Dolan: The Secret Space Program - Who is Responsible?

[Goggs Mackay]

Great post Mike and some good points.

Being a 'Pom' (does that apply equally to the whole UK - I've never been sure) and having a favoured uncle an Australian citizen - a ten-pound pom no less, I've actually always thought that this thing of the UK looking down on the 'convict colonials' is nothing of the sort. The only poms who do, are the type or are utter snobs anyway!
Everyone in the UK or Oz knows fine people were 'transported' for the most petty of crimes, whilst as we all know now, the big bankers etc have been committing crimes far worse for ages!

The snobs who have the attitude you mention are not at all representative of the UK population. In fact, due to the weather etc so many Brits dream of moving down under and rightly so.

For me it comes down to this utter fallacy called 'class'. People who believe class exists are the only ones who look down their noses at anyone, never mind our Ozzy cousins. A fine example for me is Prince Phillip. If he had been kidnapped at age 6 months and brought up in a slum in Glasgow, I wonder how many utterly fake rings would he be wearing on his dress naval uniform? As far as I know, he did not rise above a lieuftenant in the RN but look at all the crap he gets to wear at functions cos he is married to the Queen!

My uncle left school at 15, when his family still got water from a well and had no TV etc. He left to go to sea and from starting at the bottom, in no time flat he had his Masters ticket and was in overall charge of moving huge ships and oil rigs etc. He built his own house with his own hands in his spare time. He would have been considered very 'working class' by the snobs I am talking about and he is better than most of them in every conceivable way, except conceit!

Class does not exist. Circumstance and inheritance exist. They are not the same thing at all. I know you were not making any sweeping statement about British attitudes to Australians and I think we probably agree exactly on this class bollocks.
To recap: only people who believe class exists have any ridiculous notions about descendants of convicts. Lets get this straight - every single person in the world will have stacks of criminals and criminal activity in their family history and absolutely those who think they are 'upper class' ! The cheek of these idiots knows no bounds!

(sorry Mike, didn't mean to hijack the thread but It's a sore point, the class and colonial thing, cos many of my relatives went everywhere, every one of them starting from nothing. Unlike the 'upper class' twits who are handed everything on a plate and are still useless, except knowing which effin fork to use!)

 

[mike]

Break Away civilizations are the stock trade of classic science fiction. There are boundless examples of speculated societies that grew from colonists that migrated from Earth.
Are there people actually living science fiction out there right now?

Not just science fiction, Both the US and Australia are breakaway civilisations.
And they illustrate the point that such BAC's develop their own unique identitys.
The US is/was a british colony, they put men on the moon, which might make a case for technological superiority.
Culturally there is a strong USA = #1 meme going on there as well.

Its the nature of any offshoot culture to look at itself and highlight its positive attributes.

Where the colonisation of space is concerned, that sentiment will be magnified imo.

The very foundation of space travel is tied to the phrase "the right stuff".

They wont just have a unique identity, its likely to be a very elitist one as well.

Orbital habitats will by their very nature have to be ultra low waste, highly ordered systems.
Its not hard to predict that children growing up is such an environment will look down on the dirt grubbers below , with their crime and grime, and feel a sense of detached superiority.

They will identify with the future and the advancement of mankind, and the grounders with the past and a grubby history.

Homo celestials will not be the same cultural beasties as Homo terrestrials.
In time that gap will imo only widen

 

[mike]

To the question is it happening now ?

Well we can only speculate, but if it is then i think the whole elite aspect would naturally come into play.

There is an old adage that says "power shared, is power lost" and i think if there were an existing BAC, then this comes into play.

or as Dolan puts it

So I leave open the possibility that some great secret would be understood by a very small, elect group of people. They would want to hide this from the rest of the world for obvious reasons – power, and just not wanting to share."

If you had the option to start civilisation anew and leave the mess we have here behind, would you take the garbage with you ?

For example if you were starting a new colony would you take religion with you ?
Or screen it out, take only people who reject superstition.

