Suppression of technology?, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times
Topic started on 8-8-2005 @ 01:56 AM by keybored
A number of things become evident to me when I consider the possibility of a no need for oil society. Take this as hypothetical since nothing (?) points to the contrary.
Aside (for the moment) from the megabucks and the monopoly the elite few have as hold over us, if we had a major discovery that breaks through all the known barriers of science and current technology, would a government allow it to come to fruition?

I ask this since I am of the opinion that advanced technology could exist and yet would be suppressed under various dogma's,... first and foremost of these would be National Security, followed by greed, power, keeping the balance of haves/have nots etc.

By way of explanation let me give you an example of what the political/social repercussions would be if we discovered free energy via a perpetual motion device. Science says it can't be done (... and we all still seek it) however, for the sake of argument here lets say it can.

Politically, a government needs to control it's people and its borders for security purposes. A perpetual motion device would develop into levitation with no need for fuel. Without a need to stop for fuel and not being limited to ground travel, how could you keep a border when everyone would be free to travel ...where-ever?
A NWO might have this vision in mind by controlling the entire world... Demonstrating the viability of a device to foreign nations would get them to go along with the NWO since it would be the way of the future and how could you defend against anyone who can come and go as they pleased?

It would also herald a one world economy with us all playing the same field with the same currency. Aside from the numerous means that could be employed to achieve this end lets just take it as a given, that we all use the same "world dollar" and that those who had dollars to begin with would naturally hold more than a sizeable share in the NWO to come. This alone is a reason to get as much as they can now while they still had that edge. (oil)

The benefits of a one world order would eliminate wars, and the trillions militarily spent world-wide by various governments could be put to better use like advancing our technological database on more than a weapons first basis. This would be a sociological plus but could also be a minus if you consider that the world goes through major war (by design or circumstance is a good question) every so often to thin out our over-population that minimal (and dwindling) resources can't take care of.

Levitation would lead to inter-stellar travel and we could reach beyond our present day limitations for expanding our explorations on a cosmic scale.

And yet, would a NWO be willing to give up that hold over the masses? Would we as a race be accepted by ET's lets say when we can't even get along with each other? Would a foreign power even be willing to give up their hold on their own people?

In view of the above hypotheticals, would a new technology even be allowed to come into being, or would all governments seek to suppress it no matter the cost in terms of global harming?
Does a government, any government care about "ordinary" people? Would there be pre-requisites for existence such as IQ, productivity, compassion towards others? (to name a few)
How would you decide? I'm not asking for a debate on free energy/perpetual motion/levitation, I'm just curious as to who can solve this type of problem... or adapt to it. ... and what if its not hypothetical?


reply posted on 8-8-2005 @ 02:28 AM by craig732
You are definitely correct about new technology being suppressed. In 1990, a 12.5 megahertz computer was just being introduced by AT&T www.att.com... That same year, Art Bell had a guest on his radio program who used to work for AT&T and also Lucent Technologies. He said that at that time, AT&T had computers up and running that operated at 1000 megahertz. Even Art Bell was incredulous to this statement. The guest stated that AT&T would not release the technology yet though, because it stood to make more money if it were released a little at a time.

[edit on 8-8-2005 by craig732]

ed to fix link

[edit on 8-8-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]


reply posted on 8-8-2005 @ 09:03 AM by keybored
Thanks for your input guys. The irony here is that everyone searches for that "Holy Grail" of science and yet once found it would probably lead to Armageddon. If one government found it the others would try to prevent R&D to keep the status quo, if all governments had it, there would be opposition since not every government has the resources to develop it as quickly. Lose/Lose ... is there a win/win? I don't think there is in our society.

Enter the NWO and we are all under the same government but as I earlier stated, who gets to remain when it becomes a logistical problem?

The planet-ruling one government would no doubt make this transition to power through war since its doubtful all governments would accept any other rule so there would be time before it became a problem... and yet this "culling" of human life has been going on ever since our numbers started to impair our ability to sustain. Is war a necessary evil, or if man was ready to move on a stellar scale would we all pull towards that same goal?
It would still require resources but like a bio-dome, we could build craft that were self replenishing. I haven't followed the bio-dome projects very closely other than knowing their goals but I hadn't heard if they even worked over an extended period of time.

I guess you could call me a futurist in that I look to the future to solve the problems of today. Problem is, can we overcome our past/present? Without divine intervention I have my doubts. It's all about money, not life. Kind of sad to think we spend more and more to take more and more...
a conspiracy against mankind?

just another sign of the times.


reply posted on 8-8-2005 @ 02:11 PM by alphabetaone
Keybored,

Good afternoon...some technologies yes, undoubtedly, are being suppressed..
technologies such as Cold Fusion were masked for many years.
This happens to be a prime example due to the implications of the existence
of this technology. The implications to the oil and power industries is mind crippling.

However one thing I would like to point out is that, there are times, when stifling
a technology (whether by choice or ignorance) can be a good thing. As an example I would
like to use an exerpt from the Defense Tech Web site on the DARPA Program called Real-World Reasoning

DARPA WANTS YOUR LIFE INDEXABLE AND SEARCHABLE
It's a memory aid! A robotic assistant! An epidemic detector! An all-seeing, ultra-intrusive spying program!

The Pentagon is about to embark on a stunningly ambitious research project designed to gather every conceivable bit of information about a person's life, index it and make it searchable.

What national security experts and civil libertarians want to know is, why the hell would the Defense Department want to do such a thing?

The embryonic LifeLog program would take every e-mail you've sent or received, every picture you've taken, every web page you've surfed, every phone call you've had, every TV show you've watched, every magazine you've read, and dump it into a giant database.

All of this -- and more -- would be combined with a GPS transmitter, to keep tabs on where you're going; audio-visual sensors, to capture all that you see or say; and biomedical monitors, to keep track of your health.

This gigantic amalgamation of personal information could then be used to "trace the 'threads' of an individual's life," to see exactly how a relationship or events developed, according to a briefing from the Defense Advanced Projects Research Agency, LifeLog's sponsor.


If anyone wishes to read the rest of the article it can be found here
www.defensetech.org...


Of greatest concern to me is what they call their LifeLog program and the already in place
TIA (Total Information Awareness now renamed to Terrorist Information Awareness) program.

If THIS type of technology were to come to fruition I'd say we should go back to stone wheels.
I dont believe we need newer or cleaner technology to bring us to Armageddon
our basic nature will do that for us. Instead perhaps a reversal is in order to "level the field"
with respect to technology.


reply posted on 30-8-2005 @ 09:34 AM by enslaved83
Ive often thought about technological suppression and ways to get around it. In the end I figured the following and came to my conclusion that this would be the only thing I could do.

Lets say I invented a form of Fusion allowing for high energy yeilds at low temeratures using common household items. (Cold fusion if you like).

Know knowing that my idea is very likely to be suppressed i.e. by the oil moguls, governemnt, I would do the following. During the development it would be very very important to keep the idea to myself/close friends. Upon completion of my idea I would do the following. Launch a blanket attack through as many communication channels as possible concurrently and overwealm any censorship attemps through sheer weight in numbers. I would flood conspiracy forums with my idea, universities, newpapers, embasies of foreign countries such as China (free energy, they will sit up and listen) scientific journals, local newspapers. I would handout flyers in the street. I would send the technology to big companies, car companies and additionaly I wouldn't patent it. If I wanted my invention to change the world, it would be unlikely that I could to it for my own gain. I would also try and figure out several ways to produce the reactions meaning that if one method is patented I would realease another. (Heck if Im bright enough to figure out cold fusion I can sure as hell figure out several methods of doing it!)

Truth be told Im not too sure about the whole technological suppression thing. Its very hard to do. Also alternatives already exist which have not been surpressed. In Brazil for example their cars are fueled by sugar cane and alchohol produced from it. Why don't we do that in the UK? Well a new energy distribution infastructure would be massivly difficult to implement. Engines would need to be modified and we would also have to grow large ammounts of sugar cane. Bio Diesel would also work in the UK but there is another reason that hasn't been done. 1stly its the whole infrastructure thing followed closely by the fact that it wouldn't sell because the Governemnt would levvy the same massive tax rates on Bio Diesal as it does for fossil fuels meaning that there would be no incentive to switch as the prices of petrol and bio fules would essentially be the same for Mr Joe Average. (Shows that the Government is full of BS when it comes to the environment) It is in this country a case of economics (Im speaking about the UK in case anyone is wondering). If your interested in alternative energy look up bio diesel. Its so easy to produce it defies belief!
Pages: <<  1    2  >>    ^^TOP^^



DEA is Investigating Montana State Legislators Over State Laws
  Posted 11 days ago with 59 member flags
The CIA in Australia: America\'s Foreign Watergate
  Posted 1 days ago with 17 member flags
Who is really behind the birthers and what is their real motive?
  Posted 10 days ago with 11 member flags
ESF and Black op funding.
  Posted 9 days ago with 11 member flags
There is NO Media Bias in America
  Posted 9 days ago with 10 member flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Anonymous show your face!
  Rant, Posted 16 hours ago, 69 replies
Official Maine Caucus Results Thread!!
  2012 US Elections, Posted 6 hours ago, 63 replies