Humans are babies, and UFO disclosure is a .357 magnum.

You wouldn't give a .357 magnum to a baby, so why give the human population UFO disclosure?

Follow me on this for just a minute...

Up until 1945, human beings didn't have access to power capable of destroying planets. In 1945 humans got that access.

Ever since then, the powers that be (TPTB) have been trying to control these "Weapons of Mass Destruction". In 1962, the two most powerful nations on earth came to the brink of global thermonuclear war. Despite that, governments around the world are trying to develop their own nuclear weapons. Most claim it's just so they can develop nuclear energy, but it's a small step to go from ENERGY production to ENERGY destruction.

This is all about ENERGY, and how to control it. That's where UFO's come in.

If TPTB admit or disclose that the UFO's are real and piloted by ET's, then we begin down a dangerous road. The technologies of the power generating systems that propel these UFO's will want to be known. Efforts will begin to discover/steal/mimic those systems.

EVERYONE will want this supposedly free energy. That would be like everyone having a nuclear bomb in their pocket.

That is a road that humanity cannot afford to go down.

Hence, disclosure about UFO's will never happen, not in this lifetime at least.

Wouldn't surprise me if the technologies were already known, and already being abused. Some of the ufo lore is so strange and stupid it smacks of boys out playing with their toys.

It's not that the ET technologies would be like everyone having a nuke in their pocket, it's more like big business losing out on a lot of money.

Whether it happens or not. I believe that people have the right to know. I feel like humans underestimate themselves too much, if people knew the truth, many of us would then be able to look at our lives, and choose to move to a positive light, for those who desire a deeper life, which I think most desire, a deeper connect to ones self, an understanding of the unknown.

There may be riots and violence, but with time, things could settle down, especially if the ETs landed, looked like us, and presented ways to help with the suffering, possibly better technology? Maybe we could start living like them, maybe they could help cure our DNA?

What am I saying, what's done is done, most of us are probably not going to make it aboard, at least not in physical form.

reply to post by harrytuttle


I disagree with the OP. humans already have the capability to destroy the world with a press on the button. However, humans have shown to be responsible enough not to do it. Therefore it would not make a difference if humans get an even more powerful weapon - using a world destroying nuke or a universe destroying super weapon is the same outcome for humans on earth. And I am sure the technology to use a more advanced and powerful energy source above nuclear energy, only the most advanced nations would be able to capitalize on, as it is in todays world

Good point though about the energy production and energy destruction

"Humans are babies, and UFO disclosure is a .357 magnum."

You are wrong about that. It should read
'Humans are babies, and UFO disclosure is a nuke."

UFO disclosure will distory the human race. Peoples minds can not handle the truth.

Originally posted by harrytuttle
You wouldn't give a .357 magnum to a baby, so why give the human population UFO disclosure?

Follow me on this for just a minute...

Up until 1945, human beings didn't have access to power capable of destroying planets. In 1945 humans got that access.

Ever since then, the powers that be (TPTB) have been trying to control these "Weapons of Mass Destruction". In 1962, the two most powerful nations on earth came to the brink of global thermonuclear war. Despite that, governments around the world are trying to develop their own nuclear weapons. Most claim it's just so they can develop nuclear energy, but it's a small step to go from ENERGY production to ENERGY destruction.

This is all about ENERGY, and how to control it. That's where UFO's come in.

If TPTB admit or disclose that the UFO's are real and piloted by ET's, then we begin down a dangerous road. The technologies of the power generating systems that propel these UFO's will want to be known. Efforts will begin to discover/steal/mimic those systems.

EVERYONE will want this supposedly free energy. That would be like everyone having a nuclear bomb in their pocket.

That is a road that humanity cannot afford to go down.

Hence, disclosure about UFO's will never happen, not in this lifetime at least.

Since when we have power to destroy planets? :S

Even with nukes, we would need thousands or millions of them to blow a planet.

P.S. The Moon is not the Death Star!

