Go Back   Old Project Avalon Forum (ARCHIVE) > Project Camelot Forum > Project Camelot > Project Camelot General Discussion

Notices

Project Camelot General Discussion Reactions, feedback and suggestions on interviews, current events and experiences.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-08-2008, 10:47 AM   #1
ROSEKAMINSKI
Avalon Senior Member
 
ROSEKAMINSKI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8
Default Wingmakers.com Labeled Hoax, By The Hoaxer Himself !

Wingmakers.com Labeled Hoax, By The Hoaxer Himself !

http://www.rense.com/ufo2/wing.htm


HOAX!
Wingmakers.com Labeled Hoax...
And By The Hoaxer Himself?
11-28-98


The following email from Ed Wolfe <ewolfe@involved.com to Mark Hempel speaks for itself. An email from Mr. Hempel to which Mr. Wolfe refers follows...

Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 00:22:08 -0800
From: ewolfe@involved.com (Ed Wolfe)
To: Mark Hempel <mhempel@southbaygroup.com

This is a new one on me. A hoaxer debunking his own creation. Details follow...

Mark Hempel wrote:

[snip]

I initially tried newsgroups trying to stir up feedback, but because I sort of 'spammed' the UFO newsgroups, I don't think people took my efforts seriously."

Not only did Mark spam the newsgroups, he lied. He said that he had come across this site (wingmakers) and that it was real interesting, had a lot of info, including music, that he claims he couldn't get to play when he tried it, and he asked for people's opinions of the site.

He also said there was no one claiming ownership of the site, and no webmaster was listed.

One problem is, he sent that message out with the email address: wingmakers@worldnet.att.net

That alone makes it hard to believe that he just stumbled across the site.

A simple WhoIs search of Internic reveals one Mark Hempel as the owner of the site also. Of course, he tells us that he secured that domain name, but he saw fit to promote the site under a false pretense on usenet.

But even worse, he posted to another usenet group completely unrelated to the conspiracy/ufo groups, and this time, he appears to have told to the truth. He was addressing his peers - fellow artists. Here's what he wrote to alt.art.video:

-- begin posted article --

Anyone interested in making a film for the net? I have all the content. I created the site to be the blueprint for a film or TV series. It's taken 3 years to produce all of the content. I created everything you'll see on the site. It's completed integrated. I call this Immersive Multimedia Art Forms (IMAF). IMAFs are experimental, but very powerful ways to experience art.

They're ideal -- in my opinon -- for conversion into film. Only about 60% of the total content for this site is posted, but you'll see how extensive it is. It takes most people 10-12 hours to complete the site if they read/view and consider every page. You're invited. This is one of the only IMAFs on the web I know about. If you know of others, please let me know.

www.wingmakers.com

Mark -- end posted article --

So now we already have three different versions from him about his knowledge of the site. But wait, there's more...

So I began my own research into this community via the web.

In doing so, I came across numerous web sites that had email addresses of people who were expert and/or experienced in this field. Since about a week ago, I sent out about 30 emails to a wide variety of people. My efforts were to seek your advice and help in assessing the wingmaker site.

It was in this message that he said the reporter, Anne, had the last name of Anderson. Being that Anne's sole contact with the top secret group was with a person named Dr. Anderson, this was just sloppy and stupid.

Over the course of employing your help, I've come to the following conclusion based in part on your feedback and my own research. Not all of you will probably agree, but I believe the site is indeed an elaborate hoax.

Yes. A hoax created by Mark and a few friends. Possibly in part to help promote a CD that is coming out soon, (or that was recently put out) on which, Mark is one of the musicians. The group is called 'Soul Food' and the music on their debut release called "Breathe" sounds remarkably like the music that the futurians left in New Mexico 850 years ago.

Or perhaps it's what the person who hired me claimed it was, an experimental art site.

Perhaps, and it's a great work of some sort of art, but like one usenet poster said in response to your posting, "I like my art to be signed."

What follows are the reasons I've come to this conclusion:

[snip]

1) The music is too contemporary sounding. It just doesn't sound like something that would be produced 750 years in the future. I really like the music, but I've had musicians listen to it and they don't hear many sounds that seem futuristic. Every sound that they heard could be replicated today on a synthesizer or digital sampler.

You should know. Or, is it a completely different Mark Hempel on 'Soul Food's' CD that just happens to play the same sort of music you have on your wingmaker's site?

[snip]

6) I had a linguist analyze the speech of "Dr. Anderson" and she didn't believe a man with such a supposedly high IQ would talk like he does, particularly if he worked 80 hours per week with others like himself. People with high I.Q.'s can talk in any way that pleases them.

On the other hand, I happen to have analyzed Mark's speech and that of Anne and concluded that they are the same person.

The most glaring evidence is that Mark has a habit of mis-using a common phrase. There are many phrases people use to resume their narrative. Things like, "On any road..." (british), "In any event" and "In any case," and "At any rate." All of these begin with prepositions.

Mark's uses the phrase, "At any rate," except he has the unusual habit of dropping the word "At." He just starts a sentence with, "Any rate..."

Incredibly, Anne does this same exact thing.

I've never seen anyone delete the preposition from those phrases before, and yet, both Mark and Anne do it.

[snip]

Therefore, I'm calling this a hoax or experimental art site. Afterall, to be fair with my client, she never claimed it was anything but an experimental art site from an art collective in Norway.

Why would she or you create art that claims to be revealing previously unknown data?

A film is a work of art, but if the film depicted something as an actual event that didn't actually occur, then the film is a hoax, a lie, or propaganda.

There's no doubt that this site is a work of art, but why does it portray itself as something real. It's first sentence speaks of a discovery in New Mexico.

If it's just art, should'nt it have a disclaimer of some sort?

Or, is it an experimental art form - one that attempts to fool the viewer into thinking that it isn't art?

[snip]

It was just the lack of communication from her that got my suspicions up, and caused me to take the time to read the text of the site-which to me was very odd.

Then why did you post to alt.art.video that you made everything on the site and that it took you three years to do it?

[snip]

I still haven't heard from her (my client), but I'm asking your help to pronounce the site a hoax,

You got it.

Feel free to pass this along.

Ed Wolfe

_______________________

This is the letter to which Mr. Wolfe Alludes in the above. It is a response to Michael Lindemann's inquiry about the similarity between the alleged 'wingmakers' music and a contemporary CD called 'Soulfood'.


From: "Mark Hempel" <mhempel@southbaygroup.com
To: <CNINews1@aol.com
Cc: <eotl@west.net
Subject: RE: Wingmakers = Hoax?
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 20:54:13 -0600

Hi, Michael,

Yes, I know this album very well (Soulfood). I used to work at NetRadio for approximately 2 years. I was in charge of operations (COO), before we sold the company to Navarre, and I moved into consulting. Anyway, my involvement with Gordy's CD project was the following: He shared it with me when it was in early production (Gordy was a DJ at netradio under the name DJ Free). I told him it was a great project and that he should finish it and play it over the Internet via NetRadio's new age and world music channels. I did not produce or co-produce the album. I simply encouraged him. You can buy the album at most music stores and in the credits my name is not mentioned as producer, co-producer, or musician. He simply thanks me in the credits (along with about twenty other people). I believe he was thankful for my support and willingness to let him play it on the NetRadio "airwaves". As for the similarity of sound between Soulfood and WingMakers, yes, I can hear similarities too, but they seem more in the use of nature sounds than musical instruments, vocals, etc. Also, there are strings used extensively in WingMakers, and I don't think there are any strings in SoulFood that I can recollect.

I don't know if that answers your question, but I can't take credit for something I didn't do. However, it seems that your real question is whether I can't take credit for something I did do. I think you'd agree that to produce the WingMakers site, someone or probably some group would have to go to a lot of effort. To me, those paintings don't look like they were created in a few weeks time or even months. I don't disagree with anyone that it's a hoax. It probably is, and that seems to be the prevailing opinion of those who have looked at the site.

I've done my own research, and with the help of about 25 other people (I didn't know before a week ago), I think the issues that are most probably hoax-revealing are:

1) The music is too contemporary sounding. It just doesn't sound like
something that would be produced 750 years in the future. I really like the
music (I made a CD of it), but I've had musicians listen to it and they
don't hear many sounds that seem futuristic. Every sound that they heard
could be replicated today on a synthesizer or digital sampler.
2) According to a scientist who read the entire text of the site, somewhere
in the interview transcripts section there's a reference to the Pleaides,
which is claimed to be the seed race of the WingMakers and humankind. This
scientist says the Pleaides is a relatively young nebula, and therefore this
is not possible.
3) I had an ex-Navy intelligence officer review the site, and he read the
ACIO memos and said they're completely out of protocol standards and he
doesn't believe any agency or department of the NSA would violate these
protocols.
4) The glyphs have been further researched and the connection to Sumerian
culture seems to be a stretch. There are some similarities, but for the most
part, these glyphs are not recognizable to an anthropologist that looked at
the site.
5) I had a person who had read a book by Courtney Brown called Cosmic
Voyage, and he quoted passages from the book that seemed very similar to the
writings in the transcripts where they talk about the Martians, Greys, and
remote viewing in general. It's either an amazing corroboration or someone
lifted the ideas from the book. (I sent an email to Dr. Brown asking him to
look at the site. I haven't heard back from him yet).
6) I had a linguist analyze the speech of "Dr. Anderson" and she didn't
believe a man with such a supposedly high IQ would talk like he does,
particularly if he worked 80 hours per week with others like himself. She
felt his language skills represented someone with above average
intelligence, but certainly not a genius.
7) For my two-cents, I just can't believe that the crystals could be so high
tech. That just doesn't make sense to me. Synthetic or not. Crystals are not
a technology. So to me, the fact that the technology artifacts aren't shown
more or in more detail, to me, that's the most certain proof that the site
is not what it claims. I was on some new age site doing some research and
saw a crystal that looked extremely similar to one of the artifacts (I
forget which chamber, but it's the one that has two distinctive pointed
ends.)

There're a few more things that lead me to the conclusion it's a hoax, but I think these are enough. I think someone should just call it what it is. I don't know who the grand de-bunker is for the UFO/paranormal community, but the site, as far as I'm concerned should be called a hoax. I believe it is. Perhaps then it will reduce the traffic in my email box, which would be appreciated.

For my part, anyone who sends me an email asking about the site, will get a response from me that is similar to the 7 reasons I just gave for why I believe it's a hoax. I hope you'll help me in doing the same.

Thanks for your email.

Mark
ROSEKAMINSKI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2008, 11:28 AM   #2
slartibartfast
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3
Default Re: Wingmakers.com Labeled Hoax, By The Hoaxer Himself !

You seem to be a little frustrated about all this.
I not sure what your agenda is in this case:

This is from the wingmakers site:
http://www.wingmakers.com/faqs.html

Question 10 - There are emails attributed to Mark Hempel that claim he wrote the materials for the purpose of creating a movie or an Immersive Multimedia Art Form (IMAF). Is this true?

There were at least 10 emails that were attributed to me (Mark Hempel) that I'm aware of. Most of these appeared shortly after I launched the site. One claimed that the site was a hoax. Another claimed I was taking credit for creating all of the content. A third made the claim that I had developed the material to launch a movie. A forth advanced the notion that I had developed an experimental art form called an IMAF. The rest were of a similar nature. In any case, I didn't write these emails, nor do I know who did, or for what purpose someone was impersonating me.


Maybe this is clearing some things out.

Greetings and love.

Last edited by slartibartfast; 12-08-2008 at 11:33 AM.
slartibartfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2008, 11:45 AM   #3
feardia
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Uisneach, Ireland
Posts: 477
Default Re: Wingmakers.com Labeled Hoax, By The Hoaxer Himself !

Did people actually believe that the wingmakers stuff was true? To me it seems to be an allegorical story in the manner of the Celestine Prophecy, a bit of truth wrapped up in a good yarn, with extra multimedia goodies thrown in for good measure.
I wonder what version of reason they were using http://www.propellerheads.se/?
feardia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2008, 11:47 AM   #4
eaglespirit
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: CT, MA, RI
Posts: 127
Default Re: Wingmakers.com Labeled Hoax, By The Hoaxer Himself !

For the most part, we are all big boys and girls here and can decide for ourselves through our own heartfelt intuition what is a hoax for us and what is not, but thanks for the info, and hey...I suppose the typo of 'wind'makers instead of wingmakers in your title was done purposely...or was it a hoax?!
From the thread I first replied to on 12/8/2008 in the am (us)eastern time:
Re: Should we remove windmakers from our forum?

Thanks for the heads up...anything that allows each of us to move forward in love through our own personal experiences and choices and decisions...whether we see them as a hoax or a blessing...is all energy that we simply decide to use personally as a benefit or not.

Onward and Upward!

Last edited by eaglespirit; 12-08-2008 at 11:49 AM.
eaglespirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Project Avalon