Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 42

Thread: UFO Ownership - If an ET Craft crashes on your land, whose property is it?

  1. #21
    @ Calikid

    Here is a funny joke I just recalled the Advisor made years ago.

    Grab a rock, any rock, then hold it day and night.

    How long does it take for that rock to "belong to you"?

    ----------------------------------

    When you get the complex humor you should feel free to laugh a bit at the absurdity.

    If you don't, then imagine the joke again with a bar of gold, then back the rock. You'll probably laugh at some point when you realize how even intelligent beings can make up some dumb "stuff"...and even fully believe it as if it were actually true.
    For every action, there is a corresponding over-reaction. -- Anonymous

  2. #22
    Lead Moderator calikid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    8,218
    Blog Entries
    19
    We do all live in a fabricated reality.
    Rules we all play by IRL.
    Ownership, deeds of trust, purchases, etc. are facts of life we must deal with no matter the level of absurdity.
    Which brings us back to the original topic.
    If the government cannot prove hostile intent, why don't I own wreckage that is discovered on my personal property?
    If an individual owns an automobile that can out perform a police cruiser, the cops don't confiscate the vehicle simply because it "might" be a threat IF used in a criminal manner.
    Same with saucer tech, it is a matter of national security because it can outperform "our" aircraft?
    When did that become the standard?
    The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
    progress. -- Joseph Joubert
    Attachment 1008

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by calikid View Post
    We do all live in a fabricated reality.
    Rules we all play by IRL.
    Ownership, deeds of trust, purchases, etc. are facts of life we must deal with no matter the level of absurdity.
    There is also a larger hidden realization to that joke up above. It has to do with the idea surrounding the concept of ownership and how any group or individual reacts based on that fabrication or self delusion that they actually own anything. The idea itself shapes behaviors and reasoning of any intelligent being.

    The various questions you are posing are centered around the idea of ownership and gaining advantages (in some way).

    A Question: The UFO crashed in your front yard. Why do you wish to exert ownership over it? Why are you worried that someone like a government body will come and take it from you?

    The first response that comes to mind should probably be dissected until you really understand deep down what it is you really want in this hypothetical situation.

    Is it to glean technology? The pride of owning some ETs' downed vehicle? The hope of some advantage by "owning" a rare item?

    What will you do with "it" when you exert your idea of ownership upon the object? What is the ultimate fulfilled purpose?

    Quote Originally Posted by calikid View Post
    Which brings us back to the original topic.
    If the government cannot prove hostile intent, why don't I own wreckage that is discovered on my personal property?
    Arbitrary rules someone made up.

    Quote Originally Posted by calikid View Post
    If an individual owns an automobile that can out perform a police cruiser, the cops don't confiscate the vehicle simply because it "might" be a threat IF used in a criminal manner.
    Actually, there are laws that prevent non-standard vehicles from operating in normal roads. There are specifications for vehicles to be road legal.

    A portion of muscle cars [for example] are often deemed not road worthy and practically illegal to drive down the road. (You won't get permission nor registration for driving that vehicle on a public road.)

    Even performance cars have to be designed to be road legal. Most specialized vehicles cannot be driven on normal roads, even if they actually can drive down a public road perfectly fine.

    ---------------------------------
    The same is generally true for planes in our sky.

    Quote Originally Posted by calikid View Post
    Same with saucer tech, it is a matter of national security because it can outperform "our" aircraft?
    When did that become the standard?
    When the arbitrary rule was made that they take UFOs under a tarp and threaten witnesses into silence.

    Our kind (humanity) is keen on just making things up on the spot and hoping no one will contradict the "new rule" put into place 5 seconds ago.

    It's all made up and then logic is half applied to make it all sound sensible.

