Congressional UAP hearing today

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Muta

I think I once read somewhere in Jane's Defence Weekly that the military is now usually about 30 years ahead in technological capability of the public's knowledge with many of their black projects. Famously, Lockheed's (sexy AF) F-117 was conceived in 1975, flown for the first time in 1981, and only became public knowledge in 1988; it had already been airborne for seven years by the time people became aware of it. Just a classic example of this delay in what's out there and what's actually being engineered / produced.

I've heard similar things and believe it to be true. In fact, I tend to think the gap has probably gotten a lot bigger in the past 40-50 years. Just given how much technology the has advanced in general over that time (steeper than a linear progression) combined with information age acceleration, I would not be surprised if hidden or secret technology is several generations more advanced and increasing. Maybe even hundreds of years more advanced.

[Fuzz]

I see it as a narrowing gap. Industry, and other countries have their own technology, and a lot of tech is dependent on other tech. The military couldn't possibly have 100 year ahead processing power, for instance. Probably not even 5 years ahead of the best commercial tech. Material science advancements aren't going to be the domain of just the military, either. I just don't see them having the gap that used to exist.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I see it as a narrowing gap. Industry, and other countries have their own technology, and a lot of tech is dependent on other tech. The military couldn't possibly have 100 year ahead processing power, for instance. Probably not even 5 years ahead of the best commercial tech. Material science advancements aren't going to be the domain of just the military, either. I just don't see them having the gap that used to exist.

Maybe when it comes to technology that has practical commercial applications. Civilian companies tend to be accountable to shareholders and therefore pursue science and technology with commercial applications. Public companies that pursue science for the sake of science, regardless of whether they can profit from it, ae rare. The amount of money put into research and development would probably not be worth it to them.

Now take a company like Lockheed Martin which gets research and development funds from the government. They can pursue technology regardless of commercial potential because they are getting paid anyway. Some of these UAP that reportedly can travel speeds of Mach 20 through any medium, while stopping and turning on a dime. If such a contraption existed, the military value would be obvious. But what reasonable commercial value would there be? I suppose it would be fun to try, but the costs would be so high, that no sustainable business model could exist.

Or if something like zero point energy extraction was developed and people suddenly had almost limitless free energy, that would have negative commercial value. The economic and social turmoil would likely cause societal upheaval. It would be a technology you might want to ease people into over a long time. But again, it would have priceless military value.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Maybe when it comes to technology that has practical commercial applications. Civilian companies tend to be accountable to shareholders and therefore pursue science and technology with commercial applications. Public companies that pursue science for the sake of science, regardless of whether they can profit from it, ae rare. The amount of money put into research and development would probably not be worth it to them.

Now take a company like Lockheed Martin which gets research and development funds from the government. They can pursue technology regardless of commercial potential because they are getting paid anyway. Some of these UAP that reportedly can travel speeds of Mach 20 through any medium, while stopping and turning on a dime. If such a contraption existed, the military value would be obvious. But what reasonable commercial value would there be? I suppose it would be fun to try, but the costs would be so high, that no sustainable business model could exist.

Or if something like zero point energy extraction was developed and people suddenly had almost limitless free energy, that would have negative commercial value. The economic and social turmoil would likely cause societal upheaval. It would be a technology you might want to ease people into over a long time. But again, it would have priceless military value.

If you found zero point energy you would immediately deploy domestically and become the most dominant super power as your energy cost made the cost of everything cut in half relative to any competition. There is no way you wouldn’t use this to create energy security for your country.

In general I agree with you though.

[Locke]

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Maybe when it comes to technology that has practical commercial applications. Civilian companies tend to be accountable to shareholders and therefore pursue science and technology with commercial applications. Public companies that pursue science for the sake of science, regardless of whether they can profit from it, ae rare. The amount of money put into research and development would probably not be worth it to them.

