Conspiracies and ufo's and other strange things

I don't believe that any government know the full extent of whatever is happening. That's the key problem. The government may have knowledge of, but not control of whatever is behind the phenomenon. Admitting that, is more problematic that the actual truth as it suggest vulnerability in the government and weakness is something most states are loath to admit as it undermines authority.
I kind of agree with that but post Wiki-leaks and Snowdon it makes you wonder whether whitsleblowers would be that inhibited from revealing any UFO secrets if they existed; especially if you consider how they didn't stop from revealing things like the private thoughts of diplomats about world leaders etc.
 
That is rubbish. I know psychics are just cold readers and faith healers are simply placebo. That doesn't take away my curiosity or conviction that there is far more to the UFO phenomenon that those other examples. It's this lumping together of fringe and usually ridiculous and unrelated activities that thwarts serious investigation attempts.

I didn't mean you. I was on about the people on other forums that think everything is an conspiracy
 
I kind of agree with that but post Wiki-leaks and Snowdon it makes you wonder whether whitsleblowers would be that inhibited from revealing any UFO secrets if they existed; especially if you consider how they didn't stop from revealing things like the private thoughts of diplomats about world leaders etc.

But the Snowdon thing also enforces this view. Those NSA revelations were kept secret by thousands of people for decades. He was just a contractor with the same level of clearance as many many other people. Just because Snowdon went rogue, there are still thousands of people working in different government departments not telling the world what they know. Many secret programs and projects have been kept secret by many of people. Sure people are people and people talk. But people also like a regular pay cheque, have responsibilities, and like to stay off no fly lists.

Even when the news broke. Most media outlets kept the party line and obeyed the "voluntary" D Notices. Only the Guardian published. It wasn't on the front of the Sun telling the masses what to think about it. To most people, it never really happened or since the red tops didn't lose their sh*t over it, most people didn't think they should either and continued to worry about the next peado scandal. Projects like Operation Mockingbird also show the government has been involved in media control for a very long time.

So, yes, I don't think it implausible that a great number of people know far more than most people and the desire to conform should not be underestimated.
 
What's the hypothesis that states if there was other life in the Universe we'd be able to see evidence of it. A civilisation able to travel a fraction the speed of light would have easily populated our galaxy in a few million years, not a long time in galactic terms.
 
What's the hypothesis that states if there was other life in the Universe we'd be able to see evidence of it. A civilisation able to travel a fraction the speed of light would have easily populated our galaxy in a few million years, not a long time in galactic terms.

We still might. We still only scan a tiny tiny tiny part of the sky. The next 20 years will be telling.
 
But the Snowdon thing also enforces this view. Those NSA revelations were kept secret by thousands of people for decades.
But national security is a different matter where people are likely to keep secrets because they don't want to damage their country. You'd think almost everyone who works for an organisation like the NSA would be positively motivated to not cause harm to their country. Aliens visiting Earth, it's a little harder to convince a leak would damgae your country.
 
But national security is a different matter where people are likely to keep secrets because they don't want to damage their country. You'd think almost everyone who works for an organisation like the NSA would be positively motivated to not cause harm to their country. Aliens visiting Earth, it's a little harder to convince a leak would damgae your country.

Wouldn't that be the ultimate threat to national security? An outside agent that no state can control through force or diplomacy.
 
We still might. We still only scan a tiny tiny tiny part of the sky. The next 20 years will be telling.
Our galaxy is 100,000 light years across, a civilisation able to travel a tenth the speed of light would be able to travel the length of our galaxy in 10,000 years. Consider how much of our galaxy would have been colonised during a few million years.
 
Wouldn't that be the ultimate threat to national security? An outside agent that no state can control through force or diplomacy.
I don't know whether that would be compelling enough to prevent a leak. What might is this, Snowdon was able to flee and seek refuge with America's enemies, rivals call them what you might. You wouldn't be able to do that if you leaked UFO secrets.
 
I'll bite... Which secret programs? If they're still secret, how do you know about them? If you know about them, then they're not secret.
It's just 9/11 and the aliens that are still secret I suppose.

Phil
Things only stay secret while they need to be. The D-Day landings was secret. The Manhattan Project was secret. The SR-71 was secret. Bletchley Park was secret. Project Aquiline started in the 60s but we only heard about drones and UAVs in the last 10 years. Loads of stuff was classified and stayed secret.

That is ignoring all the really trippy CIA stuff that they messed around with like the Remote Viewing and LSD.
 