Mankind has a long list of baggage, why not found a new colony based on science and knowledge and leave the superstition and ignorance behind.
The last thing you would want if you acheived this, would be for the unevolved masses to get their hands on the same technology and pollute that supposed utopia with the cultural BS you left behind.

Any group that got its hands on this technology has a chance to start fresh, to leave the crap behind and build something new.

Its not going to be to their advantage to share that with the masses.

We hear a lot of talk about making the US a christian nation again (google america is a christian nation)
So why wouldnt a group of that cultural persuasion say lets just colonise another planet and make it a christian planet.
They are not going to share the propulsion technology so the godless commies and muslims can come and upset their applecart.

Its human nature not to share, if in doing so ,you can maintain your percieved advantage

 

[Randall]

Deny as you wish, that is another straw-man argument. I did not propose that it would take "an entire high tech breakaway civilization." I put to you that their origin and nature is unknown and certainly unknowable through observing their appearance and behavior. Speculating as to their point of origin is entertaining, but produces no real knowledge about them.

It is obvious from the lack of any evidence within our familiar global civilization that UFOs are not a part it, therefore they must originate from outside of it, which makes them alien to our civilization. Therefore UFOs are, from our perspective, alien craft. I have seen no reasoning or evidence that successfully and rationally counters that position. Even if we assume that UFOs are now associated with current secret military programs, these programs have only come into existence over that 50 years, and UFOs have been around long before that. So their ultimate origin is still something alien.

Also, I am perfectly fine taking claim for the position that it would take an entire breakaway hi tech civilization to be able to collect the raw materials, refine them, manufacture the components, and construct all the vessels needed to explain the UFO phenomenon ... that only makes sense. Your position is that it wouldn't take an entire breakaway civilization if our own civilization were doing all the heavy lifting. While that is interesting to ponder for a short while, it doesn't take long to realize that the immense complexity and the sheer number of people involved on a global scale would require a conspiracy of silence so vast that it isn't reasonable to believe that it is possible to maintain. To support this position I've used two well known examples of formerly top secret projects that within a comparatively short time span were discovered and then brought to light. I'll add now that underground military bases are no exception. They've been known to exist for a long time, so they aren't really all that secret. Here's a YouTube video that talks about these places. Again, these facilities are all relatively new, which means that they cannot be responsible for the ultimate origin of UFOs, the existence of which predates any of the technology we have seen developed over the last 50 years.

 

[mike]

To the secrecy issue Richard Dolan makes a salient point in the article

Dolan offered the following story to make his point about keeping certain technology secret: “Back in 1986, when the United States bombed the nation of Libya, is very instructive. Because at that time, the US had operationally, but still secret, the F-117-A Nighthawk Stealth Fighter. Yet the Stealth Fighter was not employed in that Libyan mission. Instead, the US used the F-111. Now, the F-111 is a very fine aircraft, but the fact was that the top of the line fire aircraft was the Stealth fighter, and it wasn’t used on the Libyan mission. The question is, why not?
“The answer, we learn from the military, was simply that the F-117 classification was still secret, and the Libyan mission was not seen as a high enough priority to risk exposing that aircraft yet. The US did not want the rest of the world to know because Stealth technology was just that important. And that should tell us something: that just because you have top of the line technology out there, using it in such a way that it’s out in the open is not always a good thing. The technology can be so valuable that it’s almost counterproductive to use it because then you’re letting the rest of the world know you’ve got it.
“So too with secret space technology and the secret space program. Using flying saucers to fight the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq would be counterproductive from their point of view. That’s assuming that they want to win the wars to begin with. But once you use them in battle, you’re alerting other groups that yes, this is possible and you can build a functioning flying saucer. And maybe the US doesn’t want them to know that."

 

[Randall]

To the secrecy issue Richard Dolan makes a salient point in the article

So let's apply that logic to the question at hand. Keeping a few relatively mundane spy planes secret makes no sense if you have UFO technology. Why? F-117s are like sopwith camels compared to saucer technology, which means that if they actually have saucers then F-117s would be obsolete by comparison and it would make more sense to use them than keep them secret. This also brings up another point. Why even build the F-117 in the first place ... So that they could spend billions of dollars developing a useless ( and secret ) aircraft that would serve as nothing more than a diversion from the really secret stuff? I'm sorry but I'm just not buying into it.

 

[exo_doc]

So let's apply that logic to the question at hand. Keeping a few relatively mundane spy planes secret makes no sense if you have UFO technology. Why? F-117s are like sopwith camels compared to saucer technology, which means that if they actually have saucers then F-117s would be obsolete by comparison and it would make more sense to use them than keep them secret. This also brings up another point. Why even build the F-117 in the first place ... So that they could spend billions of dollars developing a useless ( and secret ) aircraft that would serve as nothing more than a diversion from the really secret stuff? I'm sorry but I'm just not buying into it.

Ufology, I don't understand why you're not getting this, no insult intended.
Speculation: The "elite" are technologically advanced, they have so-called saucer tech and are living among the stars. They probably either control, or are being controlled, by the US or (less likely to me) a coalition of countries.
They control the tech. Plain and simple. It makes them superior (at least tech wise).
This tech would have to be hidden behind layers of secrecy. It's simple.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

The reason saucers would not be used and expensive human-tech planes would continue to be used is the same reason the UFO topic is still so secret.

If for a war, a country showed they had anti-grav etc or zero-point energy extraction then the whole petrochemical financial system would become relatively worthless overnight as everyone realises we don't need to rely on petroleum the same way. The billions spent on stealth planes is but a drop in the ocean to the money to be lost if the whole world get's their hands on cheaper energy and travel.

It's all about power and money and really the 'elite' could care less if using a stealth fighter results in the loss of more American servicemen, rather than using a saucer.

There is virtually no reason good enough to reveal tech that would collapse the western financial system, short of inter-plantetary war. It is that simple for me, it makes sense in every single way I can look at it. (tho I don't claim to be able to see all sides)

 

[trainedobserver]

I honestly think if the truth ever comes out we are going to find out that we have collectively suffered from a lack of imagination. I think it will be a "none of the above" type of answer. Our brains will probably buck like mules in our skulls just trying to comprehend it and then most of us will turn around and get back in the rat race, hoping that if we can just ignore it, we can go on with our lives as they were.

 

[exo_doc]

I honestly think if the truth ever comes out we are going to find out that we have collectively suffered from a lack of imagination. I think it will be a "none of the above" type of answer. Our brains will probably buck like mules in our skulls just trying to comprehend it and then most of use will turn around and get back in the rat race, hoping that if we can just ignore it, we can go on with our lives as they were.

And I think when/if we do find out, it will have been right under our noses the whole time and we'll have a cosmic "D'OH!" moment of "Now why didn't WE think of that."

 

[Randall]

Ufology, I don't understand why you're not getting this, no insult intended. Speculation: The "elite" are technologically advanced, they have so-called saucer tech and are living among the stars. They probably either control, or are being controlled, by the US or (less likely to me) a coalition of countries. They control the tech. Plain and simple. It makes them superior (at least tech wise).This tech would have to be hidden behind layers of secrecy. It's simple.

It's not that I don't understand what you are saying, it's that we're talking about about two slightly different scenarios and I've been focused on the other one. To address yours specifically, and please correct me if I'm wrong, you are proposing that with respect to a breakaway civilization ( presumably human and evolving from Earth ), they are able to remain secret now because they are now extraterrestrially based, so there would be no Earthly evidence of the infrastructure needed to support them here on Earth. Are we now on the same page?