Originally posted by harrytuttle
If TPTB admit or disclose that the UFO's are real and piloted by ET's, then we begin down a dangerous road. The technologies of the power generating systems that propel these UFO's will want to be known. Efforts will begin to discover/steal/mimic those systems.

EVERYONE will want this supposedly free energy. That would be like everyone having a nuclear bomb in their pocket.

That is a road that humanity cannot afford to go down.

Hence, disclosure about UFO's will never happen, not in this lifetime at least.

This argument is flawed. Let's think about the nuke analogy: you say that in 1945 humans developed the bomb, and once the bomb existed other humans started trying to make their own. You describe this as though it is evidence of the danger of making the existence a powerful technology known to the world. The reason that's not right is that humans were after the bomb before they had it; that's how we ended up inventing it. It's not that someone told the world, "There are such things as nuclear bombs," and then everyone tried to make one. What really happened is that humans were already making the most powerful weapons they could come up with, and had been for a long time. At some point they developed a new, very powerful weapon by harnessing the atom. We continue to try to make the most powerful weapons that we can. Humans advance from what we have, not towards what we know exists.

As this relates to ET energy technology; humans are already working on developing the most powerful and efficient forms of energy that we can think of. It's not like if someone announced that some UFOs were ETs, everyone would say, "Hey, that means they have more advanced technology then us, which means we should try to make more advanced technology ourselves and be like them." We're already advancing technology as fast as we can. Just knowing that more advanced technoloy exists wouldn't change anything.

Additionally, a lot of people believe that some UFOs are ETs already. It's true that some of those people are working on alternative energy technology, but they're not making any progress and they're certainly not putting humanity in danger. There's a wide gap between knowing that there is a better energy technology, and "having a nuclear bomb in your pocket." In fact, I bet that if you asked anyone in the developed world if there is a more advanced energy technology that human beings could develope, they will all say yes. No one thinks we've figured it all out. As with many things, it's easier said than done. There's a huge difference between saying that interstellar spaceships exist and saying how to build one.

reply to post by MonteroReal


maybe not destroying the world, but humans and today nukes definitely are enough to bring civilization to a halt as we know it ..from answer.com:

A single 100 megaton air burst would be enough to cause a nuclear winter and pollute the Earth for many many years. Theoretically, a 100 megaton bomb detonated below ground could produce a massive earthquake and the constant explosions of a full blown nuclear war may also cause numerous earthquakes around the globe. But this would not destroy the world nor all human life. Globally there are not enough nuclear bombs to completely kill every human

reply to post by MonteroReal



www.huffingtonpost.com...

You do not have to blow it to bits like the Death Star but we have more than enough to turn the Earth into nothing but a lifeless radioactive rock floating though space. The USA have enough to turn the planet as lifeless as the moon so add to the the nukes the other countries of the world have. What did live though the blast would did from the radiation. So we humans do in fact have more than enough nukes to wipe every living thing off the face of the planet. Not even bacteria would survive.

And not only the nukes them selfs but all the fires they will start. All that smoke and dust. And all the poison gases released.

Originally posted by fixer1967
reply to post by MonteroReal

 

www.huffingtonpost.com...

You do not have to blow it to bits like the Death Star but we have more than enough to turn the Earth into nothing but a lifeless radioactive rock floating though space. The USA have enough to turn the planet as lifeless as the moon so add to the the nukes the other countries of the world have. What did live though the blast would did from the radiation. So we humans do in fact have more than enough nukes to wipe every living thing off the face of the planet. Not even bacteria would survive.

And not only the nukes them selfs but all the fires they will start. All that smoke and dust. And all the poison gases released.

edit on 9/25/2010 by fixer1967 because: To add some detail

Well, so say we have the capacity to destroy life or something like that, but we definitely dont have the capacity to destroy planets.

and Cockroaches, they always survive.

reply to post by harrytuttle


We already have the powers of the alien UFOs. We call them black triangles.

