UFO-Blog.com Fighting against truth decay.....
DroneHoax.com Home - (* Denotes recently added/updated article)
Original Drone Reports

Chad - California
Wife/Mufon 7013 - Lake Tahoe
Rajman1977-Capitola, California
Listserv: Stephen, Big Basin
Ty - Big Basin, California
Isaac Caret/Pacl Documents

Related Drone History

Mufon Report (After 1 - Year)
The LMH Effect (Earthfiles.com)
The Dreamland Drones (Strieber)
The 'Walter' Drone Hoax

Dronehoax.com (Issac) Critiques

Who Is Isaac & The Drone Link
Identifying Isaac
Isaac's Alien Treaty

Linguistic Analysis Primer (LAP)
The CARET Facility

Drone Image Analysis

1111 Analysis Part 1
*1111 Analysis (HPO Model)
*1111 Antigravity Device Analysis
Biedny/Ritzman Analysis
Freelance_Zenarchist - LAP
JB Analysis
Jeddyhi Analysis
Kris Avery Analysis

Marc D'antonio Analysis

Marvin Analysis
Mufon/Reichmuth Analysis

Radi Analysis
Torvald Analysis
Wayne/Secret Web Analysis

Personal Beliefs, Perceptions & Reality

Skeptical Of Believers?
Marcello Truzzi - Zeteticism
The Burden Of Skepticism
UFOs - Age Of Information
Failure Of Science/Ufology
UFOs - Edge Of Reality
Logical Trickery Of UFO Skeptic
7 Warning Signs Of Bogus Skepticism
Marcello Truzzi, Pseudo Skepticism
Unfair Practices On Paranormal Claims
10 Signs Of Intellectual Dishonesty
*What Is Pseudoscience?

Additional Witness Information

Rajman1977 Additional Info
Lake-Tahoe Additional Info
Isaac - Follow-up Emails
Location, Location, Location!!

Other Online Critiques

Issac's Hoax: A Sad Story
A "Viral" Fantasy
Issac's Letter
Caret Documents - Another Hoax
A Skeptical Point Of View (Jeddyhi)

Steven Reichmuth Comments & The Mufon Email

Steven Reichmuth Comments & The Mufon Email

Back on 4th July 2007, Bill Hamilton sent an email to the popular UFO mailing list, 'UFOUpdates'. Unfortunately not long afterwards UFOUpdates switched to a subscription only service and so while the email is still available to view in their archives a subscription fee must be paid. Steve Reichmuth appeared not long after this at OMF, stating he was the Mufon investigator and posting a lengthy comment detailing the Drones as a hoax. He then promptly deleted this comment and terminated his membership.

Steven Reichmuth was first, 'Officially' mentioned in association with the Drones when his name appeared in the Mufon email (posted below this text) he was one of the original investigators and so was on the Drone scene quite early. He was only involved with investigating the first two Drone reports (Chad & Lake Tahoe) and has declared them both a hoax on several separate occasions.

It was Steve Reichmuth who involved Marc D'Antonio (FXModels) & Steve Neil. Steven Reichmuth also sought (and was given permission) to forward the images/reports to Mufons 'in-house' analysts who are Dr. Bruce Maccabee and Jeff Sainio.

California Drone photos by "Raji"
MUFON Investigation Shows Drone Photos Hoaxed

From: Bill Hamilton
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 07:56:18 -0700
Archived: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 07:40:05 -0400
Subject: MUFON Investigation Shows Drone Photos Hoaxed

I received this on the MUFON LA mailing list and thought
it would be worth posting it here. I have examined the
related CARET docs and have detected some erroneous
statements on antigravity. The whole affair seems
contrived as a hoax, but why?

-Bill Hamilton

Dear MUFON LA Members and Supporters,

Many of you have expressed your certainty that the alleged drone
photos which appear on C2C and Earthfiles are the real deal. I
decided to log on to MUFON.com, and see what the field
investigator assigned to the case came up with. Incidentally,
the investigator turned out to be the SSD for that district.
Befitting for such a high profile case, don’t you agree? Here
are his comments:

May 16, 2007

The object in the attached images within this report first
appeared several weeks earlier on the Coast to Coast web site
page. This new witness report was posted May 12, 2007.