 

[Randall]

The reason saucers would not be used and expensive human-tech planes would continue to be used is the same reason the UFO topic is still so secret. If for a war, a country showed they had anti-grav etc or zero-point energy extraction then the whole petrochemical financial system would become relatively worthless overnight as everyone realises we don't need to rely on petroleum the same way. The billions spent on stealth planes is but a drop in the ocean to the money to be lost if the whole world get's their hands on cheaper energy and travel. It's all about power and money and really the 'elite' could care less if using a stealth fighter results in the loss of more American servicemen, rather than using a saucer. There is virtually no reason good enough to reveal tech that would collapse the western financial system, short of inter-plantetary war. It is that simple for me, it makes sense in every single way I can look at it. (tho I don't claim to be able to see all sides)

I still don't buy it. There are just as many reasons that a working knowledge of UFO technology would open up entire new possibilities for economic growth and prosperity. Look at all the benefits we're still enjoying because of the space race back in the 1960s. This kind of technology would be no less significant. Plus it still doesn't explain the presence of UFOs prior to us having any aircraft at all, or why they wouldn't have used them in WW-I and WW-II. If some breakaway civilization is responsible, it seems to me that Chris O'Brien's mention of the possibility of some antediluvian culture that has since had all traces washed away by the forces of nature makes more sense. But I don't even see how that is possible without them being something that came along before humans evolved, which doesn't really make them a "breakaway civilization" in the sense we're discussing here. Plus they'd have to have made a concerted effort to clean up any evidence of their existence including their entire evolution including fossil records. That's all too much to ask and still have it be reasonable to believe.

 

[exo_doc]

It's not that I don't understand what you are saying, it's that we're talking about about two slightly different scenarios and I've been focused on the other one. To address yours specifically, and please correct me if I'm wrong, you are proposing that with respect to a breakaway civilization ( presumably human and evolving from Earth ), they are able to remain secret now because they are now extraterrestrially based, so there would be no Earthly evidence of the infrastructure needed to support them here on Earth. Are we now on the same page?

Yes! Exactly. Now we're on the same page.

 

[Randall]

Yes! Exactly. Now we're on the same page.

OK. Then I would have to say that although it seems like a better scenario at first, there are still some problems, some of which are the same as in other posts and even more problematic. For example, if they evolved here, then UFOs had to be built here originally, so how do we explain UFOs in history prior to the development of modern mining, refining and manufacturing facilities? Are we to believe that UFO technology could be built using blacksmith's forges and basic iron alloys ... like some kind of steam punk scenario ( fun but unrealistic ). And if they didn't evolve out of that era, then they must be an even more ancient civilization, which again begs the question, where did all the infrastructure go? Stone monuments aren't sufficient enough to explain them. There should be archaeological evidence of sophisticated large scale mining, refining, manufacturing and the societal structure to support it. Where is it? There isn't any. So we might presume that perhaps they were even older than Atlantis ... some pre-human species that evolved ahead of us so long ago that the remnants of their civilization are completely erased. So then where are the fossil records? Again there aren't any. Any anomalies, if they can be believed are more suggestive of a visitation ... perhaps a lost expedition from another world that left only shreds of tantalizing tidbits in the form of the rare anomaly, myth or legend.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

The reason saucers would not be used and expensive human-tech planes would continue to be used is the same reason the UFO topic is still so secret.

If for a war, a country showed they had anti-grav etc or zero-point energy extraction then the whole petrochemical financial system would become relatively worthless overnight as everyone realises we don't need to rely on petroleum the same way. The billions spent on stealth planes is but a drop in the ocean to the money to be lost if the whole world get's their hands on cheaper energy and travel.

It's all about power and money and really the 'elite' could care less if using a stealth fighter results in the loss of more American servicemen, rather than using a saucer.