Now take a company like Lockheed Martin which gets research and development funds from the government. They can pursue technology regardless of commercial potential because they are getting paid anyway. Some of these UAP that reportedly can travel speeds of Mach 20 through any medium, while stopping and turning on a dime. If such a contraption existed, the military value would be obvious. But what reasonable commercial value would there be? I suppose it would be fun to try, but the costs would be so high, that no sustainable business model could exist.

Or if something like zero point energy extraction was developed and people suddenly had almost limitless free energy, that would have negative commercial value. The economic and social turmoil would likely cause societal upheaval. It would be a technology you might want to ease people into over a long time. But again, it would have priceless military value.

My argument is that technology is so specialized and interdependent compared to 50 years ago that no one entity could get as far ahead as they did back then. I think the window has narrowed in that you need tech a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h to get to x, and without it, you aren't going to get there. And you would need advancements in so many fields that it's just not really possible the military or an individual company can do it on their own.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Nm

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

Recent podcast on the subject in general with Luis Elizondo who is one of the people being interviewed

Mick West is a skeptic and critic of Elizondo:

Errors in Luis Elizondo's UFO Book "Imminent"

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/err...mminent.13613/

NY Times book review:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/16/b...e=articleShare

https://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/r...-luis-elizondo

[karl262]

The last paragraph describes Mick West quite well


https://www.twz.com/27666/what-the-h...ent-of-defense

"The main revelation is that technology exists that is capable of performing flying maneuvers that shatter our perceptions of propulsion, flight controls, material science, and even physics. Let me underline this again for you, the#Nimitz#encounter with the Tic Tac#proved#that exotic technology that is widely thought of as the domain of science fiction actually exists.#It is real. It isn’t the result of altered perception, someone’s lucid dream, a stray weather balloon, or swamp gas. Someone or something has crossed the technological Rubicon and has obtained what some would call the Holy Grail of aerospace engineering.#

This reality is very hard to process for many. There is always an out for some in the form of claiming an odd impromptu conspiracy or some hollow explanation that doesn’t pass muster beyond the first paragraph, but in the end, it happened. As uncomfortable as that fact is, it’s reality. So, we need to use this event as a lodestar going forward when it comes to evaluating and contemplating what is possible and where truth actually lies."



Sent from my SM-F741W using Tapatalk

[Muta]

Yep... for me, critics of this topic will have to explain the three videos released in the 2017 NYT report. When the Pentagon and the Department of Justice, who released these videos, say they don't know what those UAPs are, that's quite a statement for two of the strongest government organizations in the world to make.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Muta

Yep... for me, critics of this topic will have to explain the three videos released in the 2017 NYT report. When the Pentagon and the Department of Justice, who released these videos, say they don't know what those UAPs are, that's quite a statement for two of the strongest government organizations in the world to make.

Why do you think they are being truthful?

Unless you believe these are the first instances then the government has been lying to you since the 50s and only has been caught now but instead of finding a new lie they told you the truth.

Also the first statement misses a key caveat. If the data collected is reliable and what is released is authentic then the main revelation is ……

We don’t know is an excellent lie to tell when the alternatives are our data acquisition is faulty, it’s aliens, it’s our tech, or it’s someone else’s tech.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by karl262

The last paragraph describes Mick West quite well


https://www.twz.com/27666/what-the-h...ent-of-defense

"The main revelation is that technology exists that is capable of performing flying maneuvers that shatter our perceptions of propulsion, flight controls, material science, and even physics. Let me underline this again for you, the#Nimitz#encounter with the Tic Tac#proved#that exotic technology that is widely thought of as the domain of science fiction actually exists.#It is real. It isn’t the result of altered perception, someone’s lucid dream, a stray weather balloon, or swamp gas. Someone or something has crossed the technological Rubicon and has obtained what some would call the Holy Grail of aerospace engineering.#

This reality is very hard to process for many. There is always an out for some in the form of claiming an odd impromptu conspiracy or some hollow explanation that doesn’t pass muster beyond the first paragraph, but in the end, it happened. As uncomfortable as that fact is, it’s reality. So, we need to use this event as a lodestar going forward when it comes to evaluating and contemplating what is possible and where truth actually lies."