I had several trusted friends & experts in CGI (computer
generated Images) examine these images, as well as the earlier
Coast to Coast images. One examiner is Mr. Steve Neil who has
and continues to do computer generated images for the History
channels television program 'UFO Files'. The other effects
person is a Mr. Marc D' Antonio. He owns and operates a business
in Connecticut named FX Models.

Marc is a former MUFON Field investigator, and has taught
Astronomy for a number of years at a local area east coast
college. Both Marc & Steve I would consider well grounded and I
would consider them both 'non-skeptics' related to 'UFO's. They
think UFO's are 'real' and likely 'extraterrestral' in origin.
Marc works with computer generated images every day. Both
experts state all images of this object are clearly fakes. Mr.
D' Antonio is one of my valued expert contacts I network with in
studying UFO photographs. He has volunteered to assist in future

Marc examined the Coast to Coast images days earlier week (May
10) earlier. I contacted Marc again when this latest witness
report was posted on CMS shortly later (May 12, 2007).

Attached images have been studied by these two friends in the
Special visual computer effects industry. They both
independently state this object is clearly a CG fake.

Marc writes "Those of us in that community can look at and
immediately spot, fakery. I have to say that this one is not
actually even a GOOD fake."

Marc further writes:


In one of the images, you can see that the faker used, something
called "radiosity" to render the images. The technique allows
for more realistic images and makes things look very good, as if
lit by the sun in this case. Well, in ONE of the radiosity
images supposedly looking up at the 'fake ship' from directly
below it is clear that the faker didn't take care in setting his
settings for the renderer and you can see classic "radiosity
render artifacts" in the dark shadow areas of the CG craft. They
show up as mottling in the shadows instead of smooth
transitions. It is what happens when you want the rendering to
be finished quickly. If radiosity settings were used to make the
image look absolutely real, each image could take tens of hours
to render perhaps.

In another shot where the craft ought to have been some distance
away, it is sharp and clear as if there is suddenly no
atmospheric haze.

Finally, in one image the faker composited the craft to appear
behind tree branches. This is easy to perform. The faker used
something called an Alpha map which affords you JUST this

Sooner or later, I will bet that a 'video' will emerge, and the
faker is no doubt working on it but doesn't like the results I
guarantee because the radiosity renders take a long time to
render per frame and in motion, he has to get all his Photoshop
type filtering done on the fly within his rendering software and
it isn't as easy.

When I saw this I winced at how obvious the fakery is and how
utterly uneducated the coast to coast people are for falling
for it. The faker, named 'Chad' is a complete and total fabricator."

I have still sent a request to the above witness Email address
wishing a interview, following Mufon investigative proceedures.
I plan to play this interview 'dumb smart' (if it ever occurs
- but hope so) wishing to glean any further information if
possible and post it here. It maybe possible these images
submitted were hoaxed by someone else, rather than by the
witnesses themselves (names stated above).

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 recieved any reply from these

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)”

As you can see from his comments, Mr. Reichmuth is convinced
that the photos are a HOAX. So don’t get too excited. Know that
there are people out there who get their jollies from spoofing
the unsuspecting and gullible. Hey, don’t feel too bad. If it
makes you feel any better, I thought they looked real too. As
ancient Chinese proverb say; “believe nothing of what you hear,
and only half of what you see”. Or maybe that was Kwai Chang
Caine. No matter.

Steve R. Murillo

State Section Director

As this particular email was the source of much confusion allow me to clarify a couple of things.