There is virtually no reason good enough to reveal tech that would collapse the western financial system, short of inter-plantetary war. It is that simple for me, it makes sense in every single way I can look at it. (tho I don't claim to be able to see all sides)

I still don't buy it. There are just as many reasons that a working knowledge of UFO technology would open up entire new possibilities for economic growth and prosperity. Look at all the benefits we're still enjoying because of the space race back in the 1960s. This kind of technology would be no less significant. Plus it still doesn't explain the presence of UFOs prior to us having any aircraft at all, or why they wouldn't have used them in WW-I and WW-II. If some breakaway civilization is responsible, it seems to me that Chris O'Brien's mention of the possibility of some antediluvian culture that has since had all traces washed away by the forces of nature makes more sense. But I don't even see how that is possible without them being something that came along before humans evolved, which doesn't really make them a "breakaway civilization" in the sense we're discussing here. Plus they'd have to have made a concerted effort to clean up any evidence of their existence including their entire evolution including fossil records. That's all too much to ask and still have it be reasonable to believe.

Hi. Think you are missing my point. Absolutely this UFO 'tech' could open up replacement and new opportunities after making petroleum redundant.
But if that happens its likely there will end up being more equality, i.e those in power and wealth would no longer be in charge the same, having the same stranglehold. These types of people dont want new equal shiny opportunities for all - then they can't be in charge and exploit the rest of us.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

The reason saucers would not be used and expensive human-tech planes would continue to be used is the same reason the UFO topic is still so secret.

If for a war, a country showed they had anti-grav etc or zero-point energy extraction then the whole petrochemical financial system would become relatively worthless overnight as everyone realises we don't need to rely on petroleum the same way. The billions spent on stealth planes is but a drop in the ocean to the money to be lost if the whole world get's their hands on cheaper energy and travel.

It's all about power and money and really the 'elite' could care less if using a stealth fighter results in the loss of more American servicemen, rather than using a saucer.

There is virtually no reason good enough to reveal tech that would collapse the western financial system, short of inter-plantetary war. It is that simple for me, it makes sense in every single way I can look at it. (tho I don't claim to be able to see all sides)

I still don't buy it. There are just as many reasons that a working knowledge of UFO technology would open up entire new possibilities for economic growth and prosperity. Look at all the benefits we're still enjoying because of the space race back in the 1960s. This kind of technology would be no less significant. Plus it still doesn't explain the presence of UFOs prior to us having any aircraft at all, or why they wouldn't have used them in WW-I and WW-II. If some breakaway civilization is responsible, it seems to me that Chris O'Brien's mention of the possibility of some antediluvian culture that has since had all traces washed away by the forces of nature makes more sense. But I don't even see how that is possible without them being something that came along before humans evolved, which doesn't really make them a "breakaway civilization" in the sense we're discussing here. Plus they'd have to have made a concerted effort to clean up any evidence of their existence including their entire evolution including fossil records. That's all too much to ask and still have it be reasonable to believe.

Hi. Think you are missing my point. Absolutely this UFO 'tech' could open up replacement and new opportunities after making petroleum redundant.
But if that happens its likely there will end up being more equality, i.e those in power and wealth would no longer be in charge the same, having the same stranglehold. These types of people dont want new equal shiny opportunities for all - then they can't be in charge and exploit the rest of us. And make no mistake - it's always the maximum wealth directs the maximum population. The pyramid shape of having the most powerful and rich at the top could not exist the same if almost anyone could generate power and transport as effortlessly as the saucer pilots seem to do.

 

[exo_doc]

OK. Then I would have to say that although it seems like a better scenario at first, there are still some problems, some of which are the same as in other posts and even more problematic. For example, if they evolved here, then UFOs had to be built here originally, so how do we explain UFOs in history prior to the development of modern mining, refining and manufacturing facilities? Are we to believe that UFO technology could be built using blacksmith's forges and basic iron alloys ... like some kind of steam punk scenario ( fun but unrealistic ). And if they didn't evolve out of that era, then they must be an even more ancient civilization, which again begs the question, where did all the infrastructure go? Stone monuments aren't sufficient enough to explain them. There should be archaeological evidence of sophisticated large scale mining, refining, manufacturing and the societal structure to support it. Where is it? There isn't any. So we might presume that perhaps they were even older than Atlantis ... some pre-human species that evolved ahead of us so long ago that the remnants of their civilization are completely erased. So then where are the fossil records? Again there aren't any. Any anomalies, if they can be believed are more suggestive of a visitation ... perhaps a lost expedition from another world that left only shreds of tantalizing tidbits in the form of the rare anomaly, myth or legend.

