Just for discussion sake and to amuse myself, assuming UAPs are from an alien civilization, maybe we are giving them more credit than they deserve. Maybe they usurped the technology from a more advanced alien race and haven't perfected how to use it themselves either. Or maybe they did develop it, but it is still experimental even to them, leading to mistakes.
I mentioned it before as well, but maybe the creatures operating it are not the best and brightest their civilization has to offer. Humans started off by sending rats, dogs, monkeys, and chimps into space to see what would happen. Maybe an alien race has sent lower-intelligent species from their world because they see them as disposable, but biologically similar enough to them that they can collect usable data still. Maybe the crashes aren't mistakes, as much as they are just letting go of equipment once it collected the data it needed and wasn't worth recovering.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Yeah that was a strange comment, Lanny. Ingenuity has been a huge success. Which is awesome, because it likely means the next mars mission will have a robust aerial component.
I'm not disputing that- all my posts in the last page are simply counter points that the notion of lack of massive technological growth is stupid. We have definitely seen a massive, unparalleled in human history pace of technological growth since the rumored beginning of crash retrieval programs.
How about this:
The Germans flew the first ever jet plane in 1939.
The americans didn't rival that until 1942.
Here are the specs:
Performance
Maximum speed: 413 mph (665 km/h, 359 kn) at 30,000 ft (9,144 m)
Cruise speed: 375 mph (604 km/h, 326 kn)
Range: 375 mi (604 km, 326 nmi)
Ferry range: 950 mi (1,530 km, 830 nmi)
Service ceiling: 46,200 ft (14,100 m)
Time to altitude: 30,000 ft (9,144 m) in 15 minutes 30 seconds
22 years later is the first flight of the SR-71 Blackbird.
Maximum speed: 1,910 kn (2,200 mph, 3,540 km/h) at 80,000 ft (24,000 m)
Maximum speed: Mach 3.3[N 6]
Ferry range: 2,824 nmi (3,250 mi, 5,230 km)
Service ceiling: 85,000 ft (26,000 m)
Rate of climb: 11,820 ft/min (60.0 m/s)
Wing loading: 84 lb/sq ft (410 kg/m2)
Thrust/weight: 0.44
Not to mention the ridiculous amount of computerized avionics, material science development enabling stealth and light airframes, and sensor technology the aircraft possessed.
I'm not saying it's DEFINITELY because of reverse engineered tech, but can we not agree that this IS far, far, far beyond the pace of technological development in any other field leading up to this point in human history? To say there were no leaps in technology over the last 80 years is frankly baffling.
I didn't say that, I said there are no advances that can't be explained easily by building on previous knowledge. Discoveries all fit with our progress.
I also find that dismissing our progress as only being possible thourgh exploiting alien tech a bit insulting to scientists. it's like the people who say their alive because of a miracle, when in reality it's the doctors and science. unless there is some evidence, or obvious missing step in our advancements, it's just a bit demeaning to say humanity had help.
Don't be a goober. How many planets are there in our solar system? How many of them have the same atmosphere? None. They are each unique and very different. The closest to ours is Mars, but beyond that they are all very different and alien. Suggesting they are the same or that worlds don't differ is, how did you put it, not really scientific.
You have no idea what we have or haven't done with our drone on Mars. They showed a short clip of it taking off and that's it. Good god man, there have been more failures going to Mars than there have been successes. You make it sound like we've mastered traveling in space, which is clearly NOT the case. Of 48 missions to Mars by all nations, 27 have resulted in failure. Only 8 vehicles have managed to make it to the Martian surface. We've left more space junk on the surface that there have been reported UFO crashes here on earth. But we're masters of the domain.
It seems pretty much everything baffles you.
Beyond us does not mean perfect. I mean, you have to be pretty ####ing baffled to not understand that everything makes mistakes, regardless of how advanced they are.
Not going to waste my time because obviously your understanding of planetary science is at a pre-school level, and your knowledge of exploration and technology around Mars is nonexistent at best. Calling me a goober because of that is just the cherry on top. Good day, sir.
Stop talking out of your ass, Ingenuity has just reached it's 53rd flight, if you search hard enough you can find video of just about every one of them.
Here's it's 52nd flight after going AWOL due to a martian ridge obstructing the line of sight between it and the Perseverance rover.
He's not talking out his ass, he just isn't nearly as bright as he tells himself he is.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
I didn't say that, I said there are no advances that can't be explained easily by building on previous knowledge. Discoveries all fit with our progress.