  • Firstly, this email was received by Mufon LA member *Bill Hamilton* who then forwarded it to UFOUpdates.
  • The email was circulated to the Mufon LA mailing list by the Mufon L.A.
  • State Section Director, *Steve R. Murillo*.
  • Steve Murillo it appears was replying to questions he'd been asked by the local Mufon membership regarding the Drones.
  • Steve Murillo quoted a communication that he had received from *Steve Reichmuth* from the Northern California branch of Mufon who had personally investigated the case.
  • Steve Reichmuth had employed the use of digital image analysts in order to confirm or refute the validity of the images.
  • These experts were *Steve Neil* and *Marc D' Antonio* (FX Models).

But back to Steve Reichmuth, he posted the following on the 28 th May 2007 (2pm) at OMF. Unfortunately due to a server crash at Conforums.com (which is the website that hosts OMF) the posts were lost, but prior to this outage Steve popped up to ask Rajman1977 a couple of questions then deleted his account.

But after Steve's first post on the 28th an OMF member contacted *Ruben Uriarte* who is the Northern California State Director at Mufon enquiring as to whether Steven Reichmuth was actually affiliated with Mufon.


Today on the OM forum a poster identified as Steve, claiming to be an investigator for your branch of MUFON posted this:
Can you vouch for his authenticity?

Best regards,

This was emailed to Ruben Uriarte on the 28th May, a reply was received on May 29th and was posted to OMF on May 30th (2007) and was as follows:

I have been way on this Memorial Day Weekend and catching up with all my email. In response to your question, please note that Mr. Steve Reichmuth is a field investigator and a state section director with Northern California Mufon and is the lead investigator for this case reference as "CHAD UFO".

As Steve had indicated, the case is still currently under investigation as we are gathering more details and obtaining assistance from a variety of sources. A complete detailed report will be coming out regarding the findings in the near future. Steve had also indicated that some of his comments were strictly his personal opinion and not officially Mufon.

As you may be aware, this case has generated much interest from so many people and are anxiously waiting to obtained new information. Once the official report is finally completed, we will let all interested parties know when it is ready so that they have access to the Mufon link.

Thank you

Ruben Uriarte

Northern California State Mufon Director.

Source: Open Minds Forum

It appeared to me at the time (and still does) that it was this particular email seeking confirmation that caused Steve Reichmuth to delete his account. As no doubt once Mufon State Directors became aware of what had been divulged then they pulled rank. This is further confirmed by a post Steve Reichmuth made at his own forum as a reply to one of his members as to why information was deleted that supported the weather in Capitola at the time of the report, the comment was posted on May 30, 2007 and was as follows:

I apologize. I had to delete my posts related to the Capitola BS on the net. I shared publicly some of my findings, and Mufon thought it was premature to do so. I have saved the posts. Mufon thinks I should keep quiet publicly about the Capitola bogus images till the appropriate time. My passion in preventing seeing people deceived and perhaps manipulated by an unknown individual or agency on the Internet was my motive for posting my findings. It is no big deal, but when the time is right, I will spill all I know within my small station in this.

This computer generated image stuff has been the strangest case yet, and it does not even involve aliens!..but the internet! Bottom line...the images have all been checked by 4 experts, and all the images are all bogus as hell. lol


So we can ascertain that at some point between the 28th May and the 30th May that Steve had a massive change of heart and I suspect that this was due to the North California Mufon State Director who was made aware of the situation on the 28th May and as stated above only returned from his vaction on the 29th May.

And Steve Reichmuth's original post to OMF:

It is hard not to comment about this. I am the actual assigned Mufon investigator for these alleged images that appeared in a Mufon internet report. I was interested since Delta posted them at my UFOResearcher.com web site. I had some computer generated image experts I know analyze them. Then soon later...a CMS case report shortly later appeared of the same object in my investigation geographical area I cover for Mufon..., and I then had to swing into action on the Lake Tahoe images, and then all the others too in total.

Because of the sensitivity of these images being associated with Linda Moulton Howe's 'Earth files' web site, I requested further experts within MUFON examine the same images for further peer review. This was granted. These experts I will not disclose now....but will be named in any future paper I may someday have to write for the Mufon Journal. Needless to say, they are some of the best photo analysis's in Mufon, and in the world.

