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)

Identifying Isaac

And now we'll have a look at the ludicrousness of Isaac's statement when he claimed that he couldn't be traced...

  • "I should be clear before I begin, as a final note: I am not interested in making myself vulnerable to the consequences of betraying the trust of my superiors and will not divulge any personal information that could determine my identity.
  • However my intent is not to deceive, so information that I think is too risky to share will be simply left out rather than obfuscated in some way (aside from my alias, which I freely admit is not my real name).
  • I would estimate that with the information contained in this letter, I could be narrowed down to one of maybe 30-50 people at best, so I feel reasonably secure."

"I've taken the proper steps to ensure a reasonable level of anonymity and am quite secure in the fact that the information I've so far provided is by no means unique among many of the CARET participants."

Let's have a brief look at just how unique this information actually was.

Isaac said before the DoD he did:

  • "Graduate and post-graduate work at university in electrical engineering."
  • "My background lent itself well to this kind of work though. I'd spent years writing code and designing both analog and digital circuits."
  • (Before taking a:) "Scenic route through the tech industry and worked for the kinds of companies you would expect, until I was offered a job at the Department of Defense"

So it's fairly easy to ascertain so far the areas in which he worked, what his grad work was, what his areas of expertise are and the fact that he was offered a job at the DoD.

"My time at the DoD was mostly uneventful but I was there for quite a while. I apparently proved myself to be reasonably intelligent and loyal. By 1984 these qualities along with my technical background made me a likely candidate for a new program they were recruiting for called "CARET".

A NEW programme, further reinforced by the statement:

"So, in 1984, the CARET program was created."

And the following text tells us that there were 30+ others recruited at the same time from the DoD, as we know it was at the inception of the CARET programme we know where he worked prior, what his speciality was, when he was hired, where he was recruited from and that he was part of a batch of at least 30 others.

"My time at the DoD was a major factor behind why I was chosen, and in fact about 30+ others who were hired around the same time had also been at the Department about as long, but this was not the case for everyone. A couple of my co-workers were plucked right from places like IBM and, at least two of them came from XPARC itself."

Still, perhaps he's safe as he could have worked anywhere at PACL, right?

"I worked with these symbols more than anything during my time at PACL, and recognized them the moment I saw them in the photos."

Just in case we missed it:

"A running joke among the linguistics team was that Big-O notation couldn't adequately describe the scale of the task, so we'd substitute other words for "big". By the time I left I remember the consensus was "Astronomical-O" finally did it justice. "

"LINGUISTICS TEAM" & "WE'D SUBSTITUTE"

So now we know specifically which 'team' he worked for at PACL and what he worked with more than anything else.

"I also had a personal affinity for combinatorics, which served me well as I helped with the design of software running on supercomputers that could juggle the often trillions of rules necessary to create a valid diagram of any reasonable complexity. This overlapped quite a bit with compiler theory as well."

So we know he helped create the software capable of disseminating the diagrams.

"I worked at PACL from 1984 to 1987, by which time I was utterly burned out. I left somewhere in the middle of a 3-month bell curve in which about a quarter of the entire PACL staff left for similar reasons"

"Somewhere in the middle" is a strange choice of words as surely, 3 months = 12 weeks, the middle of which is 6 weeks so let's assume that, "somewhere in the middle" is 5 - 7 weeks in the middle of this curve when they lost a quarter of their (approx) 200 staff as Isaac stated when he wrote:

"Inside, we had everything we needed. State of the art hardware and a staff of over 200 computer scientists, electrical engineers, mechanical engineers, physicists and mathematicians. Most of us were civilians, as I've said, but some were military, and a few of them had been working on this technology already. "

He worked there for 3 years and 'X' amount of months, if someone were trying to trace Isaac then the quarter of staff who left at within the 3 month 'bell curve' would make this easy to pinpoint.

So they'd know when he started and when he left.

"So, about 3 months before I resigned (which was about 8 months before I was really out, since you don't just walk out of a job like that with a 2 week notice). I decided to start taking advantage of my position. As I mentioned earlier, my DoD experience got me into an internal management role sooner than some of my colleagues, and after about a year of that kind of status, the outgoing searches each night became slightly less rigorous."

This tells us that he was in a management position for at least a year BEFORE he handed his notice in which was 8 months before he left.

So let's work on the average and give Isaac 6 months of the year he left (1987) and say he started in June 1984 (when in actual fact it could have been anywhere up from January to December 1984).

So June '84 to June '87 = 3 years.

Isaac felt comfortable stealing the documents 3 months before tendering his resignation which in turn was 8 months before he actually left.
So if it was June '87 then Isaac handed his notice in around Oct '86.

3 months PRIOR to this Isaac felt comfortable stealing documentation, which is June '86.

Before he felt comfortable he had to have been in management AT LEAST a year,
which means he was promoted to management at the absolute latest in June '85.

Which means we now know:

  • What his graduate and post-graduate work involved.
  • Specifically what his specialities and area of work was prior to joining the DoD.
  • He worked at the DoD quite a while before being recruited by PACL.
  • He was one of approximately 30 people recruited from the DoD at the same time.
  • This was at the inception of PACL.
  • He was employed for his skills as an electrical engineer.
  • He was part of the PACL, "Linguistic team".
  • He helped create the software capable of disseminating the diagrams.
  • He was promoted to management within (and at most) 18 months.
  • He tendered his resignation 8 months before being allowed out.
  • He left around June '87 which is irrelevant as if access to employment records was possible then it can be pinpointed EXACTLY when he resigned as he left, "Somewhere in the middle of a 3-month bell curve" (which seen a quarter of 200 employees leave).

Surely when you're working with a base set of approximately 30 people, when you have complete access to ALL employee's records and you factor the above variables into the equation then it MUST be possible to narrow the identity of Isaac down to at MOST a couple of employees and very likely down to just the one who fulfils all of the above criteria?

The only possible discrepancies in what I detail above are firstly that he left in June '87. This could have been anywhere between Jan & Dec '87 so is averaged out, however with access to records and the fact we know that Isaac left in the middle of a three month bell curve in 1987 which saw a quarter of the approximately 200 staff leave then we could isolate specific candidates from the employees with great ease.

And secondly Isaac could have began his tenure at any point in '84 (rather than June) in which case I believe that the same rationale as in the first instance above can safely be applied and so by averaging it out it could be a couple of months earlier or later. But also remember that employee records would show when the group of 30+ that Isaac enlisted with as it was at the inception of CARET. So coupled with the 'bell curve' of people leaving CARET then in the real world this would lead to this margin of error being removed.

My only point was to show what I personally could deduce from the word of Isaac alone, and without the employee history then I can still narrow the parameters down significantly. This is as well as gleaning a fair idea of his previous employment history and also defining peaks in a collective employee history that would betray specific names & dates, that's not a bad assessment considering that's working with JUST the word of Isaac.

So as I mention above if anyone had access to the employee records then it is a simple process of elimination to pinpoint EXACTLY who 'Isaac' was.

Well, IF of course Isaac, PACL or CARET ever existed...