Definitive Back Engineered Alien Technology Research thread

I would just like to ask about this sentiment.

Mankind has advanced more in the past 50 years than he has in all of the previous centuries combined is this just by accident?

The growth in technology is explained by Moore's Law. Where we are now fits fine on the exponential growth curve of Moore's Law.

And further - why is the idea of increasing human innovation so.....alien as an acceptable concept?

If an individual has never worked with design engineers, or worked in R &D with companies like SRI or EGG, it would be easy to get worked up and believe we have alien technology...it can seem fantastic that people could believe what we have achieved in just 100 years....but the facts are that we have.

Nanotechnology has been in laboratories since the late 60's, its only now that it comes out into the marketplace...who knows what is being cooked up in Labs in the US or Europe or China today...we may know in 30-40 years what is being developed. But it is hard work and sometimes by accident that some of our major discoveries and technologies become realities.

I would also disagree that human development is a straight line, it is not. We have found analog computers that are thousands of years old, had we continued on the original path of scientific progress we would be traversing the stars today...we are not because wars and famines and natural disasters cut off development. We should remember the last 10,000 years have been very calm and without natural disasters that are recorded by geology....this alone has allowed the incubation of humanity to develop scientific discoveries and implement them into the world around us. One large meteor, one large volcano....and we are back in the stone age ( Again?)

The remaining aspect is the creation of computing power. At each step we can store and calculate rates that double every 18 months or less...so this is a huge resource that can be used to continue progress.

People are creative creatures to begin with, we are curious and want to learn more and improve on what we learned. This isnt alien technology, its just natural human curiousity.

reply to post by Hallberg Rassy


like the spy plane the usa had ???

...

dont put it past a goverment... or anyone..

bigger question than what you are asking tbh

It's entirely reasonable to suppose that mankind could have come up with all this stuff on its own.

The problem is that the history of the 20th century suggests that there are other influences. Richard M Dolen's monumental UFOs and the National Security State Vol. I (volume II out soon... goody!) is the first proper history of the subject and traces the unmistakable effect on the US government of the aftermath in particular of Roswell.

Likewise we have a lot of direct testimony, for example Colonel Corso. It was interesting to watch the debunkers swing into action when The Day After Roswell came out, and I myself at the time was wondering how and why it had come to be published. One of the difficulties with trying to sort wheat from chaff in this area is the inevitable disinformation that's pumped out. I noticed that, even though people were poring over that book desperate to find errors, they could only find one minor discrepancy that could easily be explained by the vagaries of human memory, which isn't, after all, perfect.

There was also the predictable cries that he was just doing something sensational for the money.

However, Colonel Corso wrote his memoir when he knew he was dying and while he does come across in the book as a bit of a blowhard this is hardly exceptional for someone working at the heart of the military-industrial complex. I see it as an attempt by someone with nothing to lose to set the record straight.

I also think that within the group of people who have full knowledge of the extent to which technology has outstripped what is in the public domain, there are factions who want the information released, and those who don't. This means that while the cover-up continues, it's not perfect.

One of the most cogent comments Dr. LaViolette makes is about his gradual realisation that for many, science is a religion. Yes, it's a dreadful old cliche but he had personal experience of this, for example in his work on pulsars. This is a classic example of the worst aspects of scientific conservatism.

When the first pulsar was discovered at Jodrell Bank in the sixties (and by a woman, too, though this is seldom mentioned), the signal was sufficiently odd to be labelled LGM-1, for "little green men". However, when the team decided to publish their findings, I think in Nature, if memory serves, they realised they'd have to come up with a possible "natural" explanation to get it published. They came up with the idea of a rotating, highly magnetised neutron star emitting beams of radiaton.

Since then, evidence has been piling up to discredit this idea but the old model has been jury-rigged past the point of usefulness simply to avoid the idea that there might be evidence of technologically advanced life in the universe.

For example, the old model does mean that all the pulsars we can see have their rotation conveniently pointed right towards us. Kind of a coincidence, and if it is a natural phenomenon, there should be billions more pulsars we can't see because we're not directly in their plane of rotation.

