Topic: mufon have report on drones-caret (Read 4,363 times)
Admin Co-Administrator Open Minds Forum Founder member is offline
Joined: Oct 2004 Gender: Male Posts: 6,603 Karma: 236
Re: mufon have report on drones-caret « Reply #60 on Jan 14, 2008, 4:07pm »
James
Great - can we get this out the way first?
Have any 'fees' been involved regarding delivering any of the information to the History Channel?
I assume MUFON or your good self did this out of altruistic nature alone - but if it was 'paid for' via the HC then we need to put the information delivery into context.
"If you could flick a switch and open your third eye, you'd see that we should never be afraid to die. Rise up and take the power back, it's time that the fat cats had a heart attack. You know that their time's coming to an end, we have to unify and watch our flag ascend." - Uprising - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfblGznVLJo - www.Muse.mu
Re: mufon have report on drones-caret « Reply #62 on Jan 14, 2008, 4:09pm »
James, I have some questions. Why did you post a preliminary report at all? Why not wait until all your research is complete? Is that standard procedure for Mufon? To be honest, I don't know much about Mufon. It seems like adding fuel to the fire in releasing incomplete data to an already murky subject.
Question number two; Early on it is my understanding that Mufon came out early and said the photos were all hoaxed and the matter was dropped. Why is Mufon taking back up the investigation if the images were "officially" found to be hoaxed? If not, please correct me.
Question number three; Why did you quote Kris Avery as one of your CGI experts? Is it because there are no others to come forward and identify themselves? (that is no slam against Mr. Avery, I think he does great work)
Question number four; The glyphs from the Kecksburg incident don't seem to bear any similarities to the Isaac glyphs. Other than the anti-gravity aspects of the sightings, what other similarities are there?
Re: mufon have report on drones-caret « Reply #63 on Jan 14, 2008, 4:24pm »
Quote:
James
Great - can we get this out the way first?
Have any 'fees' been involved regarding delivering any of the information to the History Channel?
I assume MUFON or your good self did this out of altruistic nature alone - but if it was 'paid for' via the HC then we need to put the information delivery into context.
Bren
MUFON did not get paid for either John Schuessler or my participation. We are a non-profit organization and our duty is to the public. Public education is one of our goals and therefore all public/TV appearances falls under that aspect of MUFON's mission.
Re: mufon have report on drones-caret « Reply #64 on Jan 14, 2008, 4:30pm »
Quote:
Quote:
I am the MUFON chap so ask away...
Cool!
First question, who is Mckinley?
McKinley is allegedly the last name of the witness who submitted two drone photos to MUFON. The witness did not request anonymity through our site, but the email provided leads nowhere. Now here's a question for you - how do you know about McKinley?
Re: mufon have report on drones-caret « Reply #65 on Jan 14, 2008, 4:38pm »
Quote:
Andy,
We have a code of behavior in place here that is to be followed by all members. Do we see or catch every violation? No. But we also don't feel as though we need to babysit the postings from a group of people whose average age is 45.
Everyone involved in today's "discussions" were communicated with in private and in public. Some, such as you, responded respectfully and with understanding...although not necessarily with agreement. But that's fine.
Others made a decision to not follow the repeated requests for decorum and respect and decided to leave of their own accord. That too is fine.
We have stated repeatedly that Open Minds was created to offer a safe place for open discussion of all kinds of events, reports, sightings and experiences. Those who wish to treat this openness as an invite to practice Junior High School slam book behavior at the expense of others have not, are not and will not be welcome here.
People don't have to agree with the postings from their fellow members but they do need to respect them.
That is all we ask. 99% of the members here understand that.
Respectfully to all,
Chris
Chris,
These very principals you state above are what the foundation of these boards were created upon. The administrators of OM have done a top notch job keeping the purpose in focus.
It goes back to the old principle if what we do hurts yourself or others, it is probably wrong. There is no sense in hurting other people over this stuff. To do it out of amusement is very wrong.
To jcarrion,
First I would like to say welcome.
We are a very large group of objective thinking people who have an interest in this area of research for a plethora of different reasons. The foundation of open minds is exactly this, open mind research. I suppose you could say that "We could not deny it to the one mind concept" (Thadius Gollas) or keeping an open mind is why we have been provided so many answers by the general public. It is so cool what they did here at OM.