All these experts (four) agree emphatically. These images, some 22 and counting are all frauds - 'fakes'. Not only are they fakes, but two experts independently stated they are not even good fakes! Interestingly, they each pointed out different reasons, and because they were consulted individually...just widens the case file with more detailed useful data.

Weather historical checks (easily researched on the internet) on the same date and locations revealed in one of these alleged sightings - Capitola, California the report showed clear skies in the alleged images, but in actuality had cloudy, rainy conditions on that date and location most of the day.

Checked Watsonville (closest weather station) for Capitola , California for May 16, 2007. Weather was covercast, partial sun only later in the afternoon. One image of object below shows a very high overcast - Cirrus clouds (high,thin & wispy), weather report states overcast - suggesting Nimbostratus Clouds (dark, low-level clouds with precipitation). It does not seem to jive.


Sat image of Capitola region on May 16, 2007. 18:30

UTC converts to 10:30am local time (Pacific Standard time)

It seems to be some kind of organized 'manufactured' (using an old cold war propaganda term) for what motive & purpose I do not know of.

I will not be unkind to Linda Moulton Howe, but I remain dismayed as to why she perpetuates this. Several fundamental early investigative checks where conveniently ignored. This saddens me, without any animosity toward her, and makes me then only wonder about her many earlier claims regarding her pioneering cattle mutilation research. I hope she has not hurt herself. Her 'Earth files' is a paid subscription newsletter.

The confidential report within the Mufon CMS will remain confidential.

But I will confide this much...it is classified as a 'HOAX'.

The 'coast to coast' images have spilled out freely and in a way that the general public can form only one or two impressions...and they are all not necessarily good for Ufology. Coast to Coast has said on the air the 'images look real to us'.....but they can now only appear to be interested more in 'radio stchick' than their higher minded shallow boast of seeking the truth.

Much of this is under the radar sort of speak....but I can say those I have worked with within Mufon have quietly handled this case superbly.

UFO's is a serious matter that effects not only society around our planet, but many individuals on a deeply personal level. Sometimes frightenly so. These witnesses did not ask for it. My heart and mind goes out to these people as we in Mufon serve them in seeking the truth. Filter out the noise, the theory of extraterrestial contact (ETH) becomes definately a hard real possiblity. Such investiagtions will not be found in a 'circus' act.

I now am investigating other cases...of a more likely 'true unknown' variety. We are busy...I hope you will join us.

I keep an open mind on this, and all matters about Ufology. In my 'station' - I must. I welcome other views, which can only illuminate further.

Respectfully, these are my personal opinions being directly 'hands on' involved, and are not necessarily those of Mufon.


Mufon - Northern California
SSD - Alameda / Contra Costa Co.

Source: Open Minds Forum

Unfortunately Mufon operates a 'closed forum' which you can't just browse but the following are four comments relating to the Lake Tahoe & Chad Drone which were all posted by Steven Reichmuth who is a moderator at the Mufon forum and posts using his surname as his username (reichmuth).

(Mufon Closed Forum)
Post by reichmuth on Mar 29, 2008, 1:04pm

I was directly involved with one small portion of the entire 'drone' saga'. The Lake Tahoe cell phone images in the CMS was my only direct involvement as investigator assigned with that particular case sighting. Again, the email addresses and names were bogus. But because I knew this 'object' was seen elsewhere, I could contribute what ever I discovered for the benefit of all the body of likely work involved coming in then as it turned out in hindsight.

Not true about ONLY Mufon exposing the drones as CGI! I first went to two experts in CGI outside of Mufon who work with this stuff every day. One has a degree in Astronomy, had taught Astronomy in a eastern College, works in model and special effects work, and thinks he is actually a possible 'abductee' as well. So you know he is not likely biased against the possibility UFO's maybe alien in origin. The other has worked doing CGI effects for the History Channels 'UFO Files', and also claims to be an 'abductee' interestingly. I will not disclose their names obviously. Both said they were not even good fakes immediately. And they explained thoroughly why. It was then I approached the 'Mufon in-house authorities' on digital imagery. My state director suggested wisely I get Mufon experts involved early to check for themselves if I was to be representing Mufon as one of their investigators.

