Please read this in full before posting. Thank you.

[Double Nought Spy]

Please read all of this before posting any reply. Thank you.

I must ask the indulgence of all who make up this forum, but I feel this is important, so please bear with me. This is a subject I am very weary of, but there is some progress being made. This is not about the nature of the con job associated with these images, but about catching the people responsible. Please do not use the well known name of this abomination in any replies, or even the H word, since I'm hoping to keep this thread out of anyone's search results for a while. I think by posting here I am beyond the radar in use by the guilty parties, and this forum is frequented by many intelligent and observant people who are used to looking at weird pictures. DB, I would be very grateful for a few minutes of your attention here, in particular. This specific issue has been discussed on other forums, but it always gets buried immediately by avalanches of bullshit from several directions, which only seems to confirm my conclusion.

Here is an image that was found by an associate of mine when he was digging around in a photo account owned by a suspect. It is purported to be a modified version of the photo directly below it, with the mysterious object removed for purposes of locating the utility equipment in the photo. There is no question that it was the property of the suspect. Sorry I don't have a larger copy of the "original" complete with the mysterious object. I'll keep looking, but the search takes me to places I'd rather not go, if you know what I mean.

This photo has been around for a while, and it has always bothered me. Even before it turned up, I was suspicious when the two infamous gumshoes were supposedly looking for the site by using a "modified" photo so they didn't look foolish. What if, I thought, they were lazy enough to use the original shot without the mysterious object? No, I reasoned, they surely would use a quickly retouched photo, nobody would be that stupid...

There have been several analyses, and the clouds always bothered me. I don't have Photoshop or the skills to do any real analysis myself, but another frequent poster on the subject did this helpful animated overlay:

Then he did an enhanced overlay:
<style></style>

How can the clouds right next to the "thing" not change, if in fact the photo at the top of this page is a modified version of the one directly below? It seems plainly obvious to me that the top photo, under the circumstances, is a smoking gun with the owner's finger prints all over it, and his name engraved on the barrel to boot. But I am not a professional.

There is more, of course, much more. I will be posting some of that after I get some responses here. For now, I want to focus on the photos here, since this place is free of the usual suspects and their truckloads of garbage. So again, please avoid the obvious keywords when you post. I know the flakes and the maintenance team will eventually find this thread, but I think we can keep that from happening for a few days if we are careful. I know I sound like a paranoid lunatic, but I've been messing with these creeps for a long, long time.

 

[methshin]

I read the post, and I'm still not really sure what you're getting at, but if you want my opinion, as someone who plays a shit-ton of video games, I am pretty certain that is CG. The things you pointed out support this theory whole heartedly I admit, but I think when someone sees that image they are gonna think it looks a little too perfect.

 

[thefoundryman]

Do you suspect then DN SPY, that the poster of this original photo is also responsible for the photo manipulation? Or did the perpetrators of this hoax find a stock image upon which to build their lie?

 

[David Biedny]

CG rendered object on a photographic background.

So what's your question?

dB

 

[Double Nought Spy]

Thanks for lookin'. The question is about the first image. Is it the image that had the "mysterious object" inserted by the perpetrators of this obvious fraud, or is it a "cleaned up" version, based on the second image, as claimed by its owner.

Could the "mysterious object" be removed from the the second image (or a better version of it), with the results visible in the overlays? I don't see how, which means the owner of the first image had in his possession a copy of one of the original landscapes that were used by the...Hoaxers!

If the image with the text and red lines is a modified version of one of the original hoax photos, shouldn't we see signs of the removal of the bogus "spaceship?" How could the clouds be patched in so perfectly? Remember, if this is what it is claimed by its owner to be, then whoever did the work of removing the thing only had the published image to work with, which of course obscured parts of the clouds.

It has been well established for over two years that this whole episode was a fraud. Some of us nuts have been picking through the train wreck in an effort to find the people who did it. We are getting very close to doing that.

 

[David Biedny]

In my opinion, nothing about this fraud indicates anything I would consider "world-class". And as to who's behind it, I would ask George Noory and Linda Milten HowDidTheyDoIt, the two yokels most closely ass-ociated with this sham.

dB

 

[methshin]

In my opinion, nothing about this fraud indicates anything I would consider "world-class". And as to who's behind it, I would ask George Noory and Linda Milten HowDidTheyDoIt, the two yokels most closely ass-ociated with this sham.

dB

Better warn them that there are dragons on the loose.

Do yourself a favor and turn the volume down if your gonna watch the conculsive proof.

 

[aNorthernSoul]

Really, it's possible to both take the image out or place it in nowadays. Neither would be that difficult if you knew what you were doing. I still say more could be told by analyzing the craft itself which seems suspect, but even that is somewhat difficult... so you need supporting evidence to help make a photo legit these days, in my opinion.

 

[Sean Elifritz]

In my opinion, nothing about this fraud indicates anything I would consider "world-class". And as to who's behind it, I would ask George Noory and Linda Milten HowDidTheyDoIt, the two yokels most closely ass-ociated with this sham.

dB

Well, I think it's a much more creative hoax than usual. It has originality going for it. First of all the images are different than anything I've seen before. When first seeing these images I was quite interested in learning more about the matter. From the beginning I doubted an extraterrestrial origin but thought there was an outside possibility that it could be some weird thing NASA or the military was involved with. Of course, that they might be fakes was high up on the list as well.

The other creative aspect to it are those forged CARET documents. I was particularly impressed by the imaginative story of how the symbols work. That was pretty out there.

I feel 100% confident that this is a hoax but in my opinion the charlatan responsible, whomever he or she is, is a cut above the average UFO hoaxer.

 

[aNorthernSoul]

The other creative aspect to it are those forged CARET documents. I was particularly impressed by the imaginative story of how the symbols work. That was pretty out there.

Is that the bit about symbols that were a programming language that didn't require a processor to run? I had listened to a discussion about this somewhere and for the life of me cannot remember where I had heard it. Fantasy or not, as a programmer I've always wanted to revisit the story as the idea is wildly fascinating... some sort of merger with programming and magic in a way.

 

[Double Nought Spy]

The production work was crap compared to the efforts to distract and derail any intelligent discussion. The "owner" of that picture, which should not have been in the possession of anyone but the hoaxers, was one of the lead attack dogs for a long time. Every time something like this is presented on one of the boards where the "suspects" hang out, a shit storm immediately erupts. They really don't know when to shut up, which has given us several good breaks.

I'm about 99.99% sure I know who the artist was, but I don't wish to persecute someone who was just doing a job for a studio. The sleazeballs behind the mess are the guilty ones, (LMH and George, I'm looking at you) but we do know who several of the low level players were. Can we prove it? Maybe. Does anyone care? I doubt it. I do like that top photo, though, because for me it clinches it. I was looking for some confirmation of my opinion of it, or if I'm mistaken then I'd like someone other than a suspect to say, "Sure, it could be done." Whether anyone would bother doing it for the purpose stated is another good question, of course.

 

[Sean Elifritz]

Is that the bit about symbols that were a programming language that didn't require a processor to run? I had listened to a discussion about this somewhere and for the life of me cannot remember where I had heard it. Fantasy or not, as a programmer I've always wanted to revisit the story as the idea is wildly fascinating... some sort of merger with programming and magic in a way.

Yep, that's what I was referring to. I thought that was a pretty trippy concept. The guy has a good imagination.

 

[skunkape]

The best theory I've heard about the drone photos is that it was a viral marketing campaign for the 'Sarah Connor Chronicles.' Soon after the photos appeared the writer's went on strike and the campaign was shelved. You have to give whoever designed the CARET documents some credit for creativity.

California Drones Mystery Solved By Sarah Connor Chronicles? - Screen Rant
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

 

[aNorthernSoul]

Yep, that's what I was referring to. I thought that was a pretty trippy concept. The guy has a good imagination.

Sweet, thanks! I am so going to revisit those stories, even if only a fairytale. The concept is so awesome in how it found a way to bind old school magic and spells to the idea of programming. Whoever came up with this concept should be writing novels as a better means to use their skills.

 

[mrmikehicks]

I Too Like the Programming Aspect of this Subject

Of all the UFO pics and stories to come along in the last 40 years since I've been following it, this CARET thing seemed to be the most interesting idea I've seen yet. Yes, it is 'out there' as far as a hardware and software concept, but wouldn't you expect it to be something vastly different than we use. Like most others, I don't feel there is enough information to make a decision about the 'back engineered UFO tech story' behind the pics. Even if the pics are crap (which it appears to be, whoever thunk it up was original.) It's like my general feeling about UFO's "If it's real, it's the most fantastic thing to ever happen, but if it's not, well, then it's still very entertaining"

 

[Double Nought Spy]

