Columbia shot down by a UFO??
- Thread starter magick
- Start date
Now while I believe that there is other life in the universe, this sort of stuff is just papp.
Bearing in mind how technologically advance other species would have to be to travel here do you really think we have technology to shoot them down or even track them?
Bearing in mind how technologically advance other species would have to be to travel here do you really think we have technology to shoot them down or even track them?
Someone care to sum up the theory... no sound in work.
Obviously not just "he thinks a UFO shot down Columbia"
Basicaly more advanced 'entities' are limiting our development in space because we're so destructive. They'll let us destroy our own planet and kill each other but they're not prepared to let us go out and do the same to other planets and speices.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2007
- Posts
- 3,951
Nothing to do with Xeno is it? I bet it was one of those DC9's
There's no real proof in this video, watched the two parts but he really doesn't have an appropriate argument. Yes there may have been photos but to prove anything with them the originals need to be shown, and even then there would be no real knowing what it was. The man who claims to have 'detected' two UFOs was probably right, however they could have been anything, obviously. More proof is needed to believe this - and also my question is why did the shuttle Atlantis take off successfully afterwards? And why is the ISS in space if the exta-terrestrials don't want us up there, or indeed the government? Utter rubbish IMO.
Why is it in the past 50 years we've hardly made any progression in space travel?
Last edited:
Because we haven't yet invented a means of propulsion capable of taking us far or fast enough... simple really. I mean ffs we've only been space-faring (I use the term loosely) for less than half a century... and only had serious computing power within the last 15 years... what do you expect... warp drives by now?
Lack of funding and advances in propulsion technologies.
I've considered this, but possibly it's because we haven't really made any macro technological advances since the seventies, everything's nano and more and more money is poured into smaller technology and more advanced technology than larger things, obviously with exceptions like the Airbus jets etc, but even then just a bigger version of old technolgy. Also more money has been spent on defense since the vietnam war and this might have something to do with it. I also don't think they can 'beat' the shuttle yet, even if they are working on something. These are my speculations and if you have cause to argue go for it, I'm genuinely interested in space and space travel.
Because it's mentally expensive, and voters won't allow their governments to spend the money: look at how people complain about the cost of NASA in the US, and of ESA in Europe. That's it; no big conspiracy. If you could invent a way of getting into space that was no more expensive then jet airliner travel then you wouldn't be able to see the sky for spaceships.
M
Permabanned
- Joined
- 5 Jan 2008
- Posts
- 4,123
Pretty damn good point of view if its true.
You didn't have cruise liners 50 years after the first boat was made... zomg it must have been the aliens!
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 15,788
- Location
- Outside in the bushes
Agreed
You might want to look at the technicalities and the cost.