Sent from my SM-F741W using Tapatalk

Nothing has been proven, though. That's evidence, not proof. And the proponents acting like you'd be an idiot if you don't believe it just confirms their smugness and inflexibility in their thinking, which means any conclusions they come to should also be treated as suspect.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by GGG

Why do you think they are being truthful?

Unless you believe these are the first instances then the government has been lying to you since the 50s and only has been caught now but instead of finding a new lie they told you the truth.

Also the first statement misses a key caveat. If the data collected is reliable and what is released is authentic then the main revelation is ……

We don’t know is an excellent lie to tell when the alternatives are our data acquisition is faulty, it’s aliens, it’s our tech, or it’s someone else’s tech.

Sure, the 2017 videos could be a false flag or a lie; I just don't see it. Their authenticities have been verified by enough people at various levels (government and non-government) since then. Also, no one is claiming these things in the videos are 'aliens'; just that they're unidentified and the technology is unclear. I suppose given the history of the US's stance on this topic (hostile and resistant) that it is understandable that people wouldn't believe anything they say or put out, and that's okay. There seems to be enough people coming forward regularly with information on this topic now, that it would be unlikely that everyone is in on a mass-coordinated disinformation campaign without a single slip; now that would seem conspiratorial.

[karl262]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Nothing has been proven, though. That's evidence, not proof. And the proponents acting like you'd be an idiot if you don't believe it just confirms their smugness and inflexibility in their thinking, which means any conclusions they come to should also be treated as suspect.

Once something has been observed- and I'm specifically talking about the 2004 Nimitz encounter- continuing to doubt is illogical.

The "something" is the tic tac - a physical object demonstrating characteristics that should be impossible based on contemporary understanding.

"Observed" here by multiple independent sensors, each one the best we humans have for this type of observation and eyewitness, again the best we have for this kind of thing. Air track identification is critical, they train and train and then train some more to do this.

If one wanted to see what happens when particles smash into each other at near light speed, something like the large hadron collider would work well. And if one wanted to observe the flight characteristics of a 'UFO', like if we knew where and when one of these things would show up, a Nimitz class carrier battle group would be the best choice. With planes in the air piloted by senior officers and fitted with external targeting pods.

Sent from my SM-F741W using Tapatalk

[Fuzz]

K? Best we have still doesn't prove anything. It's an observation and data point that can be interpreted in many ways. It isn't fact. If it was fact we wouldn't be debating it for 20 years.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

K? Best we have still doesn't prove anything. It's an observation and data point that can be interpreted in many ways. It isn't fact. If it was fact we wouldn't be debating it for 20 years.

It seems like people just want to shift the window to make it so that their claims over these unexplained phenomena are the ones that need to be proven wrong, instead of needing to be proven right. As though fantastical explanations without evidence as so strong that any logical explanation requires evidence to overtake it.

It’s like believing in God and thinking the only unreasonable people are those who don’t believe God exists because they haven’t proven she doesn’t.

[firebug]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

It seems like people just want to shift the window to make it so that their claims over these unexplained phenomena are the ones that need to be proven wrong, instead of needing to be proven right. As though fantastical explanations without evidence as so strong that any logical explanation requires evidence to overtake it.

It’s like believing in God and thinking the only unreasonable people are those who don’t believe God exists because they haven’t proven she doesn’t.

Indeed this has become the 'UAP of the Gaps' scenario.

[Puppet Guy]

Originally Posted by Locke

Spoiler!

[karl262]

What are some of the ways the data of the Nimitz encounter can be interpreted?

I'm not here saying this is proof of aliens.



Sent from my SM-F741W using Tapatalk

[Fuzz]

A few posted here:


https://www.reddit.com/r/AskPhysics/...tions_for_ufo/


If you use the right google search terms, you can find explanations for most things.