All four digital image experts did their checks, and all agreed (two inside Mufon, and two independently outside of Mufon), all agreed basically the images early on were frauds, but describing details about the images that were not always about the same things in those same images very interestingly.

So Mufon was not the only one to pan the images officially, just no one then wished to listen to facts. You sit and then let the furor burn itself out hopefully, hopefully any facts you uncover speaking for you. At this time context, it was still very early in the overall investigation being conducted by Mufon.

Only writing from my own personal experience. I gave up on 'Open Minds', they are anything but open. Maybe they are simply reporting it. No apparent check of their sources. A long list of anonymous sources everywhere. They did everything so backwards. Failing to check the images first, that would have saved them much energy. Maybe Earth files perhaps needed the revenue. People at Open minds panned Mufon, not wanting to be inconvenienced by a number of facts early on. I still think this was some kind of disinformation pattern to distract us from Chicago 's O'Hare event, or other sightings along those lines. It is so easy to do this. People have seen so many things on their own. When something like the 'drone hoax' circulates, it so easily to do...it's scary. We are the culprits here really, and the disinformation people, what ever their intent was, they must be laughing. We make it so easy for them. A description of a 3 ton sail boat soon becomes a story about a 100,000 ton aircraft carrier. There is a lesson here.

As art work, the drones are beautiful examples of CGI. As reality? Not this time.

I only know my tiny little part of this whole thing, but I know enough to state James Carrion deserves much credit here.


(Mufon Closed Forum)
Post by reichmuth on Mar 29, 2008, 2:43pm

I agree Swamprat. The concensensus in 'open minds'...now. Give them credit for that.

"This begins to smell more and more like a conspiracy for dis-information."

The squirrely rumors everywhere a side then, more and more this makes me truly believe the government does perhaps in fact have something it is hiding.

The news media late as usual. Fireman tired and dirty, rolling up their fire hoses at a tragic scene, and the reporter walking up after the fact " hey buddy...do you have a light?"


(Mufon Closed Forum)
Post by reichmuth on Apr 11, 2008, 5:10pm

Bonjour anakinneo!

Yes, the caret saga is a really complicated case.

"but I try to know more because some cases are form 1974 and 1967 that lmh doesn't seems to know..."

I agree with you. I too wish to know more to the extent it does not cloud up investigating other cases. There is so much activity going on around the world, I refuse to let the caret case distract me. If new serious evidence came in regarding this caret hoax, I would be the first to change my mind. I am not locked stepped into one conclusion forever. Many regarding this case over the internet are. I reserve the right to change my mind...! It is just the evidence from the beginning up to today show it a hoax. But what will tomorrow bring? I will evaluate what is offered then, and we will continue working together toward finding the truth out there.


(Mufon Closed Forum)
Post by reichmuth on Apr 12, 2008, 10:55am

All my writings, correspondence, emails, was sent to my State Director upon completion of my portion of the 'drone case - Lake Tahoe ', then forwarded to Mufon HQ. If it is used, it will be presented in Mufon's final overall findings on this. I believe this case investigation may not yet be over. You could consult Dr. Bruce Macabee, and Mr. Jeff Siano, two of the Mufon CGI experts consulted. These two individuals may provide any technical analysis you seek.

Thanks for your interest.


Regarding the quote by Steve Reichmuth which states:

"You could consult Dr. Bruce Macabee, and Mr. Jeff Siano, two of the Mufon CGI experts consulted.
These two individuals may provide any technical analysis you seek."

I have personally contacted Bruce Maccabee on several occasions and in every reply I received from Bruce Maccabee he skirted around the issue, never once giving specifics as to his reasoning. That's not to say that Dr Maccabee believes the Drones have any grounding in reality as I don't believe he does and he undeniably doubts the authenticity of both the images and the respective witnesses, but as I say rather strangely he wouldn't be drawn into specifics regarding how or why he believes the images are fakes.