Various "millisecond pulsars" have been discovered. This should mean, acording to the orthodox model, that the surface of the stars is actually travelling close to the speed of light, which in turn implies all sorts of difficulties in terms of them simply holding together.

LaViolette also identifies a number of behaviours and attributes which further damage the standard model. Pulsars display regularities way beyond anything else found in nature.

For example, when you see a nice waveform illustrating a pulsar signal, this is known as the "time-averaged constant". No individual pulse is the same, no individual pulse looks like the TAC, yet that TAC is exactly the same no matter how many individual pulses one looks at, a thousand or a million.

Further, some pulsars switch between as many as three different TAC profiles, and seem to display a "grammar" of switching. So if you have profiles A, B and C, then, for example, a pulsar may switch from profile A to profile B but never from A to C, and go from B to A or C but never C to A...

Finding credible explanations for this behaviour becomes increasingly difficult and researchers tie themselves in knots trying to do so rather than consider the obvious alternative.

The history of science is full of examples of people who were attacked by their peers because they challenged the orthodoxy of the time. If you follow some of the links in this thread I started ages ago you'll find some cool links. It also links to another thread that died on the vine which again, has some arguments I think are relevant to this discussion, plus more evidence to show why James Randi should suffer extraordinary rendition, cruel and unusual punishments, and have his driving license revoked. Where does his money come from?

Another thing I find fascinating is that while I'm able to consider all sorts of ideas and make my mind up about them without getting too upset, some people seem to get really angry when you discuss them. All we can do is tell ourselves stories that explain what we see around us. That's all theories are: and while many people who consider themselves of a scientific bent would say they understand that any given theory is there simply to hold us over until a better one comes along, they get really aggressive with evidence that goes against their pet theory. Why get so angry?

I have some ideas, but for the moment I'm keeping my own counsel.

[edit on 10-1-2009 by rich23]

Did aliens affected our technology or did fear of aliens speed up development of new technology by military all over the world and in that new technology is available for public use after being declassify.

I missed the link to the stealth suit video before... awesome! Thanks for posting, I'll give it a star when I'm finished this.

Honestly, though... couldn't the insurgents get a better quality video?

Seriously though, it seems much more likely that the insurgents set the camera up to record the bomb exploding and then caught something truly weird.

It also suggests that they can't yet stealth (oh dear, noun as verb, I do hate it when people do that) weaponry. It looks as if the guy was just hiding out when the insurgents went past... and he got into the tank pretty damn quick.

Very weird to watch, though.

reply to post by SLAYER69

I've been reviewing the Jack Schulman stuff, and the story boils down to this.

A widow of a scientist from Bell Labs gives JS a look at a notebook made, probably, by her late husband. The notebook contains ideas culled from attempts to analyse/reverse-engineer alien tech.

JS goes ahead and researches and builds what he calls the "T-cap" or transfer capacitor, derived directly from references in the notebook, which could immediately increase computing speed and storage while simultaneously reducing power requirements and heat output. Switching speed is in the teraHertz range.

He describes interested approaches from various well-known parties including IBM and British Telecom. He also describes a great deal of harassment from, shall we say, other parties.

Since then - and this was about ten years ago - I can't find anything. No "debunking", but no applications either. In effect the story disappeared. It was here on ATS... but as we've seen, most people have forgotten about it.

Can anyone throw any light on this?

[edit on 10-1-2009 by rich23]

Its not hard to think we have some tech from ailens.. they use the same stuff we do.. just alot more advanced..

I still think he and bob have a valid point..

we are talking tech here not god..

tech tree "our" is based on the same "tree" as any living being in the universe...

Logical..

I have just read a very interesting book called Are We Alone in the Cosmos? which is all about SETI and the Search for Alien Contact.

It's edited by Ben Bova, Howard Zimmerman and a couple of others, and has some great information/theories by people like: Issac Asimov, Carl Sagan Frank Drake (the Drake Equation), Gregory Benford and Arthur C Clark.

I have to post a quote from this book from Arthur C Clark as I feel its completely relevant. The book was published in 1999 I assume Clark wrote it about the same time. (in his own words I apologize for grammar errors I literally copied it from the book as I have no scanner)

"Nowadays anyone who considers that alien super-civilizations may exist has to contend not with skepticism but with something much worse -credulity. Although the subject now affects me with uncontrollable bouts of yawning, I would be failing in my duty if I did not say something about UFO's.

So here, as briefly as possible, are the conclusions I've come to after almost 70 years of study. (69 to be exact, since I first read Charles Fort's Lo! in 1930. That monument of eccentric scholarship, published long before anyone had heard of flying saucers, listed apparent celestial visitations right back to the Middle Ages.

1. There may be strange and surprising meteorological, electrical, or astronomical phenomena still unknown to science, which may account for the very few UFO's that are both genuine and unexplained.

2. There is no Hard evidence that Earth has EVER been visited from space.

3. If that does happen, there will be at least three independent global radar networks that will know within a matter of minutes. And in the unlikely event that the USA, Russia and Chinese authorities instantly co-operate to suppress the news, they'll succeed for a maximum of 48 hours. How long do imagine a secret could be kept? Remember how quickly Watergate unraveled.

Having written thousands of words on the subject (and read millions) I refuse to go into further details. If anybody wants to argue. I'll merely quote one of my favourite book titles: Shut Up, He Explained.

This is from the same guy who come up with the marvelous - "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"

Some inventions and Technology do seem miraculous and magic, Just look at a cell phone - very "Star Trek" especially when you have voice recognition on it! Doesn't mean Alien though and these reverse engineered theories sadly just disrespect the scientist/inventor who did a lot of work. We live in fantastic times of human understanding and Technology does seem a little "magical" sometimes. But to say its reversed engineered technology from an alien civilization is much too much of a unreasonable explanation for centuries of human progress. The simplest explanation is people far cleverer than you and I have come up with this technology for the benefit of mankind. As for the fact that so much seems to have developed in the last 50 years and it seems "excessive" well look at the population. 6.7 billion including at least 20 million geniuses, I'm surprised there's not more "magical tech"!

====
Mod edit: 'ex' tags, spelling of quote.


[edit on 1/10/2009 by Badge01]

Originally posted by theresult
Its not hard to think we have some tech from ailens.. they use the same stuff we do.. just alot more advanced..

I still think he and bob have a valid point..

we are talking tech here not god..

tech tree "our" is based on the same "tree" as any living being in the universe...

Logical..

Mate, logic seems to be one thing that's missing from all of your posts. You only seem to be able to back up your ideas with a combination of non-sequiturs and nonsense. Could you just once lay down your argument, demonstrating clearly how one premise leads to another, rather than dragging things further and further into obscurity?

Regarding the thread as a whole, it's no more than a train wreck until somebody comes up with meaningful counter-arguments to what Phage has been saying. Instead, the pros, OP in particular, seem content with evading his points or fudging around them. At the moment, the best pro argument appears to be along the lines of:

'Okay, so the clear lineage of innovation for the inventions mentioned renders extra-terrestrial assistance unnecessary, but that doesn't mean the aliens didn't help, just that they didn't have to.'

This is along the lines of me arguing that you received extraterrestrial help to take a crap, despite your digestive system doing a perfectly good job of it already. Is Occam's Razor unheard of around here?

This all smacks of people deciding what they want to believe, then providing the (distinctly dodgy) evidence.

And please, go easy on the emoticons - I can spot a bad post before I've even read it.

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
I

3. If that does happen, there will be at least three independent global radar networks that will know within a matter of minutes. And in the unlikely event that the USA, Russia and Chinese authorities instantly co-operate to suppress the news, they'll succeed for a maximum of 48 hours. How long do imagine a secret could be kept? Remember how quickly Watergate unraveled.

I really don't know how much ACC knew and wasn't saying. I'm pretty sure that Carl Sagan knew much more than he admitted to and maintained a skeptical public front. However, UFOs do show up on radar all the time. Take a look at this article.

All the official records made public under the UFO title are unevaluated reports gathered through various human intelligence means. These reports always quote the term UFO, as it has been relayed to them by sources. Mostly these sources are civilians, unaware of the current official terminology used by the US government. The US military uses two main terms in compiling and studying the UFO subject: Uncorrelated Targets (UCT), for earth-bound unidentified objects, and Uncorrelated Event Reports (UER) for space related events. I wrote to North American Aerospace Defense Command, NORAD, about their terminology. They replied:

'Historically, the term UFO was used by the Air Force starting in 1947 and ending in 1974 with the shelving of the "Blue Book" project. We all know what the term UFO means, we just don't use it.....The specific term "UFO" is not used by this command even though you could say that this term would equate to UTR [unknown track report], either an uncorrelated event or an unknown track, since an unidentified flying object could be considered either.'(3)


Further, I was told, 'Uncorrelated Events Reports (UERs), which are space related events on the United States Space Command (USSPACECOM) side of the house, are always classified SECRET.' (4)

Uncorrelated Targets are categorised as:

Significant UCTs, Nonsignificant UCTs, Critical UCTs, and

False UCTs. (5)

Any one get to the static electric solution to anti gravity engineered by Tesla?
If any UFO were back engineered it would be engineered in the first place
by Tesla.

Five years of experiments by Tesla after 1900 have never been published.
The first year at Colorado Springs was published.
Before the government-Illuminati knew they had to stop information
from Tesla.
That year, among other experiments, Tesla determined the variation of
capacitance of an orb with altitude.
A lot of orbs show up as UFOs these days.

You will not see that in the history of electricity by Whittaker.
Another scientist without knowledge of Tesla.
Yet discusses the orb powered by electricity problem.

reply to post by melaena


so why read it then??



moody? much?

Originally posted by theresult
reply to post by melaena

 

so why read it then??

moody? much?

See this is my point. Instead of facing up to the debate by clearly laying out your side of it, you rely on childish, witless ripostes such as this one. The gauntlet's still down, but I suspect you don't have a clear idea of why you should be right and phage etc wrong...

I would like to add that this thread was put together to present topics for everyone's interest and not just to cause a full on argument which seems to be the fashion here these days.

Most of the links and claims may never be proved valid and some may well be bogus but there is still much food for thought there especialy when Military and Space Program witnesse's start to come forward.

Which has been the case now in recent years, as they and should I say most are senior in their years and the career path is over the pension is in, and they have nothing to loose.

Thanks to everyone for their input so far it has turned out to be a well hit thread.

Originally posted by melaena

Originally posted by theresult
reply to post by melaena

 

so why read it then??

moody? much?

See this is my point. Instead of facing up to the debate by clearly laying out your side of it, you rely on childish, witless ripostes such as this one. The gauntlet's still down, but I suspect you don't have a clear idea of why you should be right and phage etc wrong...

the sheer venom of your post is why i did what i did...

or shall we argue over total bullsnip? I walked away becouse i can not reason with you here.. understand?

If you cant read every single thing i have posted and wish to flame me and call me names as you are FINE do it.. becouse tbh i meet closed minded peolpe all the time..

The gauntlet's still down, but I suspect you don't have a clear idea of why you should be right and phage etc wrong...

I mean look at what you state???

Im giving a very open question here and trying to brin math into play as its both relative and included in the subject matter...

Tech tree is "our" math... our understanding ... and if an "alien" from another planet as we understand has logicaly gone down that same very tree we are talking about!!!

If you cant see what the question is you will flame.. i see the question at hand and thats about another life form affecting our own tech tree as it were..

and tbh the only other argument is NO there is no other life and we are alone and god made us to dream this all up

Now who sounds more stupid ME or YOU???

back up ur own crap I DO

[edit on 11-1-2009 by theresult]

Originally posted by melaena
Regarding the thread as a whole, it's no more than a train wreck until somebody comes up with meaningful counter-arguments to what Phage has been saying. Instead, the pros, OP in particular, seem content with evading his points or fudging around them. At the moment, the best pro argument appears to be along the lines of:

'Okay, so the clear lineage of innovation for the inventions mentioned renders extra-terrestrial assistance unnecessary, but that doesn't mean the aliens didn't help, just that they didn't have to.'

This is along the lines of me arguing that you received extraterrestrial help to take a crap, despite your digestive system doing a perfectly good job of it already. Is Occam's Razor unheard of around here?

This all smacks of people deciding what they want to believe, then providing the (distinctly dodgy) evidence.

And please, go easy on the emoticons - I can spot a bad post before I've even read it.

Occam's razor is always quoted as if it's a law, rather than a sensible rule of thumb. No extraterrestrials are needed for me to take a crap - even though anal probing might be one of their things - and if you asked me whether we could have come this far in the last sixty years without backengineering alien tech, I couldn't answer that. But Occam's razor doesn't really apply because we're looking at history here.

And a careful look at the history involved certainly suggests that the scenario we've been outlining is plausible. I'd commend, again, Richard Dolen's UFOs and the National Security State. Dolen did his first degree in History and went on to read Political Studies at Oxford, specialising in the Soviet Union and international relations. He began looking into the UFO phenomenon and was surprised at what he found. Using only published documents he has put together a superb study showing the interrelationship between UFO events and the development of the US security state. Here's his website.

Again, we have Colonel Corso. In attempts to discredit him no-one's been able to show that he wasn't at the Pentagon when he said he was. And as I mentioned in a previous post, he wrote it when he knew he was dying, so the usual skeptical character smears ("he only did it for the money/the attention/because he's inadequate") don't really apply.

There are also plenty of people who have worked within the US military-industrial complex who have been prepared to come forward and give sworn testimony about this. Now, I'd have said this should be a fairly major news story yet the Disclosure Project's 2001 presentation caused barely a ripple in the mainstream media. You can find about 2 hours' worth of testimony here.

WHEN you've watched all two hours' worth, ask yourself: which is more plausible - that these people are telling the truth or that they're all liars?

You might find yourself more inclined to accept the possibility that people like Corso and Jack Schulman are telling the truth, too.

As for Phage, he does a very good job with the orthodox view of events, but he's arguing against leaps and gaps. Leaps and gaps are unlikely.

Let's say you're a scientist faced with a piece of alien technology. You can only bring your current knowledge and tools to bear on it, and any advances you make will first come as "add-ons" to areas that you already know about. There may be a superconducting alloy that you hadn't considered, for example. Edison famously spent years looking for the right material for the filament in an incandescent light bulb. It's possible that examining alien technology shortened similar searches in the relevant fields.

So what we're looking at is a significant increase in the rate of progress perhaps beyond what might be expected even if you accept that we've hit a point in human history where the exponential growth rate is starting to really kick in - not much for centuries, and then...

However, according to this alternative narrative, such an increase - beyond exponential - is actually occurring, but people are keeping the technology under wraps. If you go and read the stuff about Jack Schulman you'll see that he built a data storage device that in terms of speed and capacity blew Moore's Law out of the water. However, it doesn't seem to have been put into large-scale production. Now JS was the head of a fairly large, well-established company and I'd say he'd have had a lot to lose by making unverifiable claims. I haven't heard those claims dismissed. I haven't heard about the T-cap going into manufacture. I haven't heard anything at all. I find that odd, or, possibly, predictable under the kind of supposedly paranoid thinking whereby that kind of technology is suppressed.

So, no leaps and bounds - steady progress, but at a massively increased rate and with a lot of technology not remotely coming into the public domain.

I'm sorry for not getting back to you, Been working around the house all weekend I'll time to answer some question Mon or Tuesday and also I have another long thread in the works this one is on something completely different


Keep up the good work


PEACE
SLAY

Guys.

Great thread, the best I've seen in ages. I know we will get there..

The issue also is how to go around without being shot at..
au.youtube.com...

..So the trick will be also to work on constant dodging flying patterns, beam ray early detection systems, on top of conventional defense mechanisms. These guys were just sitting ducks, I feel sorry for them:
au.youtube.com...

I now realize this is going to take some time on a low budget. I might test producing some colloidal iron, mixed with oil, see if I can get any of the effects as if I had fast spinning mercury..

I've seen some you tube videos students testing with coils alone and achieving some clumsy levitation effect.. but the idea of the fast spinning superconductor makes more sense.

Kudos to you guys.
Techie.