Re: Humanoid Aliens

I can understand what you mean by not look like us, but what im trying to point out here is that the mentality is also key to the way that lifefom will look in some respects..

If we take basic logic here and say ok we have 2 planets bother are identical! and we let them fester... the same things that happen on one would not infact happen on the other at the same time "number of factors" wind rain geolgy ect"..

Infact you could have 2 planets with the excat same thing and one may never have life on it and the other one will.. why is this? because in order for life to happen it must be planned..!!

Now if we scale this up to our universe.. the amount of earthlike planets are good alot infact, will like take hold on one of them "well we know that for sure because we are here" would life on that planet evolve humans from the very first spark "well we know for sure it can because we are here" now if we take into account what the earth is made from ect we can say that any earth like planet would hold a good change of making the same stuff on it.. Tho we dont know the chances of it actualy making humans becuase of metor impacts ect... but the "basic" blocks are there that give the "chance for it" to happen just like it did on earth and with that world called infinity you can bet ur bottom doller its happend alot!!!

Now would aliens Look like us from a planet that is not the same "lets say jupiter" well no way would it look close, infact nothing on the planet would come close to any alien that resided on jupiter.. would it have intelegence? well if life is there then the possiblity of it getting or making intelegence is 1 because we have life "prerequsist ofc"...

So with that i can firmly say yes other aliens do stand a very good chance of looking like the way we do.. and some will not "they are the ones who may not visit" infact i find it hard to imagen why they would bother...

now another thing also is Bactira, there is a good possiblity of GIANT bactira aswell that live in the skys of planets.. just like the pretty worms we see floating about in ours, i dont think like is limited to only planets i can imagen life living in space aswell...

dont ask my what the hell it would look like lol but the place in witch we live is VERY odd indeed, we should know this because we are here!! that is odd on its own dont you think? ; )

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by LogicalResponse

 

Why do UFO proponents, "contactees," "abductees" and other supporters always seem to depict their aliens as humanoid? Why are they insistent that these alleged life-forms follow the human body-plan?

because that's what they seen with their own eye's

That's all well and good, but how can they prove it?

Evidence is required.

and why is it you don't seem to be able to believe the millions of Alien sightings people have reported ?

can't handle the truth ?

It's pretty clear to me now that you and I adhere to two VERY different definitions of the word "truth."

Originally posted by symmetricAvenger
now another thing also is Bactira, there is a good possiblity of GIANT bactira aswell that live in the skys of planets.. just like the pretty worms we see floating about in ours, i dont think like is limited to only planets i can imagen life living in space aswell...

I think I could agree with you on that much at least, symmetricAvenger.

There exists the possibility of bacteria-like organisms etching out a living in exotic places we've never thought to look.

Recently, unique forms of bacteria were found to be living in our upper atmosphere, totally independent from others of its type.

reply to post by LogicalResponse

That's all well and good, but how can they prove it?

Evidence is required.

last time i checked , witness testimony is evidence in a court of Law

It's pretty clear to me now that you and I adhere to two VERY different definitions of the word "truth."

only because you have not seen the truth yet.

it's easy to understand why you and many others can't believe Aliens are visiting this planet. until you or most people see it for yourself, you will not believe it. it's that simple.

reply to post by LogicalResponse


yeah its pretty amazing. I mean i have a very very open mind on this subject as you can tell, i never limit myself to a narrow view "within limits" as im a science chap, but we dont understand alot of it yet and im guessin we never will "thats the fun part" ..

But life itself i think is a result of what or how the universe works and it must be teeming with life just like our own planet.. the major obstical is infact the sheer size of space itself..

we know that there are no intelgent beings that use radio waves within a 50milion light year rage.. becuase thats how long our singal has reached so far.. but then again we wouldnt find out if they sent one back for a very very long time...

If i wanted to comuinicate over a vast distance of space.. it wouldnt be light waves or anything we know of its just far to slow..

I never beivled light is the fasted thing in the universe.. because its constant... and it follows a predetermand path

bit offtopic but im enjoying this thread and i liked the topic name befor it was changed ^^)

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by LogicalResponse

 

That's all well and good, but how can they prove it?

Evidence is required.

last time i checked , witness testimony is evidence in a court of Law

Scientific verification and a courtroom trial are two very different things that employ two entirely different processes for arbitrating the truth. This comparison is baseless.

A courtroom is under no such constraint to replicate results that can be repeated or verify (over the course of years) various facts presented by different sets of valid data. They simply don't have the time or reason to do so. Science has no acceptable margin of error to work with and has more than enough time to take the proper steps necessary to prove or disprove a claim, and therefore cannot rely on unsubstantiated testimony or second-hand anecdotes as "evidence."

only because you have not seen the truth yet.

it's easy to understand why you and many others can't believe Aliens are visiting this planet. until you or most people see it for yourself, you will not believe it. it's that simple.