There is much research going on, and I honestly hope we all will be able to learn from each other. You see it is my opinion that we clearly understand the meaning of collectively working together, putting our egos and personalities aside, working through the diversity and cultural differences to make a difference. Putting aside our western cultural teachings and looking at things from all sorts of directions instead of one specific angle.
I do not speak for the forum members nor do I speak for the administrators, but when I say "Our greatest success has been a team related effort" I mean it. I welcome you with open arms in hopes that your personal bias does not get in the way with your or our open research. I look forward to a great collaboration with you!
Sincerely,
Tom
edited out question.
« Last Edit: Jan 14, 2008, 5:06pm by jazzed2bhere »
Admin Co-Administrator Open Minds Forum Founder member is offline
Joined: Oct 2004 Gender: Male Posts: 6,603 Karma: 236
Re: mufon have report on drones-caret « Reply #66 on Jan 14, 2008, 4:45pm »
Quote:
Quote:
James
Great - can we get this out the way first?
Have any 'fees' been involved regarding delivering any of the information to the History Channel?
I assume MUFON or your good self did this out of altruistic nature alone - but if it was 'paid for' via the HC then we need to put the information delivery into context.
Bren
MUFON did not get paid for either John Schuessler or my participation. We are a non-profit organization and our duty is to the public. Public education is one of our goals and therefore all public/TV appearances falls under that aspect of MUFON's mission.
Excellent. I heard from one of our team who met with one of the HC producers recently - they also seem to be a very genuine / positive outfit.
"If you could flick a switch and open your third eye, you'd see that we should never be afraid to die. Rise up and take the power back, it's time that the fat cats had a heart attack. You know that their time's coming to an end, we have to unify and watch our flag ascend." - Uprising - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfblGznVLJo - www.Muse.mu
Re: mufon have report on drones-caret « Reply #68 on Jan 14, 2008, 4:52pm »
Quote:
James, I have some questions. Why did you post a preliminary report at all? Why not wait until all your research is complete? Is that standard procedure for Mufon? To be honest, I don't know much about Mufon. It seems like adding fuel to the fire in releasing incomplete data to an already murky subject.
Question number two; Early on it is my understanding that Mufon came out early and said the photos were all hoaxed and the matter was dropped. Why is Mufon taking back up the investigation if the images were "officially" found to be hoaxed? If not, please correct me.
Question number three; Why did you quote Kris Avery as one of your CGI experts? Is it because there are no others to come forward and identify themselves? (that is no slam against Mr. Avery, I think he does great work)
Question number four; The glyphs from the Kecksburg incident don't seem to bear any similarities to the Isaac glyphs. Other than the anti-gravity aspects of the sightings, what other similarities are there?
Thanks in advance.
To answer your first question, MUFON released a preliminary report to elicit more information from bonafide witnesses and experts. Since LMH is not willing to work with MUFON and provide witness information for us to follow up on and since all of the photo witnesses are virtual witnesses at this point - if we wish to advance our investigation, we need more leads. Forensics 101 teaches that you must verify witness identity - the basic tenet of non-repudiation.
Question two - we declared the two photos submitted to MUFON to be a hoax based on the non-existent witness and based on the evaluation of the photos by the two CGI experts that Steve Reichmuth used (Kris was not one of them). We have never declared all of the photos or the ISAAC documents a hoax.
Question three - Why not Kris? He was willing to give us his real name and background, unlike the anonymous experts that seem to proliferate on this forum. We have other experts working on this and their REAL names and REAL credentials will be quoted in our more indepth report.
Question four - Kecksburg is cited based on a clue left in the CARET documents. Read the executive summary on the crashed UFOs in the Continental U.S. I used Kecksburg as a possible explanation for why this could all be a disinformation campaign. Disinformation involves taking elements of truth, wrapping them in a bunch of lies, for the express purpose of hiding a greater truth. I believe that if this is disinformation, it was triggered in response to the probing of Leslie Kean's Coalition for Freedom of Information (CFI) and CFI's lawsuit against NASA for finding the missing Kecksburg files. I could be completely wrong, but until a better explanation or confession comes my way, it is at the top of my list.
Re: mufon have report on drones-caret « Reply #70 on Jan 14, 2008, 5:02pm »
Quote:
Quote:
Andy,
We have a code of behavior in place here that is to be followed by all members. Do we see or catch every violation? No. But we also don't feel as though we need to babysit the postings from a group of people whose average age is 45.
Everyone involved in today's "discussions" were communicated with in private and in public. Some, such as you, responded respectfully and with understanding...although not necessarily with agreement. But that's fine.