I also find that dismissing our progress as only being possible thourgh exploiting alien tech a bit insulting to scientists. it's like the people who say their alive because of a miracle, when in reality it's the doctors and science. unless there is some evidence, or obvious missing step in our advancements, it's just a bit demeaning to say humanity had help.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz
if we have had it for 80 years, why haven't we developed anything with this tech? Or more specifically, why hasn't the US, or any other country that has physical evidence?
My counter point is that you can't prove that they haven't developed anything with this tech. The pace of technological growth has demonstrably increased exponentially during the same time frame we're discussing. Could it be from good old population increase and human ingenuity? Sure. But we had human ingenuity before 1930s...
I just don't think you can state with any certainty that the technology we've developed since follows entirely incremental and logical steps. Lanny pointed to Fiber Optics as an example. Semiconductors are another; specifically the ability to combine multiple functions in an integrated circuit, was developed simultaneously and independently through government sponsored programs with Texas Intruments and Fairchild Semiconductors around 1960.
Anyways, I don't want to argue that aliens exist or not based on technological development- I just don't think there are salient points here in either direction.
Just for discussion sake and to amuse myself, assuming UAPs are from an alien civilization, maybe we are giving them more credit than they deserve. Maybe they usurped the technology from a more advanced alien race and haven't perfected how to use it themselves either. Or maybe they did develop it, but it is still experimental even to them, leading to mistakes.
I mentioned it before as well, but maybe the creatures operating it are not the best and brightest their civilization has to offer. Humans started off by sending rats, dogs, monkeys, and chimps into space to see what would happen. Maybe an alien race has sent lower-intelligent species from their world because they see them as disposable, but biologically similar enough to them that they can collect usable data still. Maybe the crashes aren't mistakes, as much as they are just letting go of equipment once it collected the data it needed and wasn't worth recovering.
Yeah, one of the things that always gets me is how human-centric the conversation always is. I’ve brought up before the idea of blob-life or that human intelligence might be uniquely human.
It’s funny to watch these discussions because it’s the same people who say we can’t apply human understanding of physics to these things that turn around and apply human-centric motivations and intelligence levels to these things.
Let’s say we accept that there is some form of alien life in some form of alien craft that has somehow interacted with Earth (in the atmosphere, crashing, whatever). Why do we assume they’re even collecting data? why would they care? We assume they care because we would care, but maybe there is no value in evaluating us. Maybe they don’t even a concept of “value.” If they saw us using a nuclear bomb, would they even know what it was or why it was significant? what would be their motivation for intervening? Is there any intent behind their visit? Are they even aware of us beyond us being other objects, or are they simply existing completely ignorant of us?
The human lens is applied so heavily on this topic that you just have to laugh when one single thing is noted as being “beyond our understanding.” It might all be beyond our understanding, because they operate like no other species on Earth which is the absolute extent of our current understanding. But that doesn’t stop people from going off on crazy theories that basically come down to “they’re us but like suuuuuuper smart and wise.”
I'm generally not posting in here anymore, but regarding the 'crash' theory, there are also stories/rumors about us finding in-tact craft without the 'crash' part. Even David Grusch has said the US has "intact and partially intact craft".
And in terms of witness testimony, I always found this one from Lance Corporal Jonathan Weygandt to be fairly intriguing because of his delivery in terms of words, pace, and body language that suggests somewhat accurate recall.
The Following User Says Thank You to Ozy_Flame For This Useful Post:
We can fly a mini drone a few hundred yards from the rover! Masters of the universe! What a joke. We still have no idea what we have or have not done with the drone. All of those videos released will have been closely reviewed and sanitized for release.
Yeah, one of the things that always gets me is how human-centric the conversation always is. I’ve brought up before the idea of blob-life or that human intelligence might be uniquely human.
It’s funny to watch these discussions because it’s the same people who say we can’t apply human understanding of physics to these things that turn around and apply human-centric motivations and intelligence levels to these things.
Let’s say we accept that there is some form of alien life in some form of alien craft that has somehow interacted with Earth (in the atmosphere, crashing, whatever). Why do we assume they’re even collecting data? why would they care? We assume they care because we would care, but maybe there is no value in evaluating us. Maybe they don’t even a concept of “value.” If they saw us using a nuclear bomb, would they even know what it was or why it was significant? what would be their motivation for intervening? Is there any intent behind their visit? Are they even aware of us beyond us being other objects, or are they simply existing completely ignorant of us?