Also, "Jeff Siano" [sic] is actually, "Jeff Sainio" who is an image analyst (photo consultant) and regularly advises Mufon on the validity, credibility and ultimately the autheticity of their photographic and video evidence.

On the 18th September 2007 it was finally possible to get Steven to answer some questions regarding the Mufon investigation into the Drones that he (Steve Reichmuth) had conducted.
(Courtesy of DRT member asking questions, pre-DRT. Screen-name: Latitude).

Q1) How was it ascertained that Chad and Raj were the same person?

A1) Comparing Email & IP addresses with what little was shared by the witness in the CMS case file and sources at 'OpenMindsForum.com' forum. (A large web forum that is everything but open minded!)

Q2) This weather report for that location and day seems to conflict with your info. (http://tinyurl.com/2xert6)

A2) We used the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration. Using visual, water vapor, and infrared images. These images were viewed during the ENTIRE 24 hour period on the date in question. The weather in other so called alleged sightings, the weather appeared consistent with the hoaxed images. The only sighting where there was a conflict was with images showing clear skies, while the weather was overcast and raining in Capitola. I remembered the weather too, as I live not far from this location. See - http://www.noaa.gov/

Q3) I have seen reports from just as many CGI experts who say the photos are legit. Can the discrepancies in the photos be clearly illustrated and quantified? I have looked for the examples of radiosity and mottling but cannot see any correlation to CGI manipulation.

A3) The 4 sources of which were two from outside MUFON in the special effects industry (one did work time to time for the History channels 'UFO Files'), and later with permission from Mufon, our own Mufon photo consultants, Dr. Bruce Macabee, and Mr. Jeff Sainio. It was felt important for MUFON experts to also verify the other experts to either confirm or dispute everyone's findings. The result was unanimous the images were fakes. Interestingly, peer review brought out new different reasons among the main reasons they were regarded as hoaxes. So apparently, there are a number of 'red flags' as to why the images are untruthful being claimed to be authentic. The analysis was objective, knowing all these experts opinions lean toward that UFO's being likely alien craft. Two of the outside experts are even possible abductees, so their 'slant' if anything is pre-existing.... it is towards UFO's being extraterrestrial in a very personal way. Still, the outside Mufon experts emphatically stated they were most definitely bogus.

Q4) What was the extent of your investigation into this case?

A4) I did research for my state director checking the Capitola and Lake Tahoe sightings. Only the Lake Tahoe report was actually submitted to Mufon. The other reports were not. I only became involved when a report was submitted to the MUFON CMS. With actual personal information then available (only an email address) a follow up was possible compared to the other sightings. I write again...the so called witness gave only an email address to follow up with.

Q5) Did Mufon ever contact the "Tahoe wife" witness from Mufon case #7013?

A5) Yes, I personally emailed myself the woman several times. They never replied.

Q6) Did Chad ever contact Mufon? How was his last name deciphered?

A6) 'A Chad ' did not contact Mufon. His information was forwarded to us via a contact (and confirming myself) at the so called 'Open Mindsforum.com' web site.

Q7) Why are Chad 's images attached to Mufon case # 7013?

A7) For comparison purposes. Are you a Mufon Investigator having access?

Q8) Were any other witnesses contacted by Mufon?

A8) Yes, no one wished to reply to me or to Mufon about this case.

I cannot comment further. Other theories are being pursued. Including one that the images were internet sub advertizing for a new computer game. Another it is an elaborate goverment disinformation campaign to undermind credibility regarding the earlier dramatic Chicago O'Hare report that capitivated the world. The case is now being pursued by others in Mufon. Frankly I had too many more active, interesting, and promising cases to check out. A close encounter, and a abduction case. As one effects expert we contacted outside of Mufon stated...."the fakes were not even good fakes."


Source: UFOResearcher.com

Not... what opinions are held, but... how they are held:
instead of being held dogmatically [liberal] opinions are held tentatively,
and with a consciousness that new evidence may at any moment lead to their abandonment.

Bertrand Russell