Way to address absolutely nothing that I said to you.

As I already pointed out, if you view it from any angle OTHER than the one you presented, this thing doesn't even come close to resembling a robot.

BEHOLD... what everyone else already knows:



That this thing is a bunch of rocks.

1. Secret

Yeah, if something happens in Area 51 it's going to be a secret. However, you've offered *maybe* 1% proof that this robot project happened in the first place. And that's being generous.

The government is capable of discerning when civilian satellites are flying overhead, and is smart enough to bring their secret toys indoors when that's the case. For one thing, they have radar and for another, civilian satellite operators can't just float things around in outer space without telling the government about it.

2. Autonomous

Operators wouldn't have to be anywhere near it. UAVS developed over a decade ago can be flown on one side of the world and operated from literally the complete opposite side of the globe.

3. Robot

No matter how many times I rotated that image, changed the angle, zoomed in, zoomed out, toggled the 3D terrain on and off, or did anything else I couldn't make that area look like a robot.

You're asking me to believe that not only did the government screw up and leave a robot sitting out during a civilian satellite flyover, but that the satellite just happened to be positioned in just such a way that the image it took could only be interpreted from *one specific angle.* Sorry, but no. I look at a car on GE, and it looks like a car no matter how much I move the viewing angle around.

You know what I *could* make it look like, though? Exactly like all the other things in that area. Which are all rocks. Rocks of the same odd colors as the "robot."


4. Project

If it was no longer in a testing stage, it wouldn't be roving around a research and development facility, now would it? There's not much you can do with an 18 meter (that's over 50 feet) robot on top of a mountain in an area where nobody ever goes and no testing occurs. More on that later.

5. Advanced

No, it doesn't "go without saying." You're just assuming. Advanced compared to what? First of all, it's still probably just rocks which are not very advanced things. Second, if it's a finished project like you are now alleging than it's got nothing on Area 51 technology, which is generally so cutting edge that it's not even finished yet.

6. Mountains

Easy question to answer, if you'd try doing *any* additional research to back your claims. The reason the facility is so huge is because when the base was originally created, you could stand on top of one of the nearby mountains and see into the base. Obviously this was bad, so they made a MASSIVE land grab around the area specifically so that people standing in non-restricted areas would never be able to see into the testing area or the base. The mountain range is a buffer zone for Area 51, not part of its functional testing ground. Operating secret technology in the buffer zone would entirely defeat the purpose of having the buffer.

7. Awareness

You seem to have done exceptionally little research on the project, so I don't think it's wise of you to make assumptions based on what you are aware of. Allow me to present two recent examples which have helped lead me to that conclusion.

In your most recent post you've revealed that you were unaware of our remote control capabilities concerning unmanned vehicles. That's one of our military's most fundamentally significant technologies regarding robotic controls - had you done any research, you'd have stumbled across that. Your awareness is lacking.

Further hurting the credibility of your awareness on the subject we're discussing is that you didn't know about the annexation of the massive buffer zone around the base, nor its purpose. Again, this can only be attributed to a lack of research since that land grab is particularly well known by Area 51 researchers. And so, again, your awareness is lacking.

---

In addition to the still-unresolved issues I've brought forth with your robot theory, I've come up with a few specific counter-points. These points take my argument a step further. Rather than simply rebuffing your own claims, these are my own claims that invalidate the theory of robotics.

8. Purpose of Area 51

Historically, all projects coming out of Area 51 have been aircraft. The base is clearly designed for the development of advanced air vehicles. The type of engineering, machinery, and manufacturing that is used in designing aircraft is completely different from what you'd need to develop a ground robot.

You can't just chalk this up to Area 51's secretive nature, either. People knew *long* before any secrets were revealed about Area 51 that the projects conducted there were aircraft related. A simple look at the base reveals many airstrips, and no robots.

So the first problem is that there's never been any indication that Area 51 is used for robotics development.

9. Lack of an access route

The supposed robot is found deep within a mountain range. There are no roads leading up there. That, by itself, wouldn't mean much. A military robot that needs a road would probably not be a high-demand technology.

However, consider this: Your ruler showed the object to be 18 meters long. There are roughly 3 feet in a meter, which puts this object at 54 feet long. That's twice as long as an M1 Abrams tank. A robot that huge would leave a clearly visible path behind it as it traveled through desert sands and gravel.

If it's a robot, it was placed their by some sort of giant helicopter and hasn't moved since.

10. Deviation from military goals and doctrine

Right now, the military is in need of ground vehicles that are smaller, lighter, and easier to transport. Trying to get a 50 foot long robot to a battlefield would be a logistical nightmare, which would probably end in vain as a 50 foot target is an easy one. Such a massive device would have absolutely no use against the terrorist threat that our military is gearing up to face.

There's simply never been a call within the military to develop anything like giant robots. That's purely the realm of sci-fi fantasy cartoons. In real life, such a weapon would be impractical to the point of near uselessness.