I'll bite... Which secret programs? If they're still secret, how do you know about them? If you know about them, then they're not secret.
It's just 9/11 and the aliens that are still secret I suppose.

Phil
The U2 spy plane was a secret which is remarkable since it was built by an outside contractor and the Pakistani Government gave permission to the US to have one based on their territory. No-one knew about it until the russians shot one down.
 
To anyone who thinks it's not possible to keep the mass population in the dark about things for decades that a few other people know about but remain tight lipped, there is just one name to give you: "Jimmie Savile"
 
To anyone who thinks it's not possible to keep the mass population in the dark about things for decades that a few other people know about but remain tight lipped, there is just one name to give you: "Jimmie Savile"
It's unlikely our government and military would have kept tight lipped about that together with every government on the planet.
 
It's a completely different and irrelevant situation and we will speak of it no more.
 
On the basis that in a court, they would be considered reliable witnesses due to the position they held which gave them either access to pertinent information or specialist training and experience that made their personal eye witness accounts more trustworthy and less prone to misidentification than a lay person.
No, they wouldn't, because they didn't have such access. An astronaut, for example, no matter how well-trained or intelligent, is either a civilian (as were most of the Apollo crews), or a low-to-middle-ranking military officer. No way would a court consider them to be 'expert witnesses' in the fields of astrophysics, planetary science, xenobiology. And most if not all of the quotations cited are simply opinions, to which we're all entitled; but their opinions carry no especial weight.

Agreed that having intelligent high ranking military personnel/astronauts/politicians etc is no substitute for a saucer landing on the White House lawn with CNN HD live coverage but they have been privy to information within the US (and other nations) governmental systems that give them more credibility in their claims, as opposed to me or you...
Yes, but with a few exceptions they are not making claims. They are expressing opinions and without any cited evidence to back them up they cannot be assumed to carry any special credibility. It is notable that the three heads of state quoted all merely point out that they are setting up enquiries to find out more; nowhere is any hint given that they might know more than they are saying. And we don't hear anything of the results of those enquiries. Also, note that most of the quotations refer to a period of the 1940s and '50s where such ideas were new and credible to a wide range of the scientific community. This was the golden age of SF; Orson Welles; a vast increase of high-altitude aviation into uncharted regions where strange phenomena might be more common. The whole field of 'UFOs' struck a receptive nerve at the time.

Our galaxy is 100,000 light years across, a civilisation able to travel a tenth the speed of light would be able to travel the length of our galaxy in 10,000 years. Consider how much of our galaxy would have been colonised during a few million years.
True. But the practicalities are still immense. At the moment we are probably capable of building and launching a colony ship to the stars. But only one and that would bankrupt us even if we could find the collective will to do it. That's the biggest obstacle to the kind of expansion you envisage: simply deciding it's worthwhile and marshalling the resources. You could postulate new technologies but to be honest it's difficult to see how they could help unless we rewrote the laws of physics. To take an extreme example, for a galactic civilisation to be observable by us it would have to be no more than a few hundred light years away. How many solar systems must that civilisation have colonised first before reaching our neighbourhood, assuming it started across the galaxy?

I'm not ruling it out, by any means, but the probabilities don't seem good.
 
True. But the practicalities are still immense. At the moment we are probably capable of building and launching a colony ship to the stars. But only one and that would bankrupt us even if we could find the collective will to do it. That's the biggest obstacle to the kind of expansion you envisage: simply deciding it's worthwhile and marshalling the resources.
Considering how here on Earth, wealth is being more and more concentrated in fewer people hands, given a few million years, funding interstellar colonisation could be a multi-buzzilionaires pet project.
 
Thing is, it does not matter if the human race dies out anyway.

Everyone who is now dead have no concept of anything, and don't worry about it.
No one yet to be born cares if they are born or not. they don't exist and if they ever do or don't it doe snot matter.
The only people in the entire universe who are worried about this point are just a percentage of the humans alive now.
And we will all be dead within lets say 150 years TOPS!
 
Thing is, it does not matter if the human race dies out anyway.

Everyone who is now dead have no concept of anything, and don't worry about it.
No one yet to be born cares if they are born or not. they don't exist and if they ever do or don't it doe snot matter.
The only people in the entire universe who are worried about this point are just a percentage of the humans alive now.
And we will all be dead within lets say 150 years TOPS!


OMFG, I actually agree with you :)

Apart from the last sentence, did you mean the human race will be extinct in 150 years or everyone reading this thread or everyone currently alive will be dead by then? :)
 
Whoa screw that Dave put an 'F'' in OMG, he never (never) swears.....conspiracy?;)
 

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom