[UPDATE Aug 2008] A couple of weeks ago the web-hosts Fortunecity received a takedown notice threatening legal action if this text remained, of course a brief exchange of emails ensued so the specifics of the claim could be learned. It quickly transpired that the claim was regarding actions that occurred prior to the article being posted and actually wasn’t a direct consequence of what was actually contained in the article itself.
That’s not really the interesting part; the more interesting part was what was contained in one of the emails that were sent by Fortunecity regarding the takedown, which read as follows:
It appears that people with no real interest in the Drone Hoax are still well aware of the finer details along with the implications and the main, “Players.” And of course more importantly that the entire debacle was nothing but an orchestrated hoax, one which is STILL being perpetuated by people who SHOULD know better.
Later there also will be some confusion, on what day these photos were submitted to C2C. In march 2008 Linda Moulton Howe published a kind of review, complaining about the misinformation in the media. Here she write:
So we know, the Chad photos were taken on May 6th and received by C2C on May 11th. The so called Drone Research Team (DRT) publishes on their website the following information in their "history": "Coast to CoastAM Either late April, or May 6th, 2007"
Remember, these are the people who call themselves investigative researchers. When finally James Carrion of MUFON decided, to write a report about this, which was published in April, he wrote:
So now we had two different dates for the email to C2C. It even comes better! In Germany the story was published at Grenzwissenschaft.de on May 9th, and I also found people writing about it on May 8th. What kind of discrepancies are these?
I wrote this to DrDil, who had put up his own chronology, who also had the May 10th date in it. He did not hesitate, to ask Lex from C2C about this and got the answer, that he received Chad's first email on May 4th! Following correspondence was on May 7th, 8th and 15th. So May 6th was not the date of the sighting, but probably the day, when Lex resized the photos. How is it possible that investigative journalist Linda Moulton Howe, who has good contacts to C2C, not even put the date of the Chad emails a week later, but she also put it on a date, when the news were already known for at least three days!
But there is another thing, why an investigative researcher should have realized, that the dates can't be right. In his first email, Chad told C2C:
In his first follow up he wrote:
So now we have the information "first photo - last month" & "clear photos - two days later". This would give us a time frame between April 29 and May 2. So on May 4th Chad writes to Lex, that the first sighting was last month and the others a few days later. He is talking about some experiences he had between 6 and 2 days ago...
Linda Moulton Howe wrote about her contacts to Chad:
We can assume that "corresponded" is used synonymously for "emailed". As we know, there was never a personal contact. Instead it was said, that Chad disappeared into silence.
Obviously Chad had decided to tell Linda Moulton Howe, where the photos had been taken. At one point she started to put the Chad sighting to Bakersfield, one more red point in her beautiful map.
Rather early a few people realized that the cellphone photo showed a kind of mirror-drone of the others. This was not only easily done away by the believers, but also demonstrated to be an optical illusion by one member at UfoCaseBook. Ironically the private investigators, hired by the drone research team somehow managed to find the place, where these photos were taken. It was proved, they were not taken in Bakersfield, but far away from there and very close to the ones taken by Stephen (which also were not taken, where it was told, it were).
Also the P.I.s showed, that the mirror-picture was indeed flipped.
Nothing of all this can change a strong believer's mind. Linda Moulton Howe seems to just leave it as it is and the members of the DRT don't see anything suspicious. To them it is clear, that Chad only wanted to protect his family and thus gave a wrong location. The flipped photo could be for the same reason or somebody just pressed the flip button by accident. They did not explain away the question about the wrong dates yet, but I guess, they will explain it with human memory. Investigators forget so quickly these days.
These facts don't prove this to be a hoax, but it tells us a lot about the seriousness of the researchers, who try to tell us, this is real. They still tell the world, we have three witnesses here. The truth is, there was only 1 (in words: one) person, who emailed.....
"No independent communication" means "no communication at all" in this case. Remarkable use of language, as always. James Carrion could tell us more in his report:
Further James Carrion tells in his report, that they tried to contact Deborah via her email address at hotmail, but she never responded at all.
Again we only have one anonymous email writer, nevertheless the DRT counts two more witnesses, making five now, where there are only two - it even could be one - person, who just sent some emails
Who followed the story knows, that Linda Moulton Howe presented us some other witnesses, who had no photos, but thought they recognized the "drones", how the "strange craft" were called meanwhile. One of them was Shirley P., who said, she had seen such an object in the Sequoia National Park in May 2005. When she later corresponded with a member of the drone research team in December 2007, she seemed to have some knowledge of Linda's experiences with the first witnesses. Reading that Rajman had posted at the OpenMindsForum, she was astounded, because he never contacted Linda. This does not necessarily mean, that one of both is lying, but probably that Rajman contacted Linda after Shirley was in contact with her. But it is another example, how false information is mingled with facts easily.
Since the high resolution Version of the pictures could not be viewed at flickr.com, a member of OMF payed for an update (June 4th). A few hours after this, the pictures disappeared and instead there was a pornographic picture and a lot's of confessions of a hacker. But since news had spread very quickly, many people had downloaded the hi res pictures before.
Rajman, who identified himself as Rajinder Satyanarayana, appeared at Open Minds to answer questions, but disappeared after the second post, writing to the admin that he could not stand all those question and mistrust anymore and that he received odd phone calls.
The DRT counts 6 witnesses here. Rajman told, that his fiancée, her father and her mother were present. He also wrote, that his fiancée's brother had sent the photos to a local paper. This makes five to me. He also mentions some people in a car, who had seen the same. Fact is, we also have only one person, who sent emails and posted. This makes three photo witnesses - and it is still possible that this one done by one and the same person.
In this case the police of Capitola was asked for reports on the sighting. There was not one report at all. The search for the location did not succeed until yet. A member of the DRT wrote at OMF, that it could be possible, that the location is somewhere around Capitola.
The DRT counts one more witness. Still we only have one or more email writers.
As we know, he never was interviewed and none of his friends ever supported this story. Still the DRT speaks of 8 more witnesses, where again there is only one person, who writes emails and letters.
Although the P.I.s have brought the drones into the media, still nobody dares to come out.
The PR work in all of these five cases could have been done by one and the same person, indeed. Nevertheless Linda Moulton Howe and also the DRT count multiple witnesses and mix them with others, who even not close to the stories above.
Interestingly though, that the latest witness only relates to these five cases.