I Too Like the Programming Aspect of this Subject

Of all the UFO pics and stories to come along in the last 40 years since I've been following it, this CARET thing seemed to be the most interesting idea I've seen yet. Yes, it is 'out there' as far as a hardware and software concept, but wouldn't you expect it to be something vastly different than we use. Like most others, I don't feel there is enough information to make a decision about the 'back engineered UFO tech story' behind the pics. Even if the pics are crap (which it appears to be, whoever thunk it up was original.) It's like my general feeling about UFO's "If it's real, it's the most fantastic thing to ever happen, but if it's not, well, then it's still very entertaining"

<style></style>Did you read my opening post? This thread is about one photograph, and whether it was the original shot into which the "drone" was placed, or just what some very shady characters claimed it to be, a cleaned up version of the publicly available jpeg with the fake space ship removed. Was it the original, or a twice-manipulated image? That was important at one time, but now moot. Why do I get the feeling you know all about this already? Maybe it's your comment about "most others."

Actually, there is plenty of evidence (if you take the time to look) that "Isaac's" story is just what it appears to be: third rate science fiction. There is nothing at all to support any of that crap being real in any way. Even the die-hard "believers" from OMF, the "Drone Reality Team," are now apparently claiming to have debunked the drone business. What a sorry bunch of clowns.


It's just like the Lazar story. There are lots of people still desperate to believe it, in spite of the mountain of evidence that Bob is full of shit. Believe whatever you like, but spare me your rationalizations, please.

 

[mrmikehicks]

I Too Like the Programming Aspect of this Subject

<style></style> Why do I get the feeling you know all about this already? Maybe it's your comment about "most others." Actually, there is plenty of evidence (if you take the time to look) that "Isaac's" story is just what it appears to be: third rate science fiction. There is nothing at all to support any of that crap being real in any way. Even the die-hard "believers" from OMF, the "Drone Reality Team," are now apparently claiming to have debunked the drone business. What a sorry bunch of clowns.
It's just like the Lazar story. There are lots of people still desperate to believe it, in spite of the mountain of evidence that Bob is full of shit. Believe whatever you like, but spare me your rationalizations, please.

DB, I thought you were an intelligent person that could read. Apparently you need better language skills. You obviously were unable to understand my post, or you have me confused with someone else. I realize your fervent desire to dash all of this as fake and not real, but again if you read my post I don't disagree. I simply stated that the hoax or whatever it is put out a really neat idea (from a programming standpoint) And the fact that you attack anybody that you even think is opposing your opinion and accuse them of being part of the hoax, is further evidence of your paranoia and ignorance. What will you ever do when (and it will happen) one of these 'hoaxes' turns out to be real?

 

[Lauren Jones]

I Too Like the Programming Aspect of this Subject

DB, I thought you were an intelligent person that could read. Apparently you need better language skills. You obviously were unable to understand my post, or you have me confused with someone else. I realize your fervent desire to dash all of this as fake and not real, but again if you read my post I don't disagree. I simply stated that the hoax or whatever it is put out a really neat idea (from a programming standpoint) And the fact that you attack anybody that you even think is opposing your opinion and accuse them of being part of the hoax, is further evidence of your paranoia and ignorance. What will you ever do when (and it will happen) one of these 'hoaxes' turns out to be real?

Are you addressing David Biedny? You quote Double Nought Spy's post, but reference DB at the beginning of your post.

 

[Double Nought Spy]

I Too Like the Programming Aspect of this Subject

DB, I thought you were an intelligent person that could read. Apparently you need better language skills. You obviously were unable to understand my post, or you have me confused with someone else. I realize your fervent desire to dash all of this as fake and not real, but again if you read my post I don't disagree. I simply stated that the hoax or whatever it is put out a really neat idea (from a programming standpoint) And the fact that you attack anybody that you even think is opposing your opinion and accuse them of being part of the hoax, is further evidence of your paranoia and ignorance. What will you ever do when (and it will happen) one of these 'hoaxes' turns out to be real?

Come on Numbers, we're both too old for this crap and you know it.

Over and out.

 

[mrmikehicks]

I Too Like the Programming Aspect of this Subject

Are you addressing David Biedny? You quote Double Nought Spy's post, but reference DB at the beginning of your post.

Wow, I actually made a mistake. I was addressing Double (hence the DB) Nought Spy's post. don't know about you (double nought) but I am definitely too old for this back and forth banter. I was surprised at your initial response to my post since it wasn't even aimed at you but at the person who posted after you who also thought the idea was clever. I'm looking for information here, not fights, so lets just call it a night.