Sure they have some stuff that is being concealed like nuclear capabilities, radar deflecting paint, EMPs, etc but it isn't as advanced as EarthStepper is saying. It's not a thousand years ahead of our time, but you have to understand how the military acquires this technology: they give huge grants to universities and manufacturing companies to try and develop products that would be useful for them (i.e. radar deflecting paint). The DoD has been looking to put SCIFs in universities in the last 2 years. I actually spearheaded an effort for the DoD to make a conference involving exactly this not too long ago. Is there a way to quantify whether something is a thousand years ahead of "civilian" technology? I don't think there is. All it takes is money and research.

But let me ask you this question. What is more effective and prudent? Lies stating that you have a satellites capable of striking earthly targets on the ground which enemies and potential enemies believe? Or actually spending billions of dollars developing similarly advanced technologies (if possible)? Same thing can be said about NSA/DHS big brother eavesdropping programs. I'm not saying everything is lie, but some things are.

Reversed engineered alien technology? I used to research this topic a lot and gradually become more interested in technology than alien life itself. There are a lot of cool things that are on the brink of being made into something useful if they haven't been already, and im thinking predominantly of propulsion systems like SCRAM jets capable of flying air/space-craft outside of the atmosphere and back; space jets, or hypersonic bombers. The idea that the government has something similar to CERN is a possibility as well and that is where they can hit real pay dirt in terms of technology. Technology like this is very compartmentalized, and someone working on applying radar deflecting paint on metal has NO IDEA whether his or her research is going to be applied to bombers, spaceships, or toasters. I don't think the stuff the military has could be as advanced as what could be discovered at CERN. Fusion could propel mammoth aircraft carrier sized ships in space (maybe bigger), and I think that is one of the ultimate technologies any civilization can aspire to have. To get off the planet where they evolved and continue their journey throughout the solar system/galaxy/universe.

But the question about aliens is interesting none the less from a technological standpoint. Curtis Lemay (a general in the Air Force) was reported as becoming angry immediately when asked about whether the AF was in contact with E.T.s and told the close friend who asked, "for christ sakes never bring that up again!" Maybe he thought E.T.s were a kooky idea, or maybe he was defending something.

But government investment is what drives consumer technology as well. As much as I disapprove of how the military industrial complex operates, humanity wouldn't be where it is today without research funding provided by the military. Satellites are a prime example.

My response is probably long, but technology is really something that interests me. Sometimes I wish I would have been an engineer or galactic physicist.

but you have to understand how the military acquires this technology: they give huge grants to universities and manufacturing companies to try and develop products that would be useful for them (i.e. radar deflecting paint).

That's our money. Legally, morally, and logically, the knowledge and technology belongs to the public domain.

Technology like this is very compartmentalized, and someone working on applying radar deflecting paint on metal has NO IDEA whether his or her research is going to be applied to bombers, spaceships, or toasters.

This is exactly how bad things happen. As a rule, distribution of information is absolutely good.

Sometimes I wish I would have been an engineer or galactic physicist.

Then be one. It can still happen. It's not too late until it's too late.

I say he's pretty accurate.

[deleted]

man if you only knew how incompetent the military generally is

He spends about 10 min talking about the founding fathers followed by

Why we can't even pray in the public schools anymore...

I would say that 1000 years is pretty far off, but military technology is definitely more advanced, but the public has no knowledge of this because they are too ignorant to even think about it

Just check out this video of a press conference held in 2003 I think. Its mostly about disclosure of ufo files, but they also discuss having actually witnessed advanced technology, and how its being covered up as a matter of course. The compelling thing about this press conference is everyone is ex-military, or ex-government and have outstanding credentials, and they each say they will testify in court as to what they have witnessed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vyVe-6YdUk

Agree...just think of all the UFO sightings. And also Magic Johnson is still alive.

Of course, the technology that they 'show us' is all from the 80's.

Of course they are. They usually only let the public see whatever is ten years old.

For example stealth planes, the blackbird spy plane.

One of the most interesting examples was how much of the Hubble telescope was a waste of money becuase the military had a way to spy from satellites and cancel the effects of earth's atmosphere on optics.

The technique called adaptive optics only became public after the Hubble telescope was launched. Now ground based telescopes can see as well or better than the Hubble without having to be launched above the atmosphere. Th Hubble can still see better in some wavelengths that don't penetrate the atmosphere well but adaptive optics made unnecessary the MAIN reason the Hubble telescope was launched above the earth's atmosphere.

A modern airframe takes, at minimum, ten years for development. The F-22 Raptor was not deployable overseas until 17 years after the flight of its initial prototype. The Air Force can hide its developmental airframes, but not production/operational aircraft, because they become too visible. The AF gains a considerable lead time on potential adversaries, as countering systems will takes years of development. If the Air Force acknowledged new technology in its infancy, an adversary could have a counter waiting before the new jets even rolled out of the factory.

[deleted]

I'd say so.

Its kind of a moot point, until you're at the top, you may never know eh?

What's the deal with HAARP?

I just want to know what they're putting in our water supply!

Yep, tho at this point to say it's NASA is almost a misdirection away from their contractors like RAND.

Antigrav, radiant energy, and weapons systems have all been around for bare minimum of decades.

Up side is it's all easily reproducible.