It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


How advanced are we, really? My opinions

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 12 2005 @ 02:54 PM
Seriously now,

I have been browsing the internet and watching all these documentaries floating around on T.V. and I have heard "facts" and "speculations" from all ends of the technological spectrum and I don't know what to think. I would like to believe that we have anti gravity propulsion enabling mankind to travel to distant planets, but it just seems far fetched. I want to think that since the advent of the first moon landing, we have advanced as far as using alternate propulsion other than the solid rocket boosters and fossil fuel based travel. I see on the news nearly every week, all the tests being conducted on "ram jets" or scram jets or the next big idea, which doesn't touch what speculative technologies we supposedly posess. I can't understand the fact that billions of dollars are being poured into research and the current space program if we already have advanced space travel vehicles. Why spend billions on reaching mach 15 if anti gravity can travel infinitly faster? I know that the military needs to keep experimental combat aircraft under wraps but why the crafts that are used for exploration? Let's seriously consider the fact that perhaps we are just stuck in a routine of monotony that leaves us glued to a single form of travel for the next 50 or so years. Let us also look forward to the "solar sails" and "inflatable astronaut quarters" of the future, but let us still hold hope to the belief that we may just already be landing on extremely foreign planets.

Cheers Lads!


posted on Feb, 12 2005 @ 03:26 PM
I think mankind is way behind all the other beings throughout the universe. We ooh and aaah in wonder at the UFOs that visit this planet, We are still trying to find out whats happening on the planet next to ours. Mostly man is trapped in his development by his understanding of what can be, we have set parameters of what is possible and what can exist, if we looked inside ourselves we are more likely to find a great vehicle of travel.

posted on Feb, 12 2005 @ 03:35 PM
I agree totally with your statement sugarlump. The fact is, that these limitations we have, come from within ourselves. We do indeed set certain guidlines and parameters for physics and other sciences that we believe cannot be altered or broken. Some theories that may be in current practice by other lifeforms can seem impossible to humankind with the physical restrictions we have in place. Nevertheless, some of the theories I have read seem to explain how a craft could work, but are deemed impossible. There are too many swiss cheese explanations and theories also that are taken as fact but cannot be properly explained. I know the above is quite vague in the explanations, but I am just generalizing as to the overall theories and current practices as a whole. I suppose I am just eager to see an advancement beyond the everyday within my lifetime.

posted on Feb, 12 2005 @ 04:21 PM
What doesn't help is that the big companies that fund everything around us are looking more for the here and now rather than the future.. At the end of the day their #1 priority is usually money.
If this wasn't the case we would be using more alternative fuels.

Basically, spending billions on developing technologies to travel to the stars doesn't make a lot of money at the moment. I would not be suprised if that all changed when fossil fuels and such like get drstically low and the resources on the planet become stretched.. Then we might see some changes..

[edit on 12-2-2005 by AgentSmith]

posted on Feb, 12 2005 @ 05:46 PM
The fact is that the millitary wants nasa to build their hypersonic bomber and mini kill vehicles with nano pulse detonation engines first before a rescue mission or money for Hubble etc. is considered.

As for the advanced propulsion concept, i see a great future for plasmabeam and particlebeam propulsion, becuase these remote energybeams can double as anti-missile weapons and therefor will likely get much more pushed by the pentagon on the nasa agenda than some green and lightweight solarsail.

Beamed energy rocks tough, so something good may come out of all this millitary spaceracing, if we can keep the peace

[edit on 12-2-2005 by Countermeasures]

posted on Feb, 12 2005 @ 06:25 PM
This seems like a good thread. What would we compare our advancment to? If we go back 200 yrs. we can see Eli Whitney and the cotten gin and turn it up another 100yrs or so and we have the internal cumbustion engine. Where do we see ourselves in the next 50yrs.? I read that now, we are outstripping our own advancements every 18 months. I am curious though.

posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 04:40 AM
I understand where you are all coming from, and you all make valid points. Everything is indeed about money, especially in america. I am British but I have grown up in the U.S., living there from age 9-21 but I know live back in England. I have experienced a lot there, and I have come to understand that money is the driving force for desicion making. But that is why America is the richest country in the world, i can however, see how they would jeapordize their ethics just to make the extra buck, like Enron maybe!

I also like the idea of pulse detonation engines, I have read up on the topic and seen countless programmes on it, especially one recently on Sci Fi (Yes, we have sci fi in britain) it was about the future of space exploration and space tourism and I found it quite intriguing and exciting. Then we have people like Bob lazaar popping into the show, talking about what we already have and its just another confusing mess of possibilties.
It is like a scientist unveils a nice new 64 bit processing P.C. which cost billions to develop and then another says he has been working on a 400 bit processor in a secret lab for the past 15 years and yet we are stuck with the 64 bit for the next half century, just waiting for the arrival of the next big thing. That is the simplest analogy I can come up with, I suppose eagerness is a human trait that just wont be denied.

I hope once again, that I can see a change in travel in my lifetime though, I especially want a plane that can get to the U.S. in less than seven hours because that journey is a bugger.

[edit on 13-2-2005 by DARKJEDIG]

[edit on 13-2-2005 by DARKJEDIG]

[edit on 13-2-2005 by DARKJEDIG]

posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 05:14 AM
well of all the life we know we are pretty #ing advanced, though I wish our modern society wasn't so reliant on fossil fuels and I wish we would move faster towards changing from a hydrocarbon based society to a hydrogen (vehicles and fusion)/hydrocarbon (petrochemicals and plastics) one.



posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 08:27 AM
And I wouldn't rate mankind even that high because of so many still existing problems.

So there's long way to go... (even getting half of the world's people to think would be good interim goal, or more exactly half of "civilized" western world)

How Advanced Civilization Could Be?

Originally posted by DARKJEDIG
But that is why America is the richest country in the world, i can however, see how they would jeapordize their ethics just to make the extra buck, like Enron maybe!
Capitalism doesn't know such things as ethic or human rights...
An analysis of long-term trends shows the distance between the richest and poorest countries was about:
3 to 1 in 1820
11 to 1 in 1913
35 to 1 in 1950
44 to 1 in 1973
72 to 1 in 1992 11

The U.S. itself also has the largest gap and inequality between rich and poor compared to all the other industrialized nations. For example, the top 1% receive more money than the bottom 40% and the gap is the widest in 70 years. Furthermore, in the last 20 years while the share of income going to the top 1% has increased, it has decreased for the poorest 40%.

[edit on 13-2-2005 by E_T]

posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 08:42 AM
First off, I again am seeing all of you show off your incredible iferiority complex. Humans have terrible self esteem and the responses to this thread make it clear yet again.

You are all so incredibly narrow minded that it is fascinating to me. Tell me, where is it that you last saw an advanced race? Who here has irrefuteable evidence that we are "behind"? None of you. The fact is that we all come from the same beginning of the universe, and though it is likely that intelligence exists elsewhere in the universe, who is to say that it is "advanced"? And by what scale are you judging this? Intelligence would have to be somewhat relative if you ever thought about it on your own without reading some guys "scale" or listening to someone elses opinion and blindly agreeing.

We have no idea what types of life exist in the humongous universe, nor can we say it would necessarily be smarter than us. We have just as much chance of being the most advanced race in the universe as we do of being the least advanced.

People talk about how we are so violent, and that is an indication of our inferiority. Violent as compared to what? Have you talked to some alien race and did they tell you we are more violent then they are?

There is so many things wrong with thinking like this. The trick to maintaining a rational thought process is always keeping in mind things that are fact, and things that are speculation.

posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 09:47 AM

Originally posted by E_T

Darn, you beat me to it. Theres more about it in this thread:

posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 02:15 PM
If current rates do not prevail further than the preset button you have in the cavity upstairs, there is only one alternative option for you tailess monkeys: Invent your own damn rockets!

posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 02:31 PM
Currently the US military is about 22.5 years ahead of the civilians in technology. There really isn't much of a differance.

But the leaps in technology usually come from wars or accident.

I honestly wish the Governement would invest .. i mean subsidize the space program and start colonizing the moon, or working on a way to mine the asteroid, kuiper belt, or Oort clouds. Too bad people wanted to use space to futher military power or the whole world could be working on colonziation of the solar system

posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 02:57 PM
We are a very a primitive society in this universe on all levels, technology, spirituality and society. That is not difficult to prove, considering the constant blood shed and war and the poisonous levels of corruption, ignorance, hatred and greed in this society.

As for how advanced the government is relative to the public. Phill Schneider put it at 40 years per every public year.

posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 04:49 PM
That scale was fascinating E_T, thanks. I don't agree with your statement however, (Seapeople) since my original thread was not about comparing ourselves to other civilizations advanced or not. My thread was about OUR advancements in propulsion and space exploration and I personally have not mentioned other lifeforms and their craft, I have only discussed where we are as humankind. Please do not put all of the statements and replies into the generalization that we are comparing ourselves to other civilizations. The topic is "how advanced are we, really? my opinions, meaning WE not They. On another note, has anyone seen the craft proposed by NASA that skims and hops on the upper atmosphere to reach its destination? I saw this on the news a while ago and thought it was worth mentioning.

Go Man U

posted on Feb, 13 2005 @ 08:09 PM
Like I stated in that older thread I posted, we need to get to Type I before we die out.

posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 09:29 AM
You could also think of it this way. They say they are spending billions on scram/ram jets but really are using the funding to work on somthing much more radical. Think about it they used to spend 50k on a hammer then there trick was figured out what better way to get funding then to say the funding is going to something else. I mean really there Little toy scram jet they spent millions if not billions on it. Give me a brake Get me some heat resistant ceramics and use VCD diamond on that and get me some carbonfiber and some diamond coated titanium for the scram. With that and a 49.59 model airplain controler and a rocket moter there you go. I'm sure its infently more compicated then that but give me a brake.

Really though how do we know that the money is being spent on what they say they are spending it on? Think about how much tech has gone down in price. Now why does everthing cost millions if not billions? really with computers cadd programs and automated CC machines. Have you ever seen how they make carbonfiber aircraft its like a big printer.

posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 11:45 AM
You have to realize that 'we' are definately privy to our advances. Just remember that the Stelth Bomber was created in the early-mid seventies (first service in 1990) so was the M1-A1 tank, created late seventies, first real action 1990. Supposedly the technology which is released to the public is actually 20 yrs old compared to the government. Just think, the US just recently got the HDTV technology..........Japan had it in 1981........

new topics

top topics


log in