Quote:
Originally Posted by Monahammer
I don't want to delve into your debate too much, but I thought these two points are interesting, and to me show that you definitely did not watch the testimony yesterday.
The ####ty pilot question was actually asked and addressed directly by Grusch. His answer was actually terrifying, IMO. It amounts to a N failure problem. Even if chance of failure is small on any given sortie, because you make many 100s or thousands of sorties there is bound to eventually be a failure. The implication here is that the NHI are making a massive amount sorties on the planet.
The technological point you make is actually kind of baffling. In the last 80 years humans went from barely flying planes to landing on the moon- just in the field of aerospace technology. There are myriad techonological advancements made in the last 80 years that are obtusely accelerated compared to previous technological advancement. I am not saying this is a definite point for UFOs or reverse engineering technology, but I don't even understand the nature of your argument when the last 80 years defines a ludicrous (compared to historical) pace of technological growth for our species. 80 years ago we were still figuring out cars for f sakes.
|
Sure, so I did watch the testimony, but was also working s maybe missed the details of that. That's just his line of reasoning to explain it. It's a possible explanation that still leaves them as being OK with dying, and have the tech to get here, but still have problems. Basically "these beings are incredible, but also not" which leads to a logical conundrum. If it was just drones crashing it would be a more convincing argument.
As to the tech, no, all of what we have is explained as steps of progress and easily understandable going way back. What would you say would be a sudden advancement that doesn't flow from previous developments or implementing past ideas as technology allows for it?