Others made a decision to not follow the repeated requests for decorum and respect and decided to leave of their own accord. That too is fine.
We have stated repeatedly that Open Minds was created to offer a safe place for open discussion of all kinds of events, reports, sightings and experiences. Those who wish to treat this openness as an invite to practice Junior High School slam book behavior at the expense of others have not, are not and will not be welcome here.
People don't have to agree with the postings from their fellow members but they do need to respect them.
That is all we ask. 99% of the members here understand that.
Respectfully to all,
Chris
Chris,
These very principals you state above are what the foundation of these boards were created upon. The administrators of OM have done a top notch job keeping the purpose in focus.
It goes back to the old principle if what we do hurts yourself or others, it is probably wrong. There is no sense in hurting other people over this stuff. To do it out of amusement is very wrong.
To jcarrion,
First I would like to say welcome.
[...] We are a very large group of objective thinking people who have an interest in this area of research for a plethora of different reasons. The foundation of open minds is exactly this, open mind research. I suppose you could say that "We could not deny it to the one mind concept" (Thadius Gollas) or keeping an open mind is why we have been provided so many answers by the general public. It is so cool what they did here at OM.
There is much research going on, and I honestly hope we all will be able to learn from each other. You see it is my opinion that we clearly understand the meaning of collectively working together, putting our egos and personalities aside, working through the diversity and cultural differences to make a difference. Putting aside our western cultural teachings and looking at things from all sorts of directions instead of one specific angle.
I do not speak for the forum members nor do I speak for the administrators, but when I say "Our greatest success has been a team related effort" I mean it.
Needless to say, I welcome you with open arms in hopes that your ego does not get in the way with your or our research. I look forward to a great collaboration with you!
I do have one simple question for you though.
Why are you here exactly, and what do you wish to gain from our forum for being here outside of the history channel thing?
I look forward to your complete answers.
Sincerely,
Tom
I am here for one simple reason - to find out after 15,000 posts and I am sure a number of PMs between members, what credible information has been collected about the witnesses. I was told by one of the OMRT that I should read every single post to find out that information. I have read a significant number of the posts and what I am finding is that the vast majority of the posts are related to discussing the science of the drones, the authenticity of the ISAAC documents and the analysis of the photos. All of that is irrelevant until the photo witnesses can be positively identified as real people and their backgrounds validated. Since the photo witnesses preceded ISAAC coming out (how convenient), until their identities can be established, this case will go nowhere and we may as well label it the new MJ-12. Corresponding with the witnesses by phone or email is not going to cut it - virtual witnesses don't count. For that matter neither do anonymous experts.
Searching for the truth ..... and fighting disinfo
Joined: Feb 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 2,195 Location: California Karma: 2
Re: mufon have report on drones-caret « Reply #71 on Jan 14, 2008, 5:32pm »
Quote:
Well, it's your own fault. It doesn't matter there are others with similar opinion like yours, no one attacks them - you carry the weight. People hate changes, and after showing the world what you can do some are scared they won't ever again be able to conclude anything from pictures. Like it isn't so with or without you...
I admit, I did not get interested in this case after seeing just Chad's images - they are not very convincing. You may have the case with your claim, but it is hard to tell without the originals...
On the other hand, CGI is not perfect either. Many CGI people will try to convince you it is. It's not easy to fool people with CGI. It takes a lot of work. All of the detail that makes a image real looking takes a lot of time to get right, or close to right. A real photo is easy. Click and it's done. All of the detail is perfect.
Still photos are even harder for CGI than animations. With stills we can really scrutinize them because the show the detail. I like to examine the lighting and shadows. This is very hard for the artist to get spot on. They usually cut a corner or even miss something completely.
This is not a bad CGI rendering. But the inconsistent lighting gives it away quickly. Note the shadowing on the underside compared to the power pole items. Also it seems the artist had a problem with the layers. One of the wires seems to disappear against the drone.
It's been said before, with all of Salad's talent, he still has not yet duplicated the realism of the drone photos. It's no cut to Salad. He is very talented. I'm just trying to show that CGI is not magic.
nekitamo Independent Image Analyst member is offline
Joined: Jun 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 326 Location: Croatia Karma: 9
Re: mufon have report on drones-caret « Reply #72 on Jan 14, 2008, 7:51pm »
Quote:
Quote:
Cool!