    National Interests = "We reserve the right to change the rules at any time."
    For every action, there is a corresponding over-reaction. -- Anonymous

  4. #24
    A man lived in an abandoned shack on the beach someplace where the weather was always pleasant. The shack had no windows and no door. He slept on an old mattress. He ate from a wooden bowl with a wooden spoon. He had all he needed and although it was next to nothing, he was content. One day someone who felt sorry that he had only the dirt floor brought him a nice old carpet. They put it on the floor and it was very comforatble indeed. The man suddenly realized he now needed a door. And a lock.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Doc View Post
    A man lived in an abandoned shack on the beach someplace where the weather was always pleasant. The shack had no windows and no door. He slept on an old mattress. He ate from a wooden bowl with a wooden spoon. He had all he needed and although it was next to nothing, he was content. One day someone who felt sorry that he had only the dirt floor brought him a nice old carpet. They put it on the floor and it was very comforatble indeed. The man suddenly realized he now needed a door. And a lock.
    If our government is motivated by the concept of maintaining personal comfort (and most human beings around the world are motivated in such a way) then, it is obvious they will want to take a UFO that crashed in someones front yard.

    They will operate under the assumption that what is best for Uncle Sam is best for all.

    (though by extension all sorts of problems later develop from that kind of thinking)

    -------------------------

    If a persons entire decision making process is entirely guided by the resolution to seek, maintain and perpetuate personal comfort...then they are going to take that UFO to exploit it in whatever method they believe is justified.

    Going so far as to deny it exist under the tarp. Silencing witnesses, perpetuating a never ending coverup, etc.

    Any individual whom only thinks entirely of perpetuating their current standard of living and fearing others whom may alter that standard for the worse...well...any number of actions are ultimately internally justified.

    ------------------------

    In my mind it doesn't really matter if it is a rancher or a government agent with military trucks in tow. If they constantly have a fear inside them that if they "do nothing" their perceived advantage is going to be foiled. Then they will act on it to protect their perceived interests.

    In this mentality, a downed ET craft is "an opportunity" rather than a tragedy.

    The first thoughts crossing a ranchers mind [or government] are probably how to exploit the property to reconstruct new technologies and therefore new perceived advantages.

    Etc.

    It may then become a hidden secret for years until they have milked their find completely dry. Be it a rancher or a government doing the hiding.
    For every action, there is a corresponding over-reaction. -- Anonymous

  6. #26
    ---------------------------------------
    People whom are overly accustomed to thinking in these terms would find nothing at all wrong with that. (unless they are on the outside looking in)

    If we had intersteller planes that arrived on a distant world and crashed. If those natives thought along the lines like we currently do. They would pry open the airlocks, look inside, be scared of the looks of a human being covered in a red substance and think about how they are going to keep this a secret.

    To maintain the secret and to take advantage of these strange looking beings whom are injured, they may pull us human beings out of the wreckage one by one and those whom are still alive may be locked in a room or cave somewhere. Possibly even bound by some ropes "for their safety".

    The property owners may not being advanced enough to render proper assistance to the ill fated crew, the human beings pulled from the interstellar craft may have to die shortly after the crash if they did not die upon impact.

    When the human beings plead with the natives to let them go, the natives perceiving a risk to their sought after advantage may simply refuse. The survivors human beings from the interstellar craft which are now hidden away, will be interrogated and asked to divulge as much as they can about their origins, asked whether they are a threat or not and probably asked to teach them how to reconstruct such a craft.

    When the human captives object, the natives of this distant world may use very persuasive methods. Those whom are captive are unlikely to ever be let go. The natives will also fear any ideas of bringing more human beings to the scene, so a rescue party will probably be denied.

    --------------------------------

    As the last survivor dies (hopefully) from malnutrition, the last human survivors may quip that the natives remind them of themselves from thousands of years prior.

    When the last ill fated survivor is on their deathbed and asks the native of that world why they never allowed them to leave, the native will tell them because they had too many interests in them to let them leave.

    They have enemies in a distant land. They need the knowledge gleaned from the craft and the passengers to build better weaponry. They wanted to learn how to make stronger materials efficiently. They wanted the advances in medicine, chemistry and physics.

    The survivors were the cornucopia of new knowledge and designs.

    The native admits to the last survivor that these interests far outweighed their normal goodwill. The survivors and their craft were a new opportunity they could not afford to lose.

    The last survivor understood to the bitter end that the moment the opportunistic interests flashed through the mind of the first native whom witnessed them. Their fate was sealed.

    The last survivor would probably say:

    "Had we crashed on a world without as much fear and needs as are rife in your mind,words and actions; we might have actually gotten assistance to get home."


    --------------------------
    --------------------------

    The Moral of this fictional story is what drives someone to want to keep such a craft? I understand the interests and the opportunity. We usually look at our military and black ops community as if they had evil intent. But they are just being...all too human.

    Protecting ones personal interests and keeping those fears of losing such an opportunity is paramount to how we open and close doors.

    If it were a plane crash in our front yard, would we really want to "own it" or "keep it" under some tarp as a coveted memento? What if it were a UFO? Would we act differently than our government if given the same chance?
    For every action, there is a corresponding over-reaction. -- Anonymous

  7. #27
    Lead Moderator calikid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    8,218
    Blog Entries
    19
    Fore said:
    The various questions you are posing are centered around the idea of ownership and gaining advantages (in some way).

    A Question: The UFO crashed in your front yard. Why do you wish to exert ownership over it? Why are you worried that someone like a government body will come and take it from you?

    The first response that comes to mind should probably be dissected until you really understand deep down what it is you really want in this hypothetical situation.

    Is it to glean technology? The pride of owning some ETs' downed vehicle? The hope of some advantage by "owning" a rare item?

    What will you do with "it" when you exert your idea of ownership upon the object? What is the ultimate fulfilled purpose?
    My own motivations center around NOT having the evidence disappear as it has in so many past cases.

    Ownership implies the ability to determine when and where the possessed objects will be displayed.

    If I own the wreckage, then I can loan it to the local university for study, or set it up in a museum for public display.

    "My" ultimate goal would not be personal gain, but public disclosure.
    The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
    progress. -- Joseph Joubert
    Attachment 1008

  8. #28
    Junior Member orangekea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by calikid View Post
    If an ET Craft were to crash in the front yard of a house you own, would you have the right to claim ownership?

    What if you wanted to deny government access to the vehicle?
    What if you wanted to list wreckage pieces on eBay?
    Could the PTB stop you?
    Could YOU stop the PTB from hauling it away?
    Interesting question, and I agree unfortunately with norenrad here. Of course officially aliens and their craft do not exist, so if you have them on your land, even offering tinfoil hubcabs on Ebay, you're either insane, or a terrorist, or any other (yet to be defined) threat to mental hygiene and national security.

    I'd splurge 5.50$ on an alien hubcap by the way. No hesitation whatsoever!


    orangekea

  9. #29
    Lead Moderator calikid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    8,218
    Blog Entries
    19
    I could just envision the conversation.
    Me on my front lawn in front of a half damaged saucer.
    The news cameras running.
    (in my best grumpy old man voice) "STAY OFF MY LAWN! Stay away from MY saucer!"
    The army general at the curb saying "It's not a saucer, it's an Army weather balloon, and we want it back."
    The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
    progress. -- Joseph Joubert
    Attachment 1008

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by calikid View Post
    I could just envision the conversation.
    Me on my front lawn in front of a half damaged saucer.
    The news cameras running.
    (in my best grumpy old man voice) "STAY OFF MY LAWN! Stay away from MY saucer!"
    The army general at the curb saying "It's not a saucer, it's an Army weather balloon, and we want it back."
    To expand on your conversation, I pick it up with the General;

    General: "It's not a saucer, it's an Army weather balloon, and we want it back."

    Grumpy old man voice: It's not a balloon, and you better to talk to my little gray friends about moving it.
    "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth"
    Sherlock Holmes

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •