Enhanced images of famous 2007 Drone UFO sighting

I remember this well, getting into this and making posts on that ahem... other big conspiracy website back then.

One of the best cases for alien tech I ever saw outside of my own ufo experiences.

the debate back then of course started out as fake but since the images were so good that began to fall apart, then they shifted to arguing it was our tech.. that is when the agents started showing up to shut people up on those websites that were discussing this. Myself I think they were alien probes analyzing our environment or looking for something.

this is exactly what was happening 10 years ago.. agents all over it pushing people around... you know when you are on the good stuff when the agents show up..

Just for fun. [link to ibb.co (secure)]

that is a photo of a real object for sure.

The chromatic aberration especially in the originals, and the way it affects only certain parts of the image and looks so authentic, makes me realize it was not CGI. Only modern CGI allows chromatic aberration effects during compositing but its more of a generic looking uniform effect. Make of it what you will.

The whole Isaac Caret affair is interesting, and the relation with the Dragonfly drone sightings is tantalizing. The poor attempts at debunking it as a sort of viral marketing campaign for the "Alienware" PC company, which used some of the designs in their PCs after the Isaac Caret article surfaced, is completely unsupported. But for me the alleged sightings of it in 1981, by a witness called "Mary", who claims she also thinks she knew who "Isaac" was, and has a purse with one of the signs of the drones made with tassels in her old purse, is one of the more interesting tidbits in this whole affair.

This one i managed to get even more detail out of it by sharpening the original image more carefully. I also sketched the inscriptions on the main arm, using the data from the closeup over the telegraph pole.

[link to ibb.co (secure)]

[link to ibb.co (secure)]

[link to ibb.co (secure)]

Last Edited by Agent Smith 2014 on 01/12/2019 04:11 PM

Holy crap! hit the jackpot with this one. [link to ibb.co (secure)]

Some how the AI just decided it knew what it was doing! it utterly blows the original image out of the water, jpg artifacts, noise, lens blur, all gone! AI power.

Original [link to droneteam.com]

Also if you dont believe me. Try taking the original image and blowing it up in photoshop. it won't hold a candle to it.

full article here on the "dragon fly drone"

[link to truthfall.com]

Great improvement over the original which was like some old postcard from 1980 and very blurry.

[link to ibb.co (secure)]


original [link to droneteam.com]

There is nothing in any of these pictures that can't be easily be replicated by even a casual user of Maya and Photoshop. Yes, it was many hours of work - proving that these people were paid. If these are 'real', then where is your rationale for the obvious renderings of pieces in the 'perfectly lit studio' format that is a base default output of any high end rendering suite? As for the 'symbol analysis' papers, again they overplayed their hand with that crap. They would have been much better off sticking to the 'casual pictures taken by witnesses when the cloak failed' shots.

You seem to forget that this was already discussed to death at the time. People already pointed out the obvious composite proof of the objects seen behind tree leaves, etc. The people who were PAID to generate this stuff for an aborted attempt at a viral marketing scheme were ferreted out. The studio output shots were obviously never meant to be released, for very, very obvious reasons.

It is cute to say "hey remember this?", but to act like you are 'enhancing' these pictures is a childish and laughable joke.

I've already studied the CGI of 2007 from Maya, Max etc. They were nowhere NEAR this quality in 2007. It was even before GPU rendering became a thing and intel was only just releasing its first attempts at quad cores. To render out all those photos/images would have taken weeks and weeks on high end workstations.
The main thing is that Kris Avery a to artist for ILM attempted a fake. if you want to discuss the CGI aspect then focus on that for comparison.

Im not insisting that it's either fake or real, just that for 2007 it was blowing everything out of the water in terms of quality... Be it movie CGI, concept art, or any renderings on the internet between 2007-2008.

I too remember those images very well and researched them all that I could at the time. The concensus then was mixed with most researchers believing they were genuine pictures - and by that I mean not photoshopped or created with CGI.

As far as the origin of the "drones" themselves... that was -and is- still heavily debated.

Last Edited by GSB/LTD on 01/13/2019 10:35 AM

It's also "cute" to attempt to debunk everything you see.... even your User ID suggests your propensity.

I fully agree with you.

I remember back then.. that ahem site actually had an expert go over the images... a person who was self employed and whose job was to do this kind of thing... he said they were real images.

go there and ask them about it...

As someone who was intimately involved with the drone case as it unfolded in 2007, I still feel a need to defend the drones...from both sides; real/fake.

Still nothing, on any side, has been definitively proven.

Still everything, on any side, is speculation.

Are these enhancements scientific?

No, but they are cool af.

maybe the glyphs are similar to the nazi bell glyphs?

These pics are from a music video by a german electronic musician.

A very close musician friend was in contact with him even personally, the videos were made in CGI. It was debunked back then even.

It amazes me that these pics are still being used and claimed that they are the "real deal".

I cannot his name exactly but when I do I'll try to post him here and the original video.

This is the original video
The whole thing was a viral PR stunt, by leaking stills to UFO forums (GLP too as far as I know) with fake articles, fake testimonies etc. It spread like a wildfire.
Basically it was the Banksy stunt in UFOlogy and it still lives on present day.

Seriously? So the pictures of the OBVIOUS RENDERS that were outputted with the 'perfectly lit background floors', those are somehow 'speculation' are they? Or wait, those are 'dis-information'? But I thought these were just too good to be done in Maya at the time?

Anyone who thinks these objects in *any* way are beyond the ability of even a dedicated amateur obviously hasn't been paying attention. The detail, lighting, and resolution of single shot renders has been well above what was necessary to produce these pictures for many years before 2007. If anything, the 'pictures' were way, WAY too high of quality to pass as "oh my God look at that I better take a picture" level stuff. I mean seriously - every one of 'all these people all over the place' took incredibly high resolution, perfectly evenly lit (a little blown out, actually), always 'gee what a shock it just happens to be behind that tree, or near that pole' frame of reference... Come on.

This was a viral marketing scheme that never got finished. It was probably paid for, but then dropped. The people responsible didn't want it to go to waste, so they dribbled the pictures out with this ludicrous story that all these shots came from random people. And then obvious renders - hello, what is the explanation for those, OP? And the drawings, of course there were going to be some drawings - that make absolutely zero sense. Yeah, we are going to study the pictogram language on these alien probes, so let's start by drawing wild looping lines all over the place. Yup, that's how to go about it.

** Edit: Oh, and something that hasn't been mentioned was that a very solid lead as to motivation behind this was that 'Terminator: The Sarah Conner Chronicles' was mid-way through season 2 (a frickin' awesome show, by the way) and they were in trouble of cancellation. In the show, there were several episodes where UFO groups were seeing probes and such that were of course related to Skynet gathering a special alloy to store for use in the future. People argued that the show was being written around the release of these pictures, but that made no sense because the episodes were written and filmed long before these pictures made the rounds. The sad thing is, these pictures and the drawings and such really didn't get anyone's attention. Other than a couple of threads on ATS and a few obscure forums, there was very little interest - *mostly* because of the shots that were clear and blatant renders - which kind of made the whole thing moot. Without those shots, the other ones provided some interesting arguments about proving composites, etc, but what is the point of arguing when these renders with the same pictograms and such were released at the same time?

Last Edited by kaibosh on 01/14/2019 11:49 AM

Yep, like I said in above post: the makers of it were surprised themselves how well it worked.

And yet over a decade later still we are left with nothing more than conjecture.

Is funny how you claim the images were taken from this video, while the text acompanying the video actually acknowledges that they took the images from Linda Molton Howe's site, LOL.

Music video of "Strange craft" by DRONE. [link to www.myspace.com] Video done by Kris Avery. [link to www.kaptive.co.uk] Samples taken from the earthfiles podcasts by Linda Moulton Howe. [link to www.earthfiles.com]

Also, the comentary by the very Kris Avery on the comments section of the video, from 10 years ago:

Kris A
Kris A
Hace 10 años
Hi Paul. The video was inspired by the case, we didn't create it. The drones case is still rolling, and the original images have yet to be proved real or hoax. it is almost an impossible task with the quality of the images available.

The music video was created using Lightwave.

Kris A
Kris A
Hace 10 años
Just to clarify, we created the video, but we didn't create the original photos.


edited to add comentary posted by Kris Avery 10 years ago.

Last Edited by Red Hot Chilean Pepe on 01/14/2019 05:14 PM

There have been more witnesses coming up. IMHO the most notable case is from a woman that claims perhaps she knew who was Isaac (at the time she met him, he was friend of her mother) and that she used one of the symbols to make a purse with tassels that she has since 1981. Look for "Mary Witness testimony" on truthfall.com

Last Edited by Red Hot Chilean Pepe on 01/14/2019 05:15 PM

That is also Linda Moulton Howe's voice on the opening narration.