"michael price" <nini_pad@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5678a39d.0308101838.79031243@posting.google.com...

"Nyk" <nyknyk@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message

news:<3f331ead_1@news.iprimus.com.au>...

"michael price" <nini_pad@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5678a39d.0305202041.584620ed@posting.google.com...

Nyk wrote:

I'm probably a kook, I'm defiantly NOT a scientist, but I'm sure

as

 hell ain

't no spook.

(snipped myself)

  The NSA was created to intercept soviet transmissions, a job that

was

going on well before Hoover even know about it.  Hoover used the

Vehonna

intercepts to prosecute soviet spies but never had the power or

technical

ability to control it.

ok, more interesting info to stick in google, thanks

  You should have checked before you posted.

Sorry, but I thought this was a place to discuss ideas, I did'nt think I
needed to cite sources (of which i have admittedly few).
My first post was litterally thrown out as another angle on this whole Alien
thing.  It's not publishable material (thats for sure).

Earlier, the prohibition had created
the Black Market.  And by gaining control of Black Money, he was

able to create a Black Government.

  But he didn't get control of black money.  If anything black money

got

control of him.

Do we agree that he was central to the Black economy?

  No.  He might have been was central to the Nation Crime Commissions
control of various criminal enterprises but that a long way from being
"central
to the black economy".  Without him the black economy would have been
less national and more state based but probably not all that much
smaller.

Ok, so do we agree that there was a black economy created, probably by no
single individual, but by a group of unscrupulous beurocrats and businessmen
unconnected to each other, except by their greed and corruptness?
And it is too this black economy that black government owes its alliegence?

One that never got voted in nor got voted out.
Yay! Pax Americana!  The nation of constant war!

  But Hoover didn't get to decide on whether there was any war.

Nor did Kissinger, but they have/had influence

  Kissinger yes, but how did Hoover have influence?  As far as I know
he
never came out for a particular war, although he may have smeared
peace
protesters as communist (which many were).

Hoover Economics demanded an enemy, and as long as people were

more

terrified of that enemy, they didn't notice how their own

Government

 screwed

them.    It was a sweet deal Hoover set up with the russians.

Blame

everything on the other, and the people behave. But what would

happen

 if the

communists disappeared?  You'd need another enemy.  What if you

 created one?

During WW2, the secrets act that was developed around the nuclear

 weapon was

also applied to other promising technologies.  I think Tesla's

many

 patents

ended up here, hence the under-promotion he receives.   Also

Operation

 Paper

Clip brought over many of the founding fathers (monsters all) of

 genetics.

Hoover's think tanks put 2 and 2 together and came up with the

alien

invasion plan.  A ready built enemy.  Using his Hollywood arm, and

in

particular Orson Welles, he tested the theory out one gloomy night

in

Denver, with Orson's War of the Worlds providing the soundtrack.

 Success,

people more than believed, they freaked, and who did they turn to

for

protection.

  But there was never a time when fear of alien invasion was an

important

justification for increases State power.  The enermy was always the
Soviets, Chinese or Islamic fundamentalism.  The War of The Worlds
incident did not make people afraid of aliens, if anything it made

such

fears seem ridiculous.

Yes, the enemy was the "Communist" states.  Then the "Drug Czars" and

now

the "Terrorists".  The Alien invasion scenario is a left over piece of

cold

war silliness.

  And I repeat, it was never the justification for an increase in
State power.
Some random loons may have believe in it.

I'm a loon, but not that random.  And i agree that UFO's has never been a
reason to increase taxes.
Nor have I seen any Alien invasion enlistment posters.

My whole point is that it was a silly idea by a silly man who got into a
position of power.  And that other silly men in power have occasionally kept
up the pretence while absolutley insane men have believed and cheered from
the sidelines...

The plan works like this.

Buzz and deny.
Fly vehicles around out of the way places, or in dodgy foreign

 countries.

Deny their existence (even tho' civilian radar's could pick em up

in

 the

pre-stealth days)

Set up a Patsy and deny.
You take a respected scientist, swear him to secrecy then take him

 into a

room filled with captured "alien" technology. tell him he can back

 engineer

anything, but he can't say where it came form.. Give him some

years to

 stew,

and deny everything when he breaks his silence.  Those poor

bastards.

Maintain Limited Civilian Contact and deny.
Abductions enable the black Government to experiment on their own

 people.

Tracking devices seem popular.
Poor, poor bastards

Allow the myth to spread. And deny.
Close Encounters, Independence Day (crock o' bilge) and others

keeps

 the

fear alive.  No need to be involved in this, its automatic.

  Then why were there so many movies about the aliens being our

friends?

E.T., Close Encounters, Starman etc.?

Post 70's, mostly, (just a little aside... is "The Day the Earth Stood
Still" the first "Aliens are friendly/Our Government is Stupid" movie?).
Also, I don't believe any one person or organization control everything.
The best these "powers that be" can hope for is influence.

  So why the change?  If the policy was working (and you have no
evidence it
even existed) why not keep it?  If the government didn't have enough
influence
to stop "Aliens friendly/ Government Stupid" movies in the post 70s
what changed?

I never stated that the policy worked...  just that it maybe existed.

After Hoover died, the Hooverites (Bush snr being the main

inheritor)

continued the plan.  Along with many other deceptions (the war

against

communism) the war against the alien was jacked up to a whole new

 level.

Its under Bush that the plan became more about keeping the people

 busy,

Reagan really dug the idea, he put more money than any president

into

 it.

Hence the upsurge of abductions and sightings during his

presidency.

 As

opposed by the drop off during the time of Carter, who was

obviously

 kept

ignorant of the Black Governments existence.  Did they buzz Carter

to

discredit him?
Today tho, the Alien invasion plan seems to have become unpopular,

 probably

polluted by to much civilian awareness.
The War on Drugs and now the War on Terrorism seem to be much more

 stable

excuses to proliferate arms and remove peoples freedoms

Stuff to ponder

snipped some

4. The A.Grav propollsion is probably useless away from a dense G.

 Field.

UFO's are not space craft.

  Even if A.Grav drive becomes useless at 1/2 a G that would decrease

the

wieght of feul by 70%+.  This would give space to the US totally.

There

would be massive economic, military and even residential facilities in
space.  Why would they keep this suppressed when it is so useful.

I never said, nor do i think that EM A.grav is usefull

  Then why claim it is being used?  I repeat even if A-Grav drives are
useless
without 1/2 a gravity the implications for US control of orbital space
and by
implication all military reconaissance and trillions of dollars in
manufacturing and power generation are enormous.

I reiterate, I am no scientist, but....
Wouldn't the amount of EM radiation the a "graviton" affecting EM plasma put
out be very bad for biology?
Cancer?
And also, couldn't this EM Plasma lense be very expensive, in terms of
power, to produce?

5. We can't communicate with the alien intelligences on this

planet,

 how can

we think of communicating with something from another planet

6. Silicon chips, a.grav, and other supposed Alien Technologies

can

 all be

traced to human inventors who were kept hidden by the secrets act.

7. The amount of energy to move matter from one position of

space-time

 to

another at these extreme distances is stupendous.

  What extreme distances?  You said yourself the technology is not
spaceworthy.

I'm talking in terms of translocation, or "warp" or whatever. Doesn't

matter

how you travel, the energy needed is the same.

  And my point stands.  If the problem is extreme distances then it is
still
usefull for earth to orbit work, the most expensive part of space
flight.

Yes, except for the EM radiation... (see above)

 Doing it would definitely
leave wakes of energy in lots of spectrums.  Hell, a baseball

 travelling at

near light speed would leave a sun destroying wake.  Think we

would of

 seen

this by now it they were out there somewhere.

8. The length of time that a being with the ability to build

devices

 of any

complexity can exist in the universe is held short by the

destructive

 nature

of this chaotic universe.

All things lead towards entropy.
(rocks hit planets)

 Form does not hold.

  Why not?

see above

  Doesn't answer the question.  Entropy is a characteristic of a
_closed_
system.  Sentient beings are not such a system nor are societies of
them.
They are intrinsictly limited only by the ability of the universe to
survive.

I disagree, we are no different for the dust that makes us.  We are not
exceptions to universal rules.  All sentient beings end, all society's they
create end like them.
Constant energy must be applied to stave back encroaching entropy.
It is always on the border of our existence.
You splat when you drop, right?

 What are the odds of two
alien species existing at around the same time, and within

distance to

contact?

  Hard to say.

Hard to calculate.

  Well yes, that's what I believe I said.  Define "distance to
contact" for a
start.  Even assuming STL Von Neuman machines the distance to contact
could
be anywhere in the Milky Way if the societies last long enough.

Carl Sagan thought the same thing.  And I have the chutzpah to disagree with
him (I'm also fond of shouting "Einstien was Wrong")
I have another argument against what I call the "Radio-Fascist" that would
take up another post.
To surmise....   2 kinds of life in the universe molecular (us) and solid
state (planets and suns).  Both life forms are mutually exclusive.  IF there
are other molecular based life forms we would be better off using the
sympathetic resonance of a field of daisies then with radio telescopes
(which are good at finding solid-state entities).
Also I should of said "distance for PHYSICAL contact"  as there is quite
feasably a way to communicate regardless of position in time and space.

The universe is a very, very dangerous place, and we delude
ourselves in our temporary island of safety.

  Our "temporary" island of safety is based our intelligence.  It is

not

likely to go away just because "the universe is a very, very dangerous
place". It isn't if you think and anticipate.
  You really don't think your theories through.

Yeah your right, to emotive to be a scientist, but you can always refer

to

the experts  But no matter how smart we are, something can always

getcha.

Hell, it could be our own smarts that get us!  Don't get me wrong, I am
extropian, but what can we do about that nearby Nova or rock the size of
Kansas.

  Nearby Novas are rare, and if some of us are 10,000 light years away
it aint
that big a deal.  Rocks the size of Kansas?  Are they going to hit the
Earth,
Moon, and all the L-4 and L-5 colonies all at the same time?

What Moon colonies and L-4 and L-5 refer to Le Grange points right?  How
come I can't see these bases?
Come on Michael, you had me thinking you were a rational voice!

 Or that mad physics experiment the lights up the atmosphere?
Oh and just before I sound too apopalyptic, I don't think this is gonna
happen anytime soon, yet it it could happen anytime.
I do not support the "end of the world".
Life is tenacious

(snippity snip)

Anyway's, thanks for the replies, queries,  and straightener outers.
I still think it is a better argument then that alien one....

And despite the Alternative 3 scenario, I still think your quite rational.
Thanks for the reply to the reply