion, by prejudice." Arthur Schopenhauer

"There is no better soporific and sedative than skepticism." - Friedrich Nietzsche

"It’s one thing not to see the forest for the trees, but then to go on to deny the reality of the forest is a more serious matter." - Paul Weiss

-Euclid

[edit on 26-10-2007 by euclid]

[edit on 26-10-2007 by euclid]

[edit on 26-10-2007 by euclid]

[edit on 26-10-2007 by euclid]

[edit on 26-10-2007 by euclid]

Originally posted by planetfall
who would sue them? the aliens if its real, the hoaxer if its a hoax?

ISAAC would sue them. Or even the company that ISAAC supposedly took the images from. The images are replicas of the "alien language", not actual physically from aliens.

Doesn't matter if it is a hoax or not, the images and illustrations were created by SOMEBODY, and that SOMEBODY has the rights to it. Alienware would NOT use it when SOMEBODY ELSE owns it. It's common law, common sense.

Originally posted by planetfall
they are not using the caret photos, or the witness photos, you might notice.

Are you blind??
www.alienware.com...:decipher_10242007_body

Can you not see the gray and black background?? There is an exact match on the circle thing.... get a clue...





See the circle on the lower left? Exact match.

These illustrations above are visible on the Big Basin drone images. The Big Basin drone has body parts that are clearly identical and a perfect match with the "PACL Inventory Review". The PACL Inventory Review also has parts of the Raj drone in it. The Raj drone is basically the same shape as Chad and all the others..

They are ALL linked together. You got to be completely stupid to not make this connection to "Alienware".

Come on, its been proven that all the drones are CGI, and what do you know "Alienware Computers" are known to be some of the best gaming computers in the world, which are designed for extremely realistic lighting and high definition models.

If you still think the Drone is real, you all have SERIOUS issues.

Kudos 3rdeye.

I found the Isaac/Drone/ etc... threads fascinating and until your post almost believable. Well done.

Alienware's marketing is brilliant !

Originally posted by planetfall
a real ufo could land on the whitehouse lawn, be reported on the 6 oclock news and there'd still be people who'll say its cgi... guaranteed.

blah blah blah... rinse repeat... broken record... not-so-instant replay....

get a mind of your own man... what you said above is sooo old and played out..

The saying goes both ways also...

"A CGI ufo could land on the whitehouse lawn, be reported on the 6 oclock news as "CGI UFO" and there'd still be people who'll say its real.... guaranteed."

Originally posted by 0ne0ne

Originally posted by planetfall
a real ufo could land on the whitehouse lawn, be reported on the 6 oclock news and there'd still be people who'll say its cgi... guaranteed.

blah blah blah... rinse repeat... broken record... not-so-instant replay....

get a mind of your own man... what you said above is sooo old and played out..

The saying goes both ways also...

"A CGI ufo could land on the whitehouse lawn, be reported on the 6 oclock news as "CGI UFO" and there'd still be people who'll say its real.... guaranteed."

Actually what you are saying is old and played out. They (alienware) have not said they created the "drone" photos. Until they say they are the creators it is "not proven" that it is their viral campaign.

-Euclid

[edit on 26-10-2007 by euclid]

Originally posted by euclid

Actually what you are saying is old and played out. They (alienware) has not said they created the "drone" photos. Until they say they are the creators it is "not proven" that it is their viral campaign.

-Euclid

I am constantly talking to people that only see an inch in front of them. Please, look beyond the inch, look a few damn miles ahead.

Alienware has an exact match of the CARET Language Primer, they have exact match of the language and even a valid decipher. Alienware would NOT use knowingly copyrighted images and designs. They would want to avoid a multi-million dollar lawsuit that could crash them into the ground.

Trust me, the drone and isaac deal is a complete fabrication and it has been debunked many many months ago. The only people who believe this crap still, are the ones that are lacking in research, or are not advanced enough to notice.

reply to post by 0ne0ne


Welcome back 11 11. Seriously save yourself a lot of trouble and wait for oneone to get banned again before you keep posting. You will pull your hair out i promise.

[edit on 26-10-2007 by sputniksteve]

Originally posted by 0ne0ne

Originally posted by euclid

Actually what you are saying is old and played out. They (alienware) has not said they created the "drone" photos. Until they say they are the creators it is "not proven" that it is their viral campaign.

-Euclid

I am constantly talking to people that only see an inch in front of them. Please, look beyond the inch, look a few damn miles ahead.

Alienware has an exact match of the CARET Language Primer, they have exact match of the language and even a valid decipher. Alienware would NOT use knowingly copyrighted images and designs. They would want to avoid a multi-million dollar lawsuit that could crash them into the ground.

Trust me, the drone and isaac deal is a complete fabrication and it has been debunked many many months ago. The only people who believe this crap still, are the ones that are lacking in research, or are not advanced enough to notice.

And they probably got their images from the same place we did - the isaac site. I have not seen any "proof" that it is a hoax.

If you think they created it all then call them up and ask them.

-Euclid

[edit on 26-10-2007 by euclid]

Originally posted by indierockalien
the drones are pretty darn real. One of them was for some reason patrolling around my house for a few nights this past summer... but this one was a lot smaller than the ones in the photos, so I guess the actual drone photos could be an alienware campaign inspired by the real thing. Maybe the alienware execs have connections?

So, I guess you forgot to take a picture of it? I'm sorry, but your words are just words. No credibility what so ever. I can make the same stance that a 10000ft elephant shaped flying saucer excreting gold colored manure hovered on top of my house and my story would be as credible as yours.

Seriously stop claiming outrageous bull manure without any claims.

Thank you.



[edit on 26-10-2007 by omnicron]

Well, I matched some of the converted Alienware text to one of the words on the primer graphics. The word comes out as "VMHRN". It is clear that the Alienware version does not translate to the Isaac primer graphics at all. Therefore, I conclude that Alienware took the idea from the Isaac images.

Hope that helps!

reply to post by fill0000


Good finds all. Agree Alienware's use was derivative only. Great posts here folks. I believe the people here could make a dent in solving some real mysteries. I'm constantly impressed with what we can do collectively as people if we co-effort.

I's shocking how nothing is sacred to these marketing minds. If it's not locked down by a specific copyright it's legally exploitable to these parasites. Or worse like using WTC event to sell commemorative crap. I've been plagiarized a few times and know how rampant the ethic (or lack therein) is now days.

On a happy note:

The Golden Gate just avoided a corporate sponsorship today. Commission voted it down. (external Link)
Golden Gate Not for Sale
There is still hope for us.

By the way, I started a string a few weeks ago on the Caret and some other videos not proven or debunked. No action there. Old news I guess. Shouldn't be however. Have you looked at the absolute beauty of the Caret studied graphics. There is massive quantitative and qualitative data in very specific design. Quite complex and still simple. Way beyond the needed pay scale of a commercial designer.
Thread-
Still up in the Air...

ZG

reply to post by 0ne0ne



those are not the famous, well known witness photos... they are not used anywhere on the site. they are owned by the witnesses who shot them, and are entirely unrelated to alienware.

those are only the language graphics which anyone can get. clue? i think i left you one when i said witness PHOTOS not the language graphics.

isaac does not own them, he would not sue, he is anonymous. the agency he worked for would not sue, they officially do not exist. the hoaxer graphic artist cannot sue, without blowing the scam and it serves him or her right.

the drones have NOT been proven to be cgi, upon close, experienced examination, they are obviously real photos of real objects, alien or constructed props aside.

when you are able to produce professional cgi media for print and animation, and study the industry and are aware of the resolution standards, then feel free to weigh in on cgi judgements, untill then keep an open mind.

[quoteAlienware would NOT use knowingly copyrighted images and designs.

a suit from who? there is no indication of copyright for the language graphics, many in the graphic art field have been using them with impunity and have not been told, as far as anyone has spoken up about (and if so they would) to stop using them or else.

so, who would bring the suit?

why arent they using the witness photos? if those were faked, they would represent many hours of talent to produce, thus a big investment. why not use them?

because they would be sued by the copyright owners, the witnesses who shot the pictures.

why not offer $$ to the picture owners to use for the campaign? i bet they tried, i wonder why the owners didnt go for it?

i contacted alienware and asked them directly about where they got the graphics for their contest at [email protected], maybe you all could do the same.

i'll post their response, or lack of here.