So who should be the focus of hate? (if anyone?) Let us just say for a moment that I am right, and the drone case is a total hoax… what of the hoaxer? Should it not be the creators of a hoax that should be hanged? Is it not they that should be roasted for making a mockery of this subject we hold most dear? Is it really so wrong for someone with a background in Computer imaging to stand up and use his or her skills to try and expose these hoaxers? Is that not a noble cause? Is that not an attempt to clear the muddy waters of UFOlogy?
If there is a hoax, then I want to make sure that they are found out. There are too many people out there poking fingers at those who study UFOs. In my mind, finding the truth on this subject is extremely important. But the ridicule that I am sure everyone has faced at some point or another is made even worse by those that believe without any validated evidence. When they do that, they are sinking into the realm of faith, and are turning it all into a religion, not a scientific and logical pursuit! They don't see just how damaging this approach can be to the wider study of this unique phenomenon.
There is a distasteful core to the study of UFOs that openly invites ridicule. Whether it is the 'out there' would-be figure heads (they know who they are), or the ones who follow them, and believe everything they are told as fact, they bring shame on this important pursuit.
A hoax is created to ridicule these very people! Does no one question how all of the drones witnesses ended up at the door of 2 of these figure heads? Figure heads who will put any story out there without any investigation. Withholding evidence from a wider community. Making all of us laughing stocks. Is the study of UFOs about making money? Or is it about sharing information, ideas and seeking the truth?
If my crime is one of questioning what is real and what is not, then I gladly hold my hands up.
In my mind, the drones are a clever concoction, but ultimately a hoax. This is my opinion. Everyone is welcome to theirs. But I will not be deemed an idiot for trying to share knowledge of what tricks can be played in this modern world.
Once upon a time a hubcap would have been thrown into the sky, and a photo taken of it might have been claimed as a UFO. These days, the hubcap is a series of polygons and points, with described surfaces in a virtual world. But the effect is the same, just more complex. Digital photography allows the creator to place the objects into the scenery of an image. Reflect off the water, sit behind a tree, cast a shadow on the ground. All of this can be done without detection. So true evidence comes down to (at best) physical evidence (a physical artefact, or traces of a physical artefact) or verifiable witnesses who can be deemed as trustworthy without ulterior motives.
The drone case has none of these. It doesn't guarantee it to be fake, but it does make it impossible to claim as real. The evasive nature of the drone photo witnesses also adds strength to the hoax theory.
"Isaac" is the name of the person who presented the documents that came as a finale to the series of drone witnesses. Did you know that Isaac means "He will laugh" in Hebrew? Does that not say anything at all? The project he worked on was called CARET, a dangling carrot? Stringing the UFO community along? This person, who ever he is, is laughing at US! Making a mockery of a subject we all hold dear. If the accusation of "CGI-diot" needs to be thrust in anyone's direction, then let it be the perpetrator of this elaborate hoax, not those that have worked hard to try and uncover the truth. There is no "Fun" in being crucified for standing up and having a voice.
Personally, I stand up in the face of this hostility, and hold my head high.
I may not have captured a UFO on "twin high definition cameras etc, etc,"
but I am fighting the hoaxers who muddy the waters.
Vince may have deemed me "a threat" to his own world, because I bring into question what is real. But I would rather keep an open mind than be led down a garden path by those that would laugh at us.
Kris Avery
June 27
United Kingdom
I would like to apologize to Kris Avery and all honest CGI artists for applying the term "CGO-diot" (which I, not Vince White, coined) to label "hoaxers."
Being a serious UFO researcher, I take issue with "hoaxers" and exploiters of this field for "fun or profit" as it has led in the past to unnecessary contention, disputes and distraction from the serious work at hand.
The difference between a CGI artist like Kris Avery and a "CGI-diot" is that a CGI artist performs his art/profession for entertainment value and not to dupe his audience. A "CGI-diot" exploits his audience by foisting falsehoods, portrayed as real, on those who are seriously interested in a subject for their own titillation and/or profit.
I have had my time and research efforts wasted in the past, either by being misled or in having to debunk faked photos or videos. For me, one of the worst examples of malicious hoaxes is to be found in the actions of Kenjiro Mori, who (by his own admission) intentionally faked a purported photo of the Roswell Crash, combining imagery from a Twilight Zone episode with an image of an EBE from Ray Santilli's "Alien Autopsy."
| Click on the 'NEXT' arrow for page 4 |
 |
UFODIGEST.COM All rights reserved. FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This website distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.
|
Today:
Printer
friendly version
