Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 657 posts

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#251

Post by NickC25 »

botro wrote: post #208
subsubzero wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But.. The US Govt. has zero reasons to acknowledge existence of a non-human superior technology spacecraft. It would undermine their position as world super power and destabilize trust and security in the country and could lead to mass instability and a slow down of technological progress. And if they are running a massive psyops deception campaign it would make the public lose the last vestige of trust left in the g…

Would a US President have the necessary clearance to know of the existence of non-human superior technology spacecraft? A former US President is recorded on tape boasting about knowledge of US military plans to invade Iran. I don't mean to make this political at all, just trying to reason on the basis of a personality and knowing that a president would boast about having knowledge of such trivial classified informati…

Supposedly the President is deliberately kept in the dark. Bush Sr. denied President Carter access to that information, and I have no doubt other more recent Presidents were denied access or purposely fed misinformation.

Trump in particular never showed any interest in anything besides enriching himself and allowing the Saudis, Russians, and Chinese to feed his ego. I doubt he even thought about the aliens, let alone went through enough trouble to ask about them....because if he did, and was denied info, he would have fired the intelligence officer who denied him access and publicly blabbered about it on Twitter.

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#252

Post by JPLeRouzic »

aredox wrote: post #149
Gud wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about the other half?

Almost all of Earth's population carries a camera (with their phones), and yet sightings of UFOs (or any cryptid) have been at an all-time low. https://xkcd.com/1235/

The other day while I was in the countryside I saw a military drone (I live near an airport doing military maintenance). It was the second time in a few months. I had my phone in my backpack, yet I didn't take any photos. Somehow the four seconds or so wasn't enough for me to make the decision.

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#253

Post by [deleted] »

gremlinsinc wrote: post #90
api wrote: post #3

I have heard these types of claims many times. The people making them seem more credible at first glance this time, but I am firmly in the camp of being deeply skeptical until I see concrete proof presented. That being said, I don’t completely discount the possibility. One answer to the Fermi paradox is that there isn’t one, and I can think of many reasons multiple governments would try to keep stuff like this secret…

The thing that bothers me is they supposedly have 12 or more craft that have crashed. Aliens have super sophisticated tech that is hardy enough to travel millions of light years through space but it crashes so easy on earth? What caused them to crash? I'd like to believe, and I think 1 or 2 might be reasonable but the claim is 12, which doesn't account for ships obtained by other nations as Grusch said I'd happening.…

[deleted]

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#254

Post by jvanderbot »

ch4s3 wrote: post #241
jvanderbot wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the mars helicopter essentially uses a cell phone, so not really. And it's not that low power. But yeah, the mentality was: We know this works, it's too costly to guarantee a new one will work, and too risky to just try it. Same in the military. Imagine the military didn't have radiation, temperature, etc requirements

From what I understand the helicopter was a special case and sort of a side mission meant to test off the shelf parts.

Sure, but those COTS parts still underwent lots and lots of rad/ vac testing. There's a design-for-resilience vs test-for-resilience tradeoff at play. I'm saying that not all systems require design-for-resilience.

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#255

Post by marcosdumay »

dragonwriter wrote: post #178
marcosdumay wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> nuclear arms race between Argentina and Brazil Yeah, lol, the what now? Anyway, Brazil has a working uranium enrichment facility, with public numbers, and as efficient as any modern one (what is way more efficient than anything from the time nuclear bombs were created). What kind of secrecy are you stating that is stopping Brazil?

> Yeah, lol, the what now? The late 1970s to early 1990s were an interesting time.

Oh, ok, that.

The comment doesn't really apply to that either. Germany and France were quite involved on that one, so it wasn't exactly secrecy that kept things slow. It was more due to the sheer unpopularity of the thing (on both sides) even between the people high-ranked enough to know about it.

I mean, by 85 Brazil had already a nuclear reactor in full activity. A reactor can get you enough plutonium for a bomb long before it's in full activity.

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#256

Post by godelski »

ch4s3 wrote: post #218
jvanderbot wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To add, the reason most computers are behind is usually a mentality of "if it aint broke dont fix it" Same thing in spaceflight. The most recent mars rover uses, essentially, a half-speed imac processor from 1990s.

> The most recent mars rover uses, essentially, a half-speed imac processor from 1990s. Isn't this because they need to be specified, texted, and certified to work under high levels of radiation, extreme temperature swings, and a tiny power envelope determined years in advance?

Not everything needs to meet those specific standards, but essentially yes. My sibling comment mentioned Ingenuity (Mars Helicopter), but let's mention Curiosity. It often gets cited as costing $2.5 billion dollars. So that alone says why you wouldn't want to risk anything (see my other comments, especially about TRL[note]). But that also took almost a decade![other note] Time is also very expensive, so how much would you risk? On a 10 year project, that is going to operate for another 12+ years (still going, landed in 2011) with no way to repair or fix the product, you probably want that thing to be reliable as shit. Worth an extra year or two to make that happen.

[note] TRL 9 pretty much doesn't exist in these types of missions. We don't have decades of operation of specific devices on other planets. But you still use very robust and redundant systems.

[other note] People often cite this as a waste of money, but when we consider the time it is pittance in the government budget. Costs could definitely come down, but in government money can only exchange hands through leaky buckets. NASA politically prides itself as having parts from every state, which from an engineering perspective should sound like a logistic nightmare, and it is. But this is the type of people you are voting for, people that love pageantry over pragmatism. (pageantry gets votes, pragmatism doesn't)

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#257

Post by asdff »

haswell wrote: post #63

I’m not saying that I buy into these narratives, but in the interest of curiosity and for sake of argument… Let’s say that there are real ET craft, and let’s say that the US government has indeed been retrieving and studying them for decades. If such analysis unlocks technology breakthroughs of the kind that would solve say, energy problems, the government now has the problem of sitting on secrets that it has no lega…

I would think that knowledge of ETs would be very destabilizing for our society. Why go into work the next day if there are literal ETs visiting our planet? Why pay taxes? Why fight for generals who have lied to you? Why worship your god? Especially if its a truth that has been kept secret for so long, that would be particularly damning for the legitimacy of current governments of the world in the eyes of most people, I would assume.

On the other hand, if we have our hands on ET craft, you'd have to imagine there are some capitalists who would like to profit hand over fist over whatever this technology might offer, people who aren't well leveraged for this revolution be damned and left to fight amongst themselves while your cabal maintains the largest technological advantage relative to other groups in human history. We have plenty of examples of capitalists profiteering at the expense of humans and the earth today.

This is all speculation of course, who knows what is happening.

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#258

Post by jvanderbot »

kube-system wrote: post #245
jvanderbot wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To add, the reason most computers are behind is usually a mentality of "if it aint broke dont fix it" Same thing in spaceflight. The most recent mars rover uses, essentially, a half-speed imac processor from 1990s.

Spaceflight has an inherently different set of requirements from the types of applications people on here mostly build. NASA doesn't need to run 2GB of javascript dependencies on their rover. They have people who can write lean real-time code in a low level language. They need to be sure a bit flip doesn't turn a 3 billion dollar project into rubble. There is no 'fix it in the next sprint' in spaceflight; after you h…

It's quite amazing to see that the mars rover has what you'd call self-driving capabilities, complete with onboard mapping & localization, yet without GPS and any kind of reasonable computer.

However, they did create an FPGA to do the stereo vision in real time, which is pretty cool too.

Re: US Congress doubles down on claims of illegal UFO retrieval programs

#260

Post by asdff »

justinclift wrote: post #75
haswell wrote: post #63

I’m not saying that I buy into these narratives, but in the interest of curiosity and for sake of argument… Let’s say that there are real ET craft, and let’s say that the US government has indeed been retrieving and studying them for decades. If such analysis unlocks technology breakthroughs of the kind that would solve say, energy problems, the government now has the problem of sitting on secrets that it has no lega…

> no legal pathway to introduce to the public So, DARPA doesn't exist, and it can't put out calls for things it'd like developed in certain areas? /s I mean, it doesn't really take much thinking at all to figure out ways to introduce "future generation" technology that's not going to raise many eyebrows.

If they had this technology I'd assume there would be no point of revealing it, since you'd lose the advantage of secrecy over it for no good reason. The US military is capable enough against other nations with conventional technology. I'd expect if this tech were employed in war it would be in defense of the planet itself.
Post reply on HN