The human lens is applied so heavily on this topic that you just have to laugh when one single thing is noted as being “beyond our understanding.” It might all be beyond our understanding, because they operate like no other species on Earth which is the absolute extent of our current understanding. But that doesn’t stop people from going off on crazy theories that basically come down to “they’re us but like suuuuuuper smart and wise.”
Don't be too hard on us, this is a well known feature of human thought spanning millenia. We even have a tendency to apply human thought and emotional content to completely unsubstantial things like the weather.
The truth is we just don't have any other frame of reference to use. Even your stab at what they are is a small portion of the potential. What if they exist in the 4th dimension as swarms of molecules or something?
We can't rationalize all potential possibilities because our brains are tuned to understanding the universe a specific way. Further, our evolved social nature makes us apply feelings to even incorporeal things. We are incapable.
Not going to waste my time because obviously your understanding of planetary science is at a pre-school level, and your knowledge of exploration and technology around Mars is nonexistent at best. Calling me a goober because of that is just the cherry on top. Good day, sir.
Oh please, enlighten me with your incredible grasp on planetary science and exploration technology around Mars. What am I missing here Mr. "What is so unique about Earth's atmosphere?"
Don't be too hard on us, this is a well known feature of human thought spanning millenia. We even have a tendency to apply human thought and emotional content to completely unsubstantial things like the weather.
The truth is we just don't have any other frame of reference to use. Even your stab at what they are is a small portion of the potential. What if they exist in the 4th dimension as swarms of molecules or something?
We can't rationalize all potential possibilities because our brains are tuned to understanding the universe a specific way. Further, our evolved social nature makes us apply feelings to even incorporeal things. We are incapable.
I’m not even suggesting it’s a bad thing, it’s just a human thing. But that’s what makes picking and choosing what we can/can’t possibly understanding kind of… hilarious. Like hey, we’re capable enough in the areas where our understanding is really emotion based, but our capability is woefully insufficient it’s anything concerning advanced science or mathematics! It sort of defies logic.
When someone says they might view us like we view ants, for example, they aren’t just assuming how aliens view us, they are unintentionally assuming hundreds of different things about the existence of aliens just for it to even be possible for aliens to see us that way.
Looking at the way “believers” (not to be confused with those who are open to the idea or otherwise undecided) layer in heavy human biases into their beliefs of this is almost more fascinating than anything else. Regardless of anything else, the whole topic provides very cool insight into the human mind.
My counter point is that you can't prove that they haven't developed anything with this tech. The pace of technological growth has demonstrably increased exponentially during the same time frame we're discussing. Could it be from good old population increase and human ingenuity? Sure. But we had human ingenuity before 1930s...
I just don't think you can state with any certainty that the technology we've developed since follows entirely incremental and logical steps. Lanny pointed to Fiber Optics as an example. Semiconductors are another; specifically the ability to combine multiple functions in an integrated circuit, was developed simultaneously and independently through government sponsored programs with Texas Intruments and Fairchild Semiconductors around 1960.
Anyways, I don't want to argue that aliens exist or not based on technological development- I just don't think there are salient points here in either direction.
I mean, you could just as easily argue god gave us the info, or aliens beamed it into our heads to influence us into developing these things. The development of IC's and fibre optics are known, and while I'm not going to look, I'm sure yo could find an website with history showing how they built on previous knowledge to arrive at them. It's no mystery.
Now, if you had an example where it may be more of a head scratcher, then it's a theory that could be entertained. Otherwise it's just thoughts. But with only one example, you then have to be consistent explaining why there aren't hundreds or thousands of them.
All I'm asking for a is a little logical consistency in these theories.
Not going to waste my time because obviously your understanding of planetary science is at a pre-school level, and your knowledge of exploration and technology around Mars is nonexistent at best. Calling me a goober because of that is just the cherry on top. Good day, sir.
Don’t be rude. Lanny is the board’s foremost expert on UFOs, planetary science, psychology, political science, American culture, criminology, business negotiations, event planning, etc. and we will NOT see his name slandered! He is also a professor who DEFINITELY has real students. Show some respect young man!
Oh please, enlighten me with your incredible grasp on planetary science and exploration technology around Mars. What am I missing here Mr. "What is so unique about Earth's atmosphere?"
