SpaceX Launch - Indirect Disclosure?

First - congrats to SpaceX for proving that a private company can put Humans in space. That’s amazing. And doubly proud to see an American company leading the way here. It truly is fantastic and I’m glad our boys made it up there safely. Those dudes have some serious stones.

Now, to the point of my thread... I think we just witnessed the purest form of Disclosure we’ve ever had.

The post below from another thread is what got me thinking:

originally posted by: Willtell
Another thing about these government psychic and alien invasion experts.

Looking at the take-off of the Space-EX launch this most recent example of human technological advance, I don’t see much difference from the 1969 moon launch.

The same loud, gassy, burning fuel launch 50 years ago to me indicates that human advanced technology may have been slowing down, of course, beyond iPhone’s and other trinkets it appears some kind of force indeed may just be slowing us down, and I don’t blame them!... Since morally and spiritually we seem to as a species to be going backward.

IMO, all this alien fear and talk about how “we can take ET home" is a bunch of Bull Sh__ and part of the psyop to convince the public we are as advanced as these aliens and can take them on.

I noticed those folks in that capsule were so jammed in it, almost like sardines in a can, I doubt humans are anywhere near the technology of these aliens.

Willtell makes a great point... this IS more-less like what we’ve been doing for 50 years!

But who did it 50 years ago? The Government.

Who did it today? Private industry!

I’m of the mind that technology tied to getting to space is something that we’d consider important to national security. Historically, the Government tends to gobble up cutting edge technology if it has a national security or defense application. The arms race is never ending.

As government gets better tech, deweaponized versions of their former cutting edge tech get watered down and used for civlian purposes. Think GPS, aircraft, etc. History shows that the tech of the civilians must be behind that of the miliatary. Cant stay ahead or in control of a population that has better defensive/offensive/surveillance capability than the government...

Thus, the fact a private company launched astronauts into space - using more-less modernized versions concepts we used +50 years ago - means we have way better tech than this - way better - from the military perspective.

Is it ET tech the Feds have? I don’t know. Could be reverse engineered, engineered, relearnt knowledge, etc. But I’m nearly certain it’s way ahead of what we saw today.

This was a huge, televised admission that our miliatary/dark projects tech is materially beyond what we watched on TV today... and suggests to me the prospects that we have ET-level tech have never been higher.

What say you?

Since they used technology that is similar to what was used in the 1960s, the only real difference is who did it. Sure, the guidance systems are superior and returning that first stage to a boat safely was huge, but they launched a rocket with basically kerosene and liquid oxygen so that hasn't changed much.

Don't misunderstand, I love the space program but we should have better means of propulsion today.

a reply to: EnigmaChaser

Why is it you do not believe that we can advance in our technology without alien influence?

What you're seeing is just we humans evolving and advancing ourselves. No Aliens needed. For the first time in history people and companies wealthy enough to pay for it exist. This is more a case of seeing the end result of people having that kind of money to spare.

One more thought:

When you think about SpaceX privatizing space access, the widely publicized “tic-tac” footage and subsequent AATIP revelations, increased MSM coverage of “UFOs”, creation of the formalized “Space Force” due to the “importance” or space dominance, etc. it’s very possible that we have more Disclosure happening now than ever - it’s just not the one-sentence “aliens are here, UFOs are real and we’ve known that for a long time” that most people are looking for.

Which makes sense after 70 years of disinformation. Can’t just flip the switch.

originally posted by: HalWesten
Since they used technology that is similar to what was used in the 1960s, the only real difference is who did it. Sure, the guidance systems are superior and returning that first stage to a boat safely was huge, but they launched a rocket with basically kerosene and liquid oxygen so that hasn't changed much.

Don't misunderstand, I love the space program but we should have better means of propulsion today.

Exactly. Plus the safety tech is materially more advanced.

To me your post exactly the point... is there much that hasn’t advanced in 70 years? Not really.

But now instead of 400 switches and analog gauges we have 3 touch screens and the ability to eject the crew capsule should the rocket malfunction (that’s a simplification but you see my point).

Otherwise, it’s the same jam.

I’d be shocked if that’s all the advancement we’ve made on this from when we went from P-51 mustangs to the F22 in that period of time...

a reply to: EnigmaChaser

I don't think your supposed logic makes any sense.