I meant human exploration beginning somewhere around the late 40's early 50's....possibly. They could have started off with smaller vehicles that could build mining operation rigs of some sort, and plants to process(?), R&D and production craft/bases. I'm sure foods and other manufactured equipment came from Earth to start with
I'm not talking about this happening over night. But if the technology was there, I would say someone would be unscrupulous enough to use it secretly, and do whatever it would take to keep it secret.

All pure speculation of course. But I have a non-scientific hunch there is something to this. Wishful thinking? Eh...

 

[exo_doc]

............................

Hi. Think you are missing my point. Absolutely this UFO 'tech' could open up replacement and new opportunities after making petroleum redundant.
But if that happens its likely there will end up being more equality, i.e those in power and wealth would no longer be in charge the same, having the same stranglehold. These types of people dont want new equal shiny opportunities for all - then they can't be in charge and exploit the rest of us. And make no mistake - it's always the maximum wealth directs the maximum population. The pyramid shape of having the most powerful and rich at the top could not exist the same if almost anyone could generate power and transport as effortlessly as the saucer pilots seem to do.

And THAT is exactly how the world works.
Enslaved dependance on those with the power. And they want to keep it that way, ...by any means,...no matter who suffers or dies.
That much of this thread is most assuredly true.

 

[mike]

When we talk about replacing the petroleum based economy with antigrav technology, The ramifications go really really deep.

People who lose their jobs.

oil extraction workers
Crude transport workers, ships etc
Refinery workers
Refined product transporters
Service station owners/operators/employees
Car manufacturers
Tyre makers and distributors
Spare parts manufacturers
Road builders
Road repairers
road transport companys and truck manufacturers
Airplane manufacturers
Pilots
Spare parts for planes.

The list goes on and on

Im reminded of the planned redundancy issue. Back in the day grandma bought a fridge the thing would run for 20 years, some people still have one in the garage chilling beer etc
But the manufacturers noticed that once they sold a unit to everyone, sales dropped off.
So they built redundancy into whitegoods, made sure they failed at a certain point.
(Its typically the day after the warranty wears off in my experience )

Current transport technology involves lots of friction, things wear out and have to be replaced /repaired.

Engines/brakes/gearbox's/tyres/roads, even the fuel is a consumable.

Replace this with antigrav which i posit will be by its nature far more durable in its design and operation, and you destroy the livelihood of billions.

The average person owns at least 5 cars in a lifetime, along with all the consumables that go with them.
Replacing that with a technology designed to traverse interstellar space, and you will only ever need one, and it will likely outlast you.

A vehicle that can take you anywhere on the planet will destroy the airline industry, both civilian and military
Thats not just vehicle manufacturers, its pilots, crew, baggage handlers, refuelers, maintenance,cleaners, tower control, ticket sales, airport kiosks ....... the list goes on and for each of these employees other business hangs off, the dry cleaners who press the uniforms, the taxi drivers out front. in flight catering firms........

There is simply no way this technology could replace those jobs.

Some industrys would adapt, like transport of goods, others like traffic light manufacturers would never recover.

But the net loss of jobs would be far greater than any created by the manufacturing /sales of such vehicles.

And i havent even started with the military implications of such technology in the hands of the masses.

Border control and immigration ? you may as well sack any one employed in this field, thats a lost cause with this type of transport

It may seem a small stone at first glance, but explore its impact and you will find some very very large ripples in the pond

 

[exo_doc]

Wow Mike!!! That's getting to the bone! I've known what you wrote but for some reason I just couldn't organize coherently into a decent argument. That's a very powerful argument for technology suppression.