---

If you really want to push this thing further, I think it's time you realize that just these few Google Earth images are not going to convince anyone. You're going to need more research if you want to back your claims. Let me give you some pointers:

- Patent Search. Specifically in the field of robotics. Look for a patent that would indicate somebody is developing an exceptionally massive robot. The robot itself won't have a patent if its a secret, but many of its components probably would.

- Show us the need for it. You need to find some sort of story or article where somebody in the military has actually called for giant robots on the battlefield. Robots, yes - that's high demand. But you need to show us something that indicates the military is seeking giant robots in the 50 foot size scale.

- Corroborating Evidence. This is the big fish that you really need to find. Has anyone ever come forward with stories about working on giant robots? Have any witnesses claimed to have spotted it? Is their any past indication that Area 51 has been used in robot development and not just aircraft? And if so, what are the sources?

Good luck. If you find something, let us know. Until then, I'm sorry to say it but you're just desperately clinging to unfounded hopes and dreams. Unless you can show us more than just some fuzzy Google Earth pictures, Occam's Razor applies and the verdict is rocks.

3. Robot

No matter how many times I rotated that image, changed the angle, zoomed in, zoomed out, toggled the 3D terrain on and off, or did anything else I couldn't make that area look like a robot.

You're asking me to believe that not only did the government screw up and leave a robot sitting out during a civilian satellite flyover, but that the satellite just happened to be positioned in just such a way that the image it took could only be interpreted from *one specific angle.* Sorry, but no. I look at a car on GE, and it looks like a car no matter how much I move the viewing angle around.

You know what I *could* make it look like, though? Exactly like all the other things in that area. Which are all rocks. Rocks of the same odd colors as the "robot."

Your "car" analogy is flawed indicating that you're unaware of the 2 main ways in which GE aquires images. If you can clearly see the car no matter it's orientation, then this indicates that the car was photographed from a plane capturing more image info and consequently allowing a zoom in down to 50m or less. But a satellite image displayed on GE only gives an effective zoom in down to approx 1500m and consequently less image info is available when rotating the image and therefore more distortion introduced when rotation is used. You need to compare apples to apples which you're most certainly NOT doing by comparing a plane's low level but high resolution image capture to one taken from low orbit.


4. Project

If it was no longer in a testing stage, it wouldn't be roving around a research and development facility, now would it? There's not much you can do with an 18 meter (that's over 50 feet) robot on top of a mountain in an area where nobody ever goes and no testing occurs. More on that later.

Now here we have a case of YOU making unwarrented assumptions. How do you know what occurs both during and after trials? Unless your privy to military methodology ? Perhaps there WAS a need or requirement for the device to be in that particular location either during the test or post test ... who knows.


5. Advanced

No, it doesn't "go without saying." You're just assuming. Advanced compared to what? First of all, it's still probably just rocks which are not very advanced things. Second, if it's a finished project like you are now alleging than it's got nothing on Area 51 technology, which is generally so cutting edge that it's not even finished yet.

"Advanced compared to what?" you ask ... duhhhh ... I think that most people would tend to agree that a robotic machine wandering around mountainous terrain unattended would certainly qualify as "advanced technology". Unless of course you personally come across this sort of thing every day ?

---

6. Mountains

Easy question to answer, if you'd try doing *any* additional research to back your claims. The reason the facility is so huge is because when the base was originally created, you could stand on top of one of the nearby mountains and see into the base. Obviously this was bad, so they made a MASSIVE land grab around the area specifically so that people standing in non-restricted areas would never be able to see into the testing area or the base. The mountain range is a buffer zone for Area 51, not part of its functional testing ground. Operating secret technology in the buffer zone would entirely defeat the purpose of having the buffer.

Having the base clearly visible from Tikaboo Peak was the excuse used to annex the entire Groom mountain area to the north of A51as well as the Papoose mountain area to the south. Oh, and i have to apologize as I mistakingly referred to the Papoose mountain area in earlier posts as the south Groom mountains.
I assume that you are aware that a buffer zone's purpose is to keep people a certain distance away and that access within the buffer zone is NOT permitted - otherwise Tikaboo Peak being within the buffer zone would still be visited by hordes of UFO seekers and would defeat the purpose of having a buffer zone. So yes, military activity can well and truly still take place within the buffer zone as it's definitely off-limits to the general public.
Also a bit of additional research on your part would have informed you that the Papoose mountain area is actively in use e.g. the A51 security radio system is located there.


7. Awareness

You seem to have done exceptionally little research on the project, so I don't think it's wise of you to make assumptions based on what you are aware of. Allow me to present two recent examples which have helped lead me to that conclusion.

In your most recent post you've revealed that you were unaware of our remote control capabilities concerning unmanned vehicles. That's one of our military's most fundamentally significant technologies regarding robotic controls - had you done any research, you'd have stumbled across that. Your awareness is lacking.

