California Drones - Fact or Hoax?

[Zaggan]

The quote (whoever made it) came when the question was asked as to what the purpose of the drones could be, and someone posted check out the Old Crows. I think I had to go back to World War II to get the beginnings of it, but it was SIGINT. I started searching UAVs (the platform) until I came across a SIGINT program using UAVs, and it was detailed in a conference. I was surprised that the entire presentation was on their website, because you had to have security clearance to attend the conference. It went into great detail what Project Forester and Project Oracles were. It can definitely track humans in heavy underbrush.

The reason this really caught my eye was back in the early 90's (back to the thrilling days of yesteryear - the Lone Ranger), there were a set of circumstances surrounding a planned red flag event: a staged ET landing in New Mexico. UN military was seen and photographed on rail cars coming out of Canada heading south to California. One of the soldiers stationed at 29 Palms (near Palm Springs) was a member of the BBS I belonged to back then (before the Internet), and I met him and talked to him. He informed us that at this time he and his unit had been given a questionaire, and one of the questions was "if you were given a direct order to go house to house and disarm the American public, would you do so". He said an overwhelming majority said no. I think that pretty much derailed this planned event, because it seemed the intent was to declare martial law and control the masses for whatever reason. Those type of things don't go away, they just get re-thought out and a different angle is used.

California seems to be the place they want to control the most, for whatever reason, or maybe it's just that that is all that I have seen, or heard.

[noot]

Never explained to my satisfaction were several published photographs of similar objects from different locales and time periods. But I suppose we'll never know the truth for sure until Chad shows up on CNN. If it were a hoax it was a real hum dinger.

[Zaggan]

I'll totally agree there. UFOlogy has been used to cover a lot of clandestine projects, and the sophistication of this particular one, imo, means that the base project must be a real hum dinger.

[Chris]

I'll totally agree there. UFOlogy has been used to cover a lot of clandestine projects, and the sophistication of this particular one, imo, means that the base project must be a real hum dinger.

It then gets lost in the ultra-critical back and forth commentary that various members of the community become engaged in and allows those who are trying to conceal a particular program or project an easy out by pointing out that some "authority" has dismissed it as a hoax.

All too often people overlook the "why" of a particular story or to see if even some of it may be true - which is real camouflage if you think about it. Camouflaging does not involve a complete coverup but instead a clever combination of the actual person/item/target with some material to make it blend in and appear to be something other than what it really is.

Dismissing that possibility with out all due consideration is not true critical thinking but instead becomes an easy out for those who wish to be seen as critics but are only parroting the skin-deep observation of seeing only the camouflage.

[Lee]

I think it's clear that the pictures were fake, and the whole case developed like a 'house of cards' in that each development was built on the one before. Most significantly, the symbols were used on several picture before they appeared on the Isaac material. We now know that the original photo submitters were not real personalities, we also know that the locations given were not genuine and we know that most, if not all, of the pictures were faked. So, for me, the 'house of drones' has collapsed, yes.

The question of who was responsible still intrigues me though. Could it have been students? A sociological experiment? An Intelligence operation? Or just a group of mischievous friends? What about those that came forward and claimed to have witnessed drones? Seeking attention? Delusional? Mistaken? Part of the project/operation/hoax? Those questions still remain unanswered in my mind?

[noot]

I've never been satisfied that the original pictures were fakes.

[Chris]

The set of pictures first posted up by Linda Mouton Howe showed some incredible albeit grainy detail. I believe that they were taken over the central valley of California.

Unfortunately this was when some people decided that they were more interested in seeing their names in print and did their best (quite successfully) to disrupt the research and investigations. What followed were several obviously fake pictures and reports and the ufology field quickly threw out the baby with bath water.

[guerande]

"I've never been satisfied that the original pictures were fakes " : I quiet agree !
Following these drone affair since the very beginning, silently because I'm not capable of technical analysing, I never find
really one argument prooving fake pics, nor one prooving hoax.
Don't say it's all real, but questions are still on the table ... Hope one day Raj will come there and say " Hello , I'm now ready to explain " !

[Lee]

As I understand it, the DRT were able to determine that the Exif data had been replaced on both Capitola/Raj and Stephen/BB digital images. This was acomplished by comparing the field of view in those images with other images taken by the same type of Cameras.

According to what 11A told me this is pretty much conclusive evidence that the images had been manipulated, original exif stripped away and relaced with Exif from a different image and camera.

Chad, Raj, Stephen, Ty and Isaac, all used the same symbol language in their images, therfore if any one of these is shown to be fake the whole house of drones must fall. At least, that's the way I see it.

[calikid]

Though I'd post up a few pics for old times sake.

the raj pole, found!
Research by Drone Research Team (DRT)