First question, who is Mckinley?
McKinley is allegedly the last name of the witness who submitted two drone photos to MUFON. The witness did not request anonymity through our site, but the email provided leads nowhere. Now here's a question for you - how do you know about McKinley?
It was in MUFON's first report about Chad's images:
Quote:
INVESTIGATION AND REPORT May 16, 2007 ... I suspect the Coast to Coast web site appearance was a trial run before posting here in the Mufon CMS. The attached images files from Coast to Coast read in the image file text' the name 'McKinley'. The same witness name above in the witness report.
I seriously doubt the 'Coast to Coast' people may even know about this authenticity issue. As of May 16, 2007, I have not received any reply from these witnesses.
Clearly a 'HOAX'. Case completed, but will reopen should I recieve get a reply from the witness. (hopefully).
Very Respectfully, Steve Reichmuth Mufon - Northern California SSD - Alameda / Contra Costa Co. May 16, 2007 (20:19 hours)
Re: mufon have report on drones-caret « Reply #73 on Jan 14, 2008, 8:21pm »
Quote:
I am here for one simple reason - to find out after 15,000 posts and I am sure a number of PMs between members, what credible information has been collected about the witnesses. I was told by one of the OMRT that I should read every single post to find out that information. I have read a significant number of the posts and what I am finding is that the vast majority of the posts are related to discussing the science of the drones, the authenticity of the ISAAC documents and the analysis of the photos. All of that is irrelevant until the photo witnesses can be positively identified as real people and their backgrounds validated. Since the photo witnesses preceded ISAAC coming out (how convenient), until their identities can be established, this case will go nowhere and we may as well label it the new MJ-12. Corresponding with the witnesses by phone or email is not going to cut it - virtual witnesses don't count. For that matter neither do anonymous experts.
James,
Thanks for the prompt response. I was not expecting the direct answers you provided, but alas, I appreciate them and think you are honest. I appreciate this much.
A couple of more questions. How will you determine what is a credible witness and what is not?
How is "All of that is irrelevant" determined? What if the photo witnesses wish to remain anonymous? The thousands of hours people put into this project certainly is relevant in my opinion.
I am not totally sure, but if you gain feedback from some of the main researchers here through PM, you might find a quieter and safer approach so you can ultimately glean the information you are requesting without scaring away the customer...
Great to write with you...I am glad your here...
Sincerely,
Tom
It is paramount that we protect those individuals who wish to come forward. If we take an aggressive approach we might just scare away those who we want to attract.
fixed quote
« Last Edit: Jan 14, 2008, 8:24pm by Jake Reason »
Re: mufon have report on drones-caret « Reply #74 on Jan 14, 2008, 8:25pm »
Quote:
Quote:
McKinley is allegedly the last name of the witness who submitted two drone photos to MUFON. The witness did not request anonymity through our site, but the email provided leads nowhere. Now here's a question for you - how do you know about McKinley?
It was in MUFON's first report about Chad's images:
Quote:
INVESTIGATION AND REPORT May 16, 2007 ... I suspect the Coast to Coast web site appearance was a trial run before posting here in the Mufon CMS. The attached images files from Coast to Coast read in the image file text' the name 'McKinley'. The same witness name above in the witness report.
I seriously doubt the 'Coast to Coast' people may even know about this authenticity issue. As of May 16, 2007, I have not received any reply from these witnesses.
Clearly a 'HOAX'. Case completed, but will reopen should I recieve get a reply from the witness. (hopefully).
Very Respectfully, Steve Reichmuth Mufon - Northern California SSD - Alameda / Contra Costa Co. May 16, 2007 (20:19 hours)
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/home.png "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://s2.images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/help.png "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/search.png "[Search]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/login.png "[Login]")
![[Register]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/register.png "[Register]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/search2.png "[Search This Thread]")
![[Send Topic To Friend]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/sendtopic.png "[Send Topic To Friend]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/print.png "[Print]")
Author
![[avatar]](http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/0d77bf2ef79874aaa6d13e34bdaa88a9.jpg "[avatar]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/www_sm.png "[homepage]")
Logged![[avatar]](http://mywebpages.comcast.net/dl1027/files/ELO_avatar3.jpg "[avatar]"){kind=avatar}
I heard from one of our team who met with one of the HC producers recently - they also seem to be a very genuine / positive outfit. ![[image]](http://ovnis-usa.com/images/Leviathan6_fake2.jpg "[image]")