They used the same basic technology that has been used since the 50's because we don't have anything better.

It takes an enormous amount of power to launch payloads into space, the only thing that we currently have that can do it is rockets. The space X rockets are enormously more efficient that what has been used in the past.

It's like saying we had jet planes in the 60's too, jets have not made any real progress since then. Which is obviously false.

It's not that space x couldn't have launched men into space years ago - they could have, it just would not have been very safe.

If the government has anything anti-grav it would have to be a recovered vehicle they have figured out how to fly. There is no way we are advanced enough to create our own. We don't have the material science and we don't have a power source that would work now.

I don't think the feds have anything more advanced than what we saw today.

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: EnigmaChaser

Why is it you do not believe that we can advance in our technology without alien influence?

What you're seeing is just we humans evolving and advancing ourselves. No Aliens needed. For the first time in history people and companies wealthy enough to pay for it exist. This is more a case of seeing the end result of people having that kind of money to spare.

I didn’t say it is definitely ET tech... I personally don’t know.

I am saying that if we’re letting a publicly traded company prove to the world it’s ok to shoot people into space for hire/profit then we probably have a lot more presence/tech “up there” than you and I are aware of - like way way more advanced.

Where it came from? I don’t know. But we have it.

To the point of money - maybe. That said, If it were just about the capital we have many many companies in the US alone with more than enough scratch to jump into this race too.

originally posted by: proximo
a reply to: EnigmaChaser

I don't think your supposed logic makes any sense.

They used the same basic technology that has been used since the 50's because we don't have anything better.

It takes an enormous amount of power to launch payloads into space, the only thing that we currently have that can do it is rockets. The space X rockets are enormously more efficient that what has been used in the past.

It's like saying we had jet planes in the 60's too, jets have not made any real progress since then. Which is obviously false.

It's not that space x couldn't have launched men into space years ago - they could have, it just would not have been very safe.

If the government has anything anti-grav it would have to be a recovered vehicle they have figured out how to fly. There is no way we are advanced enough to create our own. We don't have the material science and we don't have a power source that would work now.

I don't think the feds have anything more advanced than what we saw today.

I don’t have specifics, but I happened into a social situation with a person who held a high level position at a public company who is also a defense contractor and the person is also a nuclear physicist. Based on my conversation with him, we’ve been working on tech to eliminate the need for rockets for a long time - but he wouldn’t tell me the current state of our progress there.

a reply to: EnigmaChaser

You posted this in the Aliens & UFOs forum. What did you mean by "ET-level tech"?

Our technological advances as humans have been the result of wealth since it started. At first, wealth meant having adequate food. Learning to farm, led to enough free time to develop other things, which led to even more free time and resources to advance further. Before now, the private sector did not have the disposable resources to develop space travel commercially.

I have no doubt that tech exists that we are not privy to, due to it being important to military technology, We rightly keep it close to the vest so it can't be stolen, and put us at risk from our own tech.

The quote about taking ET home was by Ben Rich, who succeeded Kelly Johnson at Skunk Works. He used it once in a speech, and it went over so well that he kept using it. It was meant to get a laugh from the audience, and it did.

Space X launch, it essentially is the same, more or less, but vastly more modernized and completely built from scratch, utilizing the latest in advanced computer modeling.

In that sense, the comparisons become vastly different.

Not to mention, privatized.

This launch showed that the common man, not of the Gov, but a private citizen, proved and provided the means to get Man into space, do you understand the implications of that? An American motivation for so many potential entrepreneurs all across the world witnessed this fact.

No need for Alien help, maybe visual encouragment like the Tic Tacs.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Fair point, Zaphod.

I’m not so much going down the Rich route here as saying that this tech is deemed not a national security threat - at least as I see it - if anyone could hire them. I suspect that’s not too far off.

It doesn’t feel like a huge reach to then say that we probably have more advanced tech then we saw today.

Does that mean we can take ET home? I don’t know. But I’d argue the probability we have more advanced stuff then we saw today is better than 50/50.

a reply to: EnigmaChaser

Yes and no. The military really isn't 50 years ahead as so many claim. I know people that have worked bleeding edge programs and would have almost killed someone to get their hands on something from the civilian world that was more efficient and easier to use.

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: EnigmaChaser

You posted this in the Aliens & UFOs forum. What did you mean by "ET-level tech"?

Our technological advances as humans have been the result of wealth since it started. At first, wealth meant having adequate food. Learning to farm, led to enough free time to develop other things, which led to even more free time and resources to advance further. Before now, the private sector did not have the disposable resources to develop space travel commercially.

I have no doubt that tech exists that we are not privy to, due to it being important to military technology, We rightly keep it close to the vest so it can't be stolen, and put us at risk from our own tech.

Yes I did post it in this forum and for a reason.

I’m asserting that witnessing a public company accomplish what it did today - and the way it paved for private space flight - suggests to me that the government likely has better tech than this.

Since money matters - we just pumped trillions into our economy with a vote. If we threw trillions at space travel we’d probably have some cool gear, right? Right. Money has never been the problem from the Government perspective.

Is what we have ET level tech? Maybe. Could we have had ET influence? I think that’s a distinct possibility.

Or, we found the artifacts as Lazar suggested. Given we could have repeated known civilization literally thousands of times in Earths history, the probability of that isn’t zero - which makes me have to consider it.

So could we have ET or seemingly ET tech as it pertains to dark projects? Sure we could, IMO.

So could we have ET or seemingly ET tech as it pertains to dark projects? Sure we could, IMO.

What do you consider "ET tech" ?
Tech from sc-fi movies ?
That stuff ain't real .
Stop watching movies on TV and YouTube and start learning something of physics and other sciences.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: EnigmaChaser

Yes and no. The military really isn't 50 years ahead as so many claim. I know people that have worked bleeding edge programs and would have almost killed someone to get their hands on something from the civilian world that was more efficient and easier to use.

Star for that one.

You’re right - and that’s also true in many important parts of the private sector as well if one can believe it.

Most people would be floored if they saw the legacy programs major banks and broker dealers use....

I’ve had experiences that strongly imply there’s government as we think about it, and then there’s the portions of “government” who aren’t really constrained by the things we think about. It’s kind of like a business where If it really wants to go all in on something - and has deep pockets - it can and doesn’t look back. That exists at the federal level as well.

Im not saying that to be a cook. I have made it high enough up the chain in my career to well know theres the truth and the official narrative - which almost never are the same whether the news is good or bad.

a reply to: EnigmaChaser

Let's use that logic. What advanced propulsion methods does the f-22 or f-35 use? Since that's cutting edge military.

a reply to: EnigmaChaser

One problem I have with it all is the fact that if you tell a secret to a small group of people, before long the secret will spread to everyone. It's human nature.

When I think of the large number of people who would have to keep alien visitation or artifacts secret, I just can't think they could keep it secret. In fact, I'm certain they could not.

I have never seen any evidence shown that proves anything at all. I have seen a lot of fake evidence and bald faced lies from people wanting attention or profiting from it. Some participate because they want it to be true.

I think any tech we are unaware of is extremely rare these days and very much of human manufacture.

At the same time I'm certain that there exists intelligent life all throughout the Universe. Have they visited? Maybe, but unlikely when you consider the simple question of why. If they are aware of us, again highly unlikely, what reason would they have to worry about us.

originally posted by: proximo
a reply to: EnigmaChaser


They used the same basic technology that has been used since the 50's because we don't have anything better.

Exactly. But the real question is why not? The first half of the 1900s led to tremendous technology discoveries but the latter half didn't do much except make those technologies smaller, faster and cheaper. Why don't we have a much more advanced energy solution? We have the technology and the brains, what's holding us back?

Some of that old tech is still superior to others in certain ways, vacuum tubes cannot be destroyed by EMPs like digital components can. Between that and being far more tolerant of temperature extremes, Russia's MiG-25 had a lot of tube equipment into the late 1980s. A couple of years ago I was recycling some hospital equipment that had been taken out of service and found a shock treatment device (seriously) that has a tube in it for voltage production. And most of us know that tube audio equipment is far superior toe-to-toe than solid state for sound quality.

But in rocket propulsion? It sure seems like we could do better than kerosene and LOX.

To me this might mean that we progress only when somebody/something wants it. That would explain why humanity has sudden leaps and then nothing for long while or two people that couldn't contact or knew each other come up with the same invention at the very same time