I've always wondered why whoever is responsible for the UFO/UAP phenomena would allow a crashed material and personnel to be captured. If something of ours crashes, particularly if it has technology we want to keep out of someones hands we try our best to recover it. We certainly don't leave personnel or bodies behind if at all possible and we mount extensive search and rescue operations to recover them.
I'm not saying UFO crashes haven't happened, I simply don't know, I'm just saying it doesn't make a lot of sense to me that they wouldn't try to locate and recover lost craft and occupants. If they locate and disarm nuclear missiles within the most heavily guarded installations on earth it seems unlikely that they would have any difficulty tracking down something of their own manufacture and recovering it no matter where we cart it off to.
QUOTE=trainedobserver;91779]
One speculation is that
they (whoever that is) drop these things around so we will find them. Why they would do such a thing is beyond me.[/QUOTE]
You can thought experiment this in a couple of other ways as well.
1) what you've said makes sense from a military point of view. However, what about from an academicians point of view. Meaning that instead of seeing the military arm of the occupants we are seeing the scientist/researcher crowd. In that case, they may not be as efficient in retrieval and rescue. Most scientific research missions conducted by humans involve very smart people ridiculously inadequately prepared for emergencies, survival, and security. If the technology is sufficiently advanced, then this would make even more sense. Just as modern technology gives us a sense of saftey and security, though just as often it is a false sense, so too could these occupants rely on their technology as that safety rope. It could be as simple as: Scientists decide to go and collect data => the technology fails => a distress call is made => someone hears it and renders aid => only time or equipment to evac the occupants => Humans show up and collect the pieces.
I think that it is inevitable for technology to fail. From my experience, this failure is typically at the most inopportune time with the worst imaginable circumstances blanketed by an oppressive sense of doom. Thus, if we can assume that Murphy's Law is universally consistent then we can assume that this has happened.
Now the prospect of one day dealing with the military arm should frighten the hell out of ya. Think Green Peace versus the 5th fleet, no holds barred. Or overweight paintballers versus Delta Force in conquest mode. It's a little frightening to consider really.
2) Now think of this with a strategic mindset. I fly my fancy UFO around and get the indigenous folks to chase me. I can gauge the current state of the tech pretty good from these exchanges. I can hover their military bases and inspect their greatest weapons. I can fly over their population centers and watch the reactions that gives me. I can see that they have managed to build a bunch of stuff and, though technologically they are eons behind me I can see that they are smart, adaptive, creative, and are able to learn. But what I dont know is how adaptive, cleaver, and creative are they. how fast can they learn. Hmm, lets give them a very old piece of technology and see what they do with it. How fast and in what ways do they incorporate it into their lives and culture.
I am smarter than a chimp (at least in theory
). Especially so when I bring that chimp to my environment. But, in its environment, I am at a supreme disadvantage. It belongs there. The more I learn about the chimp (his behavior, the environment, habits, physiology, psychology, etc) the better I am able to utilize my full intellect and technological prowess to accomplish whatever it is I am there to accomplish.
I've said it before and I still mean it. I would much rather be the feared beasts than the kept lab rat.
"Pass me that Strawberry ice cream will ya and turn up the Tibetan drum music!"
LOL, You gotta love the mythology!