Excuse me ? Where in my previous posts did I give you the impression I was unaware of remote control capabilities ? As I have mentioned in 2. above, remote control capability is OLD technology which the the military has clearly stated it is not going to cling to forever and as anyone who takes the time to do the necessary research, would have realized that the military is intent on developing robotic battlefield technology that will rely less and less on human interaction and decision making. Remote control was 20th century technology ... robotic autonomy is 21st century technology.

Further hurting the credibility of your awareness on the subject we're discussing is that you didn't know about the annexation of the massive buffer zone around the base, nor its purpose. Again, this can only be attributed to a lack of research since that land grab is particularly well known by Area 51 researchers. And so, again, your awareness is lacking.

Again ... excuse me ? Seems like I did mention to you the annexation of the Groom mountain area ... so where is my awareness lacking and my credibility hurt ?

---

8. Purpose of Area 51

Historically, all projects coming out of Area 51 have been aircraft. The base is clearly designed for the development of advanced air vehicles. The type of engineering, machinery, and manufacturing that is used in designing aircraft is completely different from what you'd need to develop a ground robot.

Errrr ... and this definitive statement is based on knowledge you've obtained from where ? I wasn't aware that A51 was in the habit of discussing what goes on there with the general public. Also, how do YOU know what type of manufacturing equipment would be required to produce a robot the design capabilities of which we have no knowledge of ?

You can't just chalk this up to Area 51's secretive nature, either. People knew *long* before any secrets were revealed about Area 51 that the projects conducted there were aircraft related. A simple look at the base reveals many airstrips, and no robots.

Ahhhh ... so if I use GE and take a look at the airstrips, then I am guaranteed to see say, B52 Stealth bombers sitting around in plain view ?

So the first problem is that there's never been any indication that Area 51 is used for robotics development.

And do you think that our permission would be required if they DID decide to branch into other developmental areas not specifically related to aircraft manufacture ?


9. Lack of an access route

The supposed robot is found deep within a mountain range. There are no roads leading up there. That, by itself, wouldn't mean much. A military robot that needs a road would probably not be a high-demand technology.

However, consider this: Your ruler showed the object to be 18 meters long. There are roughly 3 feet in a meter, which puts this object at 54 feet long. That's twice as long as an M1 Abrams tank. A robot that huge would leave a clearly visible path behind it as it traveled through desert sands and gravel.

Can't give you a definite answer without knowing further details of how the device moves itself. So a "clearly visible path" would not necessarily be an issue.

If it's a robot, it was placed their by some sort of giant helicopter and hasn't moved since.

---

10. Deviation from military goals and doctrine

Right now, the military is in need of ground vehicles that are smaller, lighter, and easier to transport. Trying to get a 50 foot long robot to a battlefield would be a logistical nightmare, which would probably end in vain as a 50 foot target is an easy one. Such a massive device would have absolutely no use against the terrorist threat that our military is gearing up to face.

There's simply never been a call within the military to develop anything like giant robots. That's purely the realm of sci-fi fantasy cartoons. In real life, such a weapon would be impractical to the point of near uselessness.

Again, you accuse me of making unwarranted assumptions and yet here you are doing the same ! How do you know what the military's future requirements could possibly be ? If back in the 30's you were to say that within 10 years the navy would be constructing massive ships the length of several football fields and carrying an entire squadron of planes, I'm sure you would have encountered a similar response to yours ... "there's never been a call within the military to develop anything like ..."

If you really want to push this thing further, I think it's time you realize that just these few Google Earth images are not going to convince anyone. You're going to need more research if you want to back your claims. Let me give you some pointers:

Those "few Google Earth images" act as an initial indicator that something extremely unusual is going on, something that the world has been completely unaware off.

- Patent Search. Specifically in the field of robotics. Look for a patent that would indicate somebody is developing an exceptionally massive robot. The robot itself won't have a patent if its a secret, but many of its components probably would.

What would you search for ? Assuming that we even had any idea of what components would go into such a device.

- Show us the need for it. You need to find some sort of story or article where somebody in the military has actually called for giant robots on the battlefield. Robots, yes - that's high demand. But you need to show us something that indicates the military is seeking giant robots in the 50 foot size scale.

Sighhhh .... SECRET PROJECT
To use the Manhattan project as an example again ... I don't recall the military advertising their need for a fissionable device equivalent to x amount of tnt ... they just went and developed the necessary technology IN COMPLETE SECRECY and then shocked the world with it's use.

And once again, your answers to my replies are nothing more but deflections, excuses, and demonstrations of complete misunderstandings of the points I brought before you. I'm tired of this. Fortunately, I don't have to change your mind. I'm sure anybody reading this debate is facepalming the crap out of themselves over you, your "robot," and your complete refusal to except reality.

without reading too much of this aggresive debate i'll make my observation.
it looks like floor, mabye some shrubs and weeds, rocks along with a hint of skynet.
if its a robot, it's broken.
sorry but i can't beleive this one.
hasnt google earth got a timeline slider, try to view it from a different year.

i can see how you'd think that maybe...


but thats clearly a rock.