Look. If we do find "ET" you would be able to tell no doubt on your graphs and data from SETI@Home and that "ET" would likely be like us...or in the same situation as us. Maybe they will be a little ahead...maybe a little behind. But if they are sending out a radio wave like the ones we are searching for then they will likely NOT have the kind of space travel I will compare to "Star Trek". For if they did, they would not be sending out a signal unless it was to ask the same question we are: "Are We Alone?"

The other reason they may be sending a radio wave or a message is a message that would not be a reply. It would likely be a message to say we are coming to see you to A: Say Hello. B: Invade (cuz they would get off on telling us they are invading because there would be no way for us to stop them and no where to go).

---

"By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible". Hebrews 11.3

Like Appetiser points out, Area51 does exist(Within Nellis Air Force Base) and not only does it exist but a few modern spy planes were developed there. Most notably the Stealth fighter and B2 Stealth Bomber. Just think how radically different their shapes and capabilities are compared to previous planes. Alien influence? Who knows. Maybe the movie Independence Day shines some light on a possibility of what really is going on there.

Maybe the movie Independence Day shines some light on a possibility of what really is going on there.

Puuuhhhleeeaase don't use Hollywood to derive your examples from, it belittles your argument.
I understand the use of it...but puuhleeaase try to hold off on such "factual" sources.

Thankya, thankya very much,
Alex:)>

---

be our fwend at..http://www.myspace.com/bandescandar

Like Appetiser points out, Area51 does exist(Within Nellis Air Force Base) and not only does it exist but a few modern spy planes were developed there. Most notably the Stealth fighter and B2 Stealth Bomber. Just think how radically different their shapes and capabilities are compared to previous planes. Alien influence? Who knows. Maybe the movie Independence Day shines some light on a possibility of what really is going on there.

Actually the shapes of the 'Stealth Fighter' and B2 are based on algorythms? developed and published by Russian scientists. The CCCP couldn't figure out how to use them militarily and hoped the Americans wouldn't either. The shapes account for most of the 'Stealth' capabilites, composite materials and ECM for the rest.

---

Need help? Check out the excellent Unofficial BOINC-Wiki!
'We are the BOINC. Prepare to be assimilated.'

Like Appetiser points out, Area51 does exist(Within Nellis Air Force Base) and not only does it exist but a few modern spy planes were developed there. Most notably the Stealth fighter and B2 Stealth Bomber. Just think how radically different their shapes and capabilities are compared to previous planes. Alien influence? Who knows. Maybe the movie Independence Day shines some light on a possibility of what really is going on there.

Actually the shapes of the 'Stealth Fighter' and B2 are based on algorythms? developed and published by Russian scientists. The CCCP couldn't figure out how to use them militarily and hoped the Americans wouldn't either. The shapes account for most of the 'Stealth' capabilites, composite materials and ECM for the rest.

Really? Because the B-2 Spirit was based on a design from the Germans for a tail-less intercepter using a type of ramjet/jet engine combo. The F-117 was designed by a team in California knocking around box and sharp angle-lines before twisting things around. The Russians? Try again, man.

(Gets off his soapbox after planting the flag)

---

Like Appetiser points out, Area51 does exist(Within Nellis Air Force Base) and not only does it exist but a few modern spy planes were developed there. .........

Actually the shapes of the 'Stealth Fighter' and B2 are based on algorythms? developed and published by Russian scientists. .................

Really? Because the B-2 Spirit was based on a design from the Germans for a tail-less intercepter using a type of ramjet/jet engine combo. The F-117 was designed by a team in California knocking around box and sharp angle-lines before twisting things around. The Russians? Try again, man.

(Gets off his soapbox after planting the flag)

There were many previous designs for tailless delta aircraft, by the Americans, British, Germans and others. An American company, (Northrop?) even built a full-scale flying prototype for a tailless delta bomber in the 50's for a USAF contract, as well as several previous aircraft, at least one before WWII.

I was referring to the angular goemetry, specifically of the F117 when I mentioned the research done _partly_ by Russian scientists, which the CCCP discarded as militarily worthless and allowed to be published, which the Skunkworks or Goom Lake picked up on, leading to the 'Have Blue' program. I should have been clearer here.

I'm not knocking American innovation. It was great that they noticed the shapes could be used to reduce as well as increase radar signatures, then figured out how to make the shapes fly, which incidentally needed a supercomputer, not a couple of cardboard boxes :)

Edit: Northrop details, Goom Lake
PS: Does this discussion actually belong on the science forum?

