Michio Kaku vs SETI: ET communication

[Trajanus]

I agree wholeheartedly with that. As someone who has been looking into the subject since the sixties I have come to realize that I need to take a step back and really look at the assumptions about what I generally accept as "knowledge" about the subject. The fact of the matter is we know little or nothing of real consequence.

Maybe not as a fact but....

The conduit of information has long been controlled and used by military intelligence toward their own ends which have little or nothing to do with anything unidentified to them.

With regard to crash retrieval accounts, besides many others, much is from civilian testimony.

 

[Ron Collins]

I have little doubt that the military/private interests/intelligence agencies have injected false information or engaged in other disinformation campaigns using the UFO stuff as a tool. Its a good multipurpose tool. But, it is no more an all encompassing truth behind the phenomenon as the ETH, IDH, or whatever. It is simply a different facet to the phenomenon.

I believe this because we do not see rapid(or in this case any) proliferation or privatization of product characteristics. The military can not build things by themselves. By charter they have to use private industry. Plus, they do not have the resources to employ the talent. setup the labs, setup the manufacturing, and keep it all under wraps. Too much paperwork is generated. Too many facilities are involved. Too much raw material we have to be delivered. To many staffing issues. The mundane day to day operative duties would paint a picture or manufacturing and engineering. That picture points to private industry. There is no way around that for a government entity. They are the users of the tool not the tool makers.

But private industry is different. They are largely exempt from FOIA . A spread out physical infrastructure allows for easier compartmentalization of data, broader access to talent as well as other aspects. But there are key points that show this is also not the holy Grail answer. Namely, McDonalds. Yeah, McDonalds. The government contract is for X billion dollars for a set amount of time. Bringing a technology to proliferation thought the consumer base of the world is how they make their money. you can sell a $7 dollar burger. I have bought more than my fair share. But McDonalds taught the world that Volume is the key to fiscal success. Proliferating a technology or using proliferated aspects of the breakthrough has been a proven method for making money. Keeping advanced and amazing technology secret and otherwise bottled up is akin to leaving money on the floor. Corporations are beholden to stockholders and are judged by profit and share price. Leaving the potential for vast wealth to only the odd developmental process is not how companies work. They accept development projects so that they can incorporate breakthrough technologies(or at least in a dialed down performance version) in non-secret applications. in short they want to proliferate the tech to drive sales. Otherwise the ROI and monetary risk assessment would be too skewed for interest.

Even aside from these you still have the problem of ever increasing performance (in steps not giant leaps) for obvious human engineered and construction while the obersvable tech f the UFO has stayed characteristically the same for at least 60+years. There is no way a government or private company would hide tech for 60+years. Though, that is exactly what some are suggesting. I for one believe that there are physical craft with technology far greater than is possessed by us. Thus, there is at least something else involved here.

 

[trainedobserver]

With regard to crash retrieval accounts, besides many others, much is from civilian testimony.

Would civilians or uninitiated military personnel necessarily recognize a nuclear warhead or other highly secret military payload or vehicle retrieval from the theater presented in those situations?

 

[Ron Collins]

Would civilians or uninitiated military personnel necessarily recognize a nuclear warhead or other highly secret military payload or vehicle retrieval from the theater presented in those situations?

If it is military then I think it would have markings that would be recognizable. Either words or clear generally accepted symbology.

 

[ALPHA ROMEO UNIFORM]

If it is military then I think it would have markings that would be recognizable. Either words or clear generally accepted symbology.

Ron, not always and certain groups within the military don't have to follow regular regimental codes during hot-spot activity read Mr Andrei Gromyko book 'Memories' 1989 regarding Cuba Crisis Soviet transport aircraft with no markings when moving special forces to certain locations.

 

[Trajanus]

Would civilians or uninitiated military personnel necessarily recognize a nuclear warhead or other highly secret military payload or vehicle retrieval from the theater presented in those situations?

Even if they didn't, researchers could learn the truth, especially in old cases where all the gear was long ago declassified.