That the Martian atmosphere is really nothing like Earths? That if alien worlds exist capable of suppurating life, they are most likely to be not that far off from Earth's composition. That if aliens have traveled so far, that we wouldn't be the first planet they would have ever visited, and would have a grasp on the physics of maneuvering in ours? Basically it isn't their first rodeo.
FWIW I did a major project in University on orbital satellites to Mars and the similarities and challenges of remote sensing through different atmospheres. So I like to think I know a thing or two...
Could you also maybe not be so childish? It doesn't help boost the perception of your intelligence.
We can fly a mini drone a few hundred yards from the rover! Masters of the universe! What a joke. We still have no idea what we have or have not done with the drone. All of those videos released will have been closely reviewed and sanitized for release.
You left out the part where it's anywhere between 40-250 million miles away.
Instead of an underscore your middle name should be "conspiracy" or in this case "backtrack"
That the Martian atmosphere is really nothing like Earths? That if alien worlds exist capable of suppurating life, they are most likely to be not that far off from Earth's composition. That if aliens have traveled so far, that we wouldn't be the first planet they would have ever visited, and would have a grasp on the physics of maneuvering in ours? Basically it isn't their first rodeo.
Not their first rodeo and likely not their first incident where they had a mishap too? Where do you get this idea that advanced civilizations are infallible and their technology perfectly adapted to all worlds.
Quote:
FWIW I did a major project in University on orbital satellites to Mars and the similarities and challenges of remote sensing through different atmospheres. So I like to think I know a thing or two...
Good to know. Did it result in your terminal degree or just a research paper for a class? Doesn't really matter, just curious. Since you completed this research then you know exactly how many missions were failures and how many missions were lost trying to establish orbit or land on the surface, so recognize space travel and working in any atmosphere is not easy. The chemical makeup of the atmosphere and density must also come into play, no? Our 78/21 split between nitrogen and oxygen must certainly be a very different environment than one 96% comprised of CO2 and provide unique challenges between the two?
Quote:
Could you also maybe not be so childish? It doesn't help boost the perception of your intelligence.
Maybe don't be so dismissive of people and their thoughts and make snide comments that make little sense. If you're such an expert on these things then maybe explain your position and share some of your knowledge. Don't make the assumption that everyone is following your thinking because you know something. It may exceed your maximum allowed word count per post, but it would go along way to understanding each other's positions better.
Not their first rodeo and likely not their first incident where they had a mishap too? Where do you get this idea that advanced civilizations are infallible and their technology perfectly adapted to all worlds.
Good to know. Did it result in your terminal degree or just a research paper for a class? Doesn't really matter, just curious. Since you completed this research then you know exactly how many missions were failures and how many missions were lost trying to establish orbit or land on the surface, so recognize space travel and working in any atmosphere is not easy. The chemical makeup of the atmosphere and density must also come into play, no? Our 78/21 split between nitrogen and oxygen must certainly be a very different environment than one 96% comprised of CO2 and provide unique challenges between the two?
Maybe don't be so dismissive of people and their thoughts and make snide comments that make little sense. If you're such an expert on these things then maybe explain your position and share some of your knowledge. Don't make the assumption that everyone is following your thinking because you know something. It may exceed your maximum allowed word count per post, but it would go along way to understanding each other's positions better.
The assumption is that if they can make it here, then yes, they should have perfected a lot of technology we still struggle with and have accidents. I'd think of it how we make deep space probes, you don't take risks, and you have loads of redundancies and options to deal with unknowns. That's not really how we make Mars landers, because our emerging technology makes it very risky and losses are expected.
This was a major course project worth something like 70% of the course grade. Yes, it was a focus of my degree. So ya, I understand getting to another planet is hard for us. I wouldn't expect it to be so for aliens who travel so far with such advanced tech.
As for being dismissive, you parade around with such certainty and authority around ideas that are just that, while you say them as fact, that dismissive is the most logical position to take.
You left out the part where it's anywhere between 40-250 million miles away.
Instead of an underscore your middle name should be "conspiracy" or in this case "backtrack"
Except it really isn't all that impressive and it isn't from 40-250 million miles away. Communications take between five and twenty minutes to reach Mars from earth, depending on our orbits, so they are not flying the drone interactively. The drone will fly pre-programmed flight paths provided by the rover and return back to the rover as its home base. You can do the exact same thing here on earth with your DJI Mavic. It's also why the drone was temporarily lost when line of sight was lost. The control package is on the rover and they must be close enough to communicate directly.