---

Need help? Check out the excellent Unofficial BOINC-Wiki!
'We are the BOINC. Prepare to be assimilated.'

Like Appetiser points out, Area51 does exist(Within Nellis Air Force Base) and not only does it exist but a few modern spy planes were developed there. .........

Actually the shapes of the 'Stealth Fighter' and B2 are based on algorythms? developed and published by Russian scientists. .................

Really? Because the B-2 Spirit was based on a design from the Germans for a tail-less intercepter using a type of ramjet/jet engine combo. The F-117 was designed by a team in California knocking around box and sharp angle-lines before twisting things around. The Russians? Try again, man.

(Gets off his soapbox after planting the flag)

There were many previous designs for tailless delta aircraft, by the Americans, British, Germans and others. An American company, (Northrop?) even built a full-scale flying prototype for a tailless delta bomber in the 50's for a USAF contract, as well as several previous aircraft, at least one before WWII.

I was referring to the angular goemetry, specifically of the F117 when I mentioned the research done _partly_ by Russian scientists, which the CCCP discarded as militarily worthless and allowed to be published, which the Skunkworks or Goom Lake picked up on, leading to the 'Have Blue' program. I should have been clearer here.

I'm not knocking American innovation. It was great that they noticed the shapes could be used to reduce as well as increase radar signatures, then figured out how to make the shapes fly, which incidentally needed a supercomputer, not a couple of cardboard boxes :)

Edit: Northrop details, Goom Lake
PS: Does this discussion actually belong on the science forum?

I wonder if they really did dabble in some designs because of the way that the MIGs and the Su Aircraft of the 50s-80s all had lines that were not demonstrating any sort of angular appearance. US designers also didn't have as many lines as demonstrated on the F-117 but there were some concepts that showed it in the F-4, F-5 and what not. Groom Lake didn't really play a huge role in the initial stages of the F-117, though...didn't Lockheed build the concept at it's facility in CA? Testing was done at Edwards on prototypes before the actual was at Groom Lake? Not up to snuff on Black Projects but it would seem rather unlikely that they got any sort of info from the Russians, considering most US firms were arrogant towards "inferior Soviet tech". Still, that's an interesting theory to kick around.

it's a stretch but it would belong in here. It's not gossip and it's not relating to crunching so yeah, Science is a good place for this.

---

Did a bit more digging, but I can't find the article that refered to the Russian research. I _think_ it was in a respected British aircraft magazine, maybe 'Flight', late 90's?

The 'Have Blue' project seems to have been developed in California by Lockheed-Martin , with flight-testing at Goom Lake and some at Edwards. F117 flight-testing seems to have been at Edwards, mainly. I'm open to correction.

The B2 _was_ developed by Northrop-Grumman, who had a long-term interest in 'flying wings'.

PS: Just remembered that, considering the amount of disinformation and misinformation surrounding the 'Stealth' projects, anything concerning them should viewed with a healthy dose of scepticism :)

Did a bit more digging, but I can't find the article that refered to the Russian research. I _think_ it was in a respected British aircraft magazine, maybe 'Flight', late 90's?

The 'Have Blue' project seems to have been developed in California by Lockheed-Martin , with flight-testing at Goom Lake and some at Edwards. F117 flight-testing seems to have been at Edwards, mainly. I'm open to correction.

The B2 _was_ developed by Northrop-Grumman, who had a long-term interest in 'flying wings'.

PS: Just remembered that, considering the amount of disinformation and misinformation surrounding the 'Stealth' projects, anything concerning them should viewed with a healthy dose of scepticism :)

Which all goes to show you that, when there is a concerted effort made by a group of people, there is a possibility to cover up such a project. However, in light of a public entity not funded by the government directly, it's unlikely to be suppressed under any guise to the US National Security Acts passed in the 1940s. There simply isn't an apparatus existing to do so on a global scale. If it were purely an American issue at question, and if they could isolate all users to be within US jurisdiction, it's possible that they could delay the release and make it seem like the government was investigating the incident, but not a concerted International effort utilizing hundreds of thousands of computers (SETI Classic/SETI Boinc). The Black Projects are subject to security and the primal urge of humans to be inquisitive of "secrets" makes them easily controllable. This project will not be.

---

Did a bit more digging, but I can't find the article that refered to the Russian research. I _think_ it was in a respected British aircraft magazine, maybe 'Flight', late 90's?

I can help a little:

In fact, the breakthroughs were based upon a little known piece of work from Russia, a monograph by Pyotr Ufimstsev, an optical theoretical physicist. Through the steps described in computing RCS for different parts of an aircraft, then summing them, the Lockheed team was finally able to computer model their aircraft designs

Also see here.

Ponbiki- while Soviet tech was considered inferior, I don't think their science was ever discounted.

---

Still looking for something profound or inspirational to place here.

Did a bit more digging, but I can't find the article that refered to the Russian research. I _think_ it was in a respected British aircraft magazine, maybe 'Flight', late 90's?

I can help a little:

In fact, the breakthroughs were based upon a little known piece of work from Russia, a monograph by Pyotr Ufimstsev, an optical theoretical physicist. Through the steps described in computing RCS for different parts of an aircraft, then summing them, the Lockheed team was finally able to computer model their aircraft designs

Also see here.

Ponbiki- while Soviet tech was considered inferior, I don't think their science was ever discounted.

Thanks Ghstwolf, I've always been terrible at research

Did a bit more digging, but I can't find the article that refered to the Russian research. I _think_ it was in a respected British aircraft magazine, maybe 'Flight', late 90's?

I can help a little:

In fact, the breakthroughs were based upon a little known piece of work from Russia, a monograph by Pyotr Ufimstsev, an optical theoretical physicist. Through the steps described in computing RCS for different parts of an aircraft, then summing them, the Lockheed team was finally able to computer model their aircraft designs

Also see here.

Ponbiki- while Soviet tech was considered inferior, I don't think their science was ever discounted.

I never said anything about their science. Their Technology was often discounted in the West, which seems to speak volumes about our arrogance. The MiG was a surprise back in Korea, Sputnik slapped us upside the head and we have yet to match the Typhoon, though it's not really practical as compared to the Ohio-Class.

---

I never said anything about their science. Their Technology was often discounted in the West, which seems to speak volumes about our arrogance.

You didn't, however, I would argue that it was still in the realm of science. You did use "tech", and it was wrong to put words in your mouth, even if I did read it that way. No malice intended, and it is just a matter of semantics.

---

Still looking for something profound or inspirational to place here.

I never said anything about their science. Their Technology was often discounted in the West, which seems to speak volumes about our arrogance.We westerners a wormy, evil, oppressive, uncultured magpies who should be exterminated to a man (men being worse) by any of several non-western tribal/national confederacies.

You didn't, however, I would argue that it was still in the realm of science. You did use "tech", and it was wrong to put words in your mouth, even if you are a flaming ass captain - I did read it that way. No malice intended, and it is just a matter of semantics.

Oh I say, don't be unseemly you chaps.

---

I never said anything about their science. Their Technology was often discounted in the West, which seems to speak volumes about our arrogance.We westerners a wormy, evil, oppressive, uncultured magpies who should be exterminated to a man (men being worse) by any of several non-western tribal/national confederacies.

You didn't, however, I would argue that it was still in the realm of science. You did use "tech", and it was wrong to put words in your mouth, even if you are a flaming ass captain - I did read it that way. No malice intended, and it is just a matter of semantics.

Oh I say, don't be unseemly you chaps.

Lol, we're not unseemly at all. Our debate here has been VERY cordial and very well respectful on both sides. We're both approaching the same topic from different views and we acknowledge holes in each other's theories without debunking the person who made it. It's sad that we don't see this type of format across all discussions here but for the most part, we're very good. :)

"Unseemly, you chaps"...now THAT's something you don't hear, ever, in Hawaii

---

I never said anything about their science. Their Technology was often discounted in the West, which seems to speak volumes about our arrogance.We westerners a wormy, evil, oppressive, uncultured magpies who should be exterminated to a man (men being worse) by any of several non-western tribal/national confederacies.

You didn't, however, I would argue that it was still in the realm of science. You did use "tech", and it was wrong to put words in your mouth, even if you are a flaming ass captain - I did read it that way. No malice intended, and it is just a matter of semantics.

Oh I say, don't be unseemly you chaps.

Lol, we're not unseemly at all. Our debate here has been VERY cordial and very well respectful on both sides. We're both approaching the same topic from different views and we acknowledge holes in each other's theories without debunking the person who made it. It's sad that we don't see this type of format across all discussions here but for the most part, we're very good. :)

"Unseemly, you chaps"...now THAT's something you don't hear, ever, in Hawaii

In Hawaii? I never heard it here in Buffalo NY either ;-)

---

"By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible". Hebrews 11.3

What you did not see on mars.