Perhaps you need to consider that the ETs showed up in vast numbers after we split the atom because they were concerned about what we were doing to ourselves. Of course, it is questionable if they are just watchers or helpers.
Some of us like to think they are more intelligent than us and are here to help and guide us to a better future.

reply to post by MonteroReal

If everything else is dead, eventually even the cockroaches will die of starvation.

I wouldn't say it's UFO or alien disclosure that could be the problem. Rather it's a much more specific disclosure of the technological principle(s) upon which UFOs capable of interstellar travel would operate upon. (Knowing about UFOs all you want is likely harmless if you don't have the tech to back-engineer them. Like some head of a cargo-cult jumping around in a birdman suit after seeing an airplane, it's cute and quite harmless. But we're now at the point where if in the same position, it's being like that same guy capable of building the complete Enola Gay after seeing it fly by.)

So if gravity were a function of energy density in matter, it might not be that big a leap to figure that knowing how to manipulate it means you've also unlocked some aspect of matter-energy conversion. If the baseline technology to accomplish that weren't more involved than some peculiar alignment of magnets on a target sample of a commonly available substance and the injection of RF energy or lasers...

It wouldn't be that convoluted knowing that if a process capable of direct matter-energy conversion was weaponized, it wouldn't be a stretch to compare it to already publicly known devices with that type of capability. In other words, you'd have something with yield capacities comparable to nuclear munitions.

Let's say that the baseline technology for gravitics and energy-matter conversion was actually fairly simple yet previously overlooked as in my hypothetical example. Now the danger is that such capability is in the hands with anybody with some commonly available materials and the ability to do some level of electronics or electrical engineering - that could be considered a serious problem. If Joe Blow down the street knew his HAM radio kit could also build a matter-energy converter, a mistake or intentional malfeasance on such a project could take a good chunk of a city off of the map. Now imagine every rogue nation and organization realizing that instead of pursuing nuclear materials, the same effective result could be had for a minuscule fraction of time and resources.

Still even without direct disclosure, there's all kinds of experiments with various technology. In some regards, it might actually be better to know of some potential effects before somebody runs into something unexpectedly. Maybe that's why there are stories of some "free energy" projects getting shut down? (Not just the money for powerful players, but the potential effects of alternate applications that aren't quite understood except to a few small and exclusive circles.) But nowadays there's the internet. Someone simply has to make such a project open and document it publicly for the cat to be out of the bag.

Of course this is a problem humanity has run into with every leap of technology. There are plenty of great and wonderful applications that come with knowledge, but whether or not the responsibility and wisdom is there is another thing. Hopefully we can manage.

reply to post by harrytuttle



I don't know about destroying the earth itself.

One way to see this is to compare the energy of a nuclear blast to that of the rotational motion of the Earth. The largest nuclear bombs have an explosive energy of several tens of megatons, or about 10^17 Joules, whereas the Earth's rotational energy is around 10^29 Joules.
Yeah, that's a pretty big difference. Spirber notes that the energy of the largest nuclear blast is less than that released by the 2004 earthquake that caused the tsunami.


The amount of fault-moving ("Earth-slimming") energy in this magnitude 9.3 earthquake was estimated at more than 10&^22 Joules, or roughly 100,000 times that of the biggest nuclear bombs. So any effect of a nuclear blast on Earth's rotation would be far below what is measureable.
So, it seems unlikely that one nuke — or several — of today's technology could do harm to the planet (though the environmental effects are quite a different story).

The tsunami did, however, alter the Earth's rotation.


Scientists calculated that the colossal tsunami-causing 2004 Sumatra earthquake caused a slimming of the Earth that shortened the day by a few millionths of a second and shifted the North Pole by an inch.

Credit: Science over mind.

If we had ET technology, most people would leave this planet. The violent people wouldn't be a problem. The peaceful people will instantly travel to another peaceful Earth-like planet.

I really don't get this analogy? It's quite counter intuitive.

Are you in georgia by any chance?