Are we hitting a technological plateau? (And do we owe all our recent tech to reverse engineering o

Let's take a look at the technological advancement of the human race:

For the first 145,000 to 195,000 years, nothing other than spreading the species around the globe, fire and hunting with sharpened sticks.

Then we seem to discover language, the wheel, building semipermanent shelters and agriculture.

For the next 4,000 years not much happens until we get to the nineteenth century and figure out how to harness steam power. Next comes the Industrial Revolution, electricity and the internal combustion engine.

Then comes what seems to be the biggie, we harness the power of the atom in the mid 1940's.

That's when it really takes off and for the next 40 to 45 years we scream along at warp speed and 'discover' more in that short period of time than had been discovered by our species during the rest of it's very long history. We go from the abacus to the PC in less than 100 years. But since the begining of the 90's, what have we really 'discovered'??? Sure we have fine tuned things that we previously in existance. Computers have more memory and can run faster, TV's are flatter, cell phones are smaller and 'smarter', but where are the new 'breakthroughs'?

Have we hit a plateau? Have we reverse engineered the Roswell wreck as much as we can? Are we just out of ideas and way past what our intelligence is capable of achieving?

Why did we hit this rapid growth of technology and why does it seem to be slowing down in the last twenty years?

reply to post by JaxonRoberts


Yes, we have gone too far too fast.

Technology has a lot to answer for.

The swing of the pendulum is happening, as it always does.

Hopefully, we will swing back to caring about each other.

Originally posted by catwhoknows
reply to post by JaxonRoberts

 

Yes, we have gone too far too fast.

Technology has a lot to answer for.

You don't make any sense.

Please clarify the quoted statements.

*Technology cannot answer for anything & You have no basis for comparison.

Maybe not a tech plateau, but an energy-density plateau.

We built up in the 19th and 20th Centuries using oxidized hydrocarbons. Energy density of hydrocarbons is sufficient to cause mayhem if misused, and supply is limited and diminishing.

But nuclear has an energy density an order of magnitude greater than hydrocarbon oxidation. So? Containment becomes a problem. Put a plutonium pellet in your hand phaser, and die from gamma irradiation or carry around 200 lbs. of lead shielding. Screw up and it contaminates wide areas.

So for gadgets, nuclear was a no-go.

Even if zero-point or vacuum energy becomes real, the energy density problem won't go away. We just aren't going to get Iron Man Suits, even if the tech gets made (outside of Spec Ops).

So we're getting the low-power, high tech stuff.

And, that's probably ALL we (average Joes) are ever gonna get.

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
Let's take a look at the technological advancement of the human race:

For the first 145,000 to 195,000 years, nothing other than spreading the species around the globe, fire and hunting with sharpened sticks.

Then we seem to discover language, the wheel, building semipermanent shelters and agriculture.

For the next 4,000 years not much happens until we get to the nineteenth century and figure out how to harness steam power. Next comes the Industrial Revolution, electricity and the internal combustion engine.

Then comes what seems to be the biggie, we harness the power of the atom in the mid 1940's.

That's when it really takes off and for the next 40 to 45 years we scream along at warp speed and 'discover' more in that short period of time than had been discovered by our species during the rest of it's very long history. We go from the abacus to the PC in less than 100 years. But since the begining of the 90's, what have we really 'discovered'??? Sure we have fine tuned things that we previously in existance. Computers have more memory and can run faster, TV's are flatter, cell phones are smaller and 'smarter', but where are the new 'breakthroughs'?

Have we hit a plateau? Have we reverse engineered the Roswell wreck as much as we can? Are we just out of ideas and way past what our intelligence is capable of achieving?

Why did we hit this rapid growth of technology and why does it seem to be slowing down in the last twenty years?

There's something that holds mankind back by suppressing advanced technologies until much later where mainstream academia are merely for delivering outdated technology to the world by pretending to "invents cutting edge technology" and our species is lot older than you thought

reply to post by JaxonRoberts


i'm not sure all discoveries have been shared.



i'm not sure if we owe our recent technological advances to reverse-engineering altogether as much as we owe our technilogical advances to our own future timeline(s) encrypting & encoding our languages with intimate knowledge concerning future technological advances.


future events and technological advice seems to be encoded into the words we are being fed, and/or creating.


not sure how many examples you may require, but their are many to choose from.....

usama bin laden
same letters as:
abuse mainland

also:

I'm Star Trek Capt.
same letters as: (*if we turn the "m" upside down (w))
Patrick Stewart


the technological advances by TPTB are given to them by the future, i think.


but, i think ... i also think that what you think is what you think, i think.



thoughts, things & stuff,
ET

reply to post by JaxonRoberts


no the government just hides it from the public and keeps it under wraps.

I've heard the rate of technology innovation is increasing exponentially. However the adoption of new technologies is limited by money. Corporations devise plans to profit and introduce technology in stages which limits the introduction of new technologies. Then government and environmental regulations impede deployment of infrastructure sometimes required for the use of new technologies. One case in point is a better transportation system here in the US. There are other technologies and fuel sources other than using oil and gas. Extremely large investments must be made by someone to develop the infrastructure to switch over to whatever new technology we use. Individuals will have to pay for new vehicles using the new technology whether that is electric, natural gas, or hydrogen or a hybrid combination. A lot of new technology has been invented but the investment and profit incentives or cost savings need to be there to develop the technology for the masses to use.

reply to post by JaxonRoberts


No way we have hit a plateau..

We are making breakthroughs at astonishing rates these days.. And most of that boils down to the amount of people in cities and ingenuity that results from this.

Didn't you see all that stuff recently that is controlled by brainwaves? Em HELLO!!!!! That changes EVERYTHING once it is harnessed and developed properly. And thats just one relatively small thing.

Just because you don't hear about the new technology straight away doesn't mean its not there.. Corporations and Militaries keep things under wraps for obvious reasons.

For those that laugh and sneer at the notion that our technology comes fom back engineered crashed/shot down U.FO'S (Intelligently controlled craft piloted by off world species) should look at the designs of aeroplanes from 1930's to the 1980's, you will see that between the end of the war up to the 70's aircraft design changed rapidly and quite unexpectedly.

I am speaking of course about the planes like the B-29 Superfortress (1939-1960) to the F-117A Nighthawk (1982- ).

Where did the leap in advancement not only in design but in technology come from all of a sudden?

There are rumours that ET gave the USA government technology in exchange for abducting human beings so that the species could not only sustain their own lives but created hybrids of ourselves in order to populate other planets. Of course it all sounds like science fiction but if there is any inkling of truth to these rumours we have been sold down the river for technology

Originally posted by franspeakfree


Where did the leap in advancement not only in design but in technology come from all of a sudden?

It came from humans.

There is no evidence or reason to believe that aliens were involved.

reply to post by Exuberant1


Here is a much more deserving detailed thread on the OT this goes in to great detail how in the 50's we suddenly saw a leap in technological development. It goes in to great detail, lots to paw over and lots of videos to watch.

Definitive Back Engineered Alien Technology Research

reply to post by franspeakfree



I'm familiar with the state of the art tech discussed in that thread.

But there is still nothing which suggests alien involvement.

reply to post by Exuberant1


And the testimonials from the likes of Boylan,Corso,Lazaar and of course David Wilcox? they all can't be lying can they?

reply to post by franspeakfree


They probably are.

Why do you think they are telling the truth?

reply to post by Exuberant1


Why do you think they aren't? it works both ways you know.

Do you honestly believe that from all the personal sources,accounts,testimonies out in the public arena that they are all fabricated and indeed false? All it takes is 1 of those statements to be true and then you have the answer your looking for.

[edit on 13-7-2010 by franspeakfree]

Originally posted by franspeakfree
reply to post by Exuberant1

 

Why do you think they aren't? it works both ways you know.

You are the one invoking aliens...


What is the most believable story you have heard?

Which evidence is the most convincing of alien involvement in your opinion?

reply to post by Exuberant1


The OT is asking whether of not we owe all our recent tech to reverse engineering. Reverse engineering would imply that we have created something from technology that isn't our own.

In my book anyone that is willing to testify in front of congress about their own personal witnessed experiences holds a high level of authenticity.

Originally posted by franspeakfree
reply to post by Exuberant1

 

In my book anyone that is willing to testify in front of congress about their own personal witnessed experiences holds a high level of authenticity.

I suppose such a claim is easier to make when one knows that there is not a snowball's chance in hell of any of them getting the opportunity to sit in front of congress and testify about UFOs.

*And think about who we are dealing with. For many of them, what's one more false claim? Especially when it makes them sound so good.


So are you going to say which evidence/story you find most convincing?

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
For the next 4,000 years not much happens until we get to the nineteenth century and figure out how to harness steam power. Next comes the Industrial Revolution, electricity and the internal combustion engine.

Well, what about arches and the revolution in building, exploration, the development of farming, scientific principles, Galileo, Newton, pharmacy... You're underselling a period of significant foundation-laying advance with that 'nothing much.'

Then comes what seems to be the biggie, we harness the power of the atom in the mid 1940's.

Well that makes sense. I agree the great leap forward with the advent of steam power is comparable to the dawn of the atomic / nuclear age. A new source of power would, though, surely? If we could harness solar power in a more efficient, portable way, or sort out fusion, we would rewrite everything that has gone before using the new power source and then stretch out into new areas. That seems to be our way - transport and industrial machinery redesigned; nowadays add leisure and gadgetry in...