I wouldn't even need to see it for myself, actually. There are plenty of forms of scientific evidence I would accept without having to handle it directly.

I would accept anything that can stand up against scientific scrutiny and not be explained away by mundane phenomena, or be shown to NOT come from psychologically afflicted witnesses who embellish the paranormal.

(That reminds me: How come there are no contactees or abductees who have won the JREF challenge yet?)

reply to post by LogicalResponse


tell me then

what do think this evidence would be, that would make you believe ?

He doesn't have to believe, but then that is his loss. He's missing on on the most critical information there is. Also, he isn't showing critical thinking, as he cannot accept that the many different types of testimonials that exist, including from astronauts, truly indicate something significant, and no, its not that they're all delusional.
Again, its his loss. Its also not critical thinking.
This kind of argument is beyond me in any case, more concerned with motives since I know whats out there. And how this interplays with the leadership and cartel on this planet. More interested in exposing everything so people can critically assess what changes they wish to see in government and what needs to be done.

reply to post by mystiq


well said Mystiq

some people prefer selective thinking and are not willing to see the bigger picture. it's understandable though and i don't blame anyone for not believing because if i didn't experience what i have, i would be highly skeptical also.

no circumstantial evidence is ever going to be good enough to convince everyone on this planet, and trying to prove it that way is impossible.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

"Why do UFO proponents, "contactees," "abductees" and other supporters always seem to depict their aliens as humanoid? Why are they insistent that these alleged life-forms follow the human body-plan?"

To be fair to the OP i dont thinks he/she is saying there aint no life in space or on other planets but i think hes more interested in how they could look like us..

As you seen in my posts i have gave very good logical arguments based on logic mathmatics and abit of my own understanding for life "to the best of my understanding neways"

and it is a good thread so far

I think a basic humanoid form, like a Grey, is quite plausible, considering it makes sense to have two eyes, arms, legs, etc because of balance and all.

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by mystiq

 

well said Mystiq

some people prefer selective thinking

and are not willing to see the bigger picture. it's understandable though and i don't blame anyone for not believing because if i didn't experience what i have, i would be highly skeptical also.

no circumstantial evidence is ever going to be good enough to convince everyone on this planet, and trying to prove it that way is impossible.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

You and the poster you are referring to have failed to add anything in regard as to why the typical grays, reptilians etc. are depicted as small humanoids.

So far it amounts to: "Because I've seen them and I know people who have seen them. No, I can't prove it."

Now, I don't know if anyone else can see the fault in that, but that's kind of a problem.

Originally posted by Donnie Darko
I think a basic humanoid form, like a Grey, is quite plausible, considering it makes sense to have two eyes, arms, legs, etc because of balance and all.

Can you elaborate on why you feel that particular configuration is the only one that makes sense, Donnie? You mentioned balance, but there are numerous animals even on earth that have no preferred up-down orientation. (Or appendages designed for manipulation like that of a human. Take the octopus for example; It uses tentacles very well. They can even open jars.)

[edit on 3/30/2009 by LogicalResponse]

I believe (and I admit I may be wrong) that you are wrong. Rather than explain the whole thing again, I would please ask you to read this thread I started in '07 which explains why I believe you are wrong. But I am open to discussion.

reply to post by LogicalResponse

You and the poster you are referring to have failed to add anything to regard as to why the typical grays, reptilians etc. are depicted as small humanoids.

So far it amounts to: "Because I've seen them and I know people who have seen them. No, I can't prove it."

Now, I don't know if anyone else can see the fault in that, but that's kind of a problem.

failed to add anything ?

they are depicted as humanoid because that's what they seen with their own eye's

what part of that don't you understand ?

if your expecting someone to adequately explain why it is possible for a bipedal being to exist on another planet your setting yourself up for nothing but conjecture and speculation.

do you see any fault in that ? or are you purposely being obtuse ?






[edit on 30-3-2009 by easynow]

reply to post by ajmusicmedia


Arms and eyes are universals, but two arms and two legs are parochial. The characteristic in general is a universal, but exactly how that characteristic is manifested is parochial. While it's very likely that an alien should have some sort of eye and some sort of leg, it's not very likely that it will have two eyes and two legs. Follow?

A lot of people tend to take the atmosphere and our planetary mass for granted because we developed here. We live within a considerably unique environment. The distance and heat from our parent star (the sun) is a huge factor, as well as the composition and density of our atmosphere. All of these things play MAJOR roles in what kind of tools a primitive organism will develop in order to manipulate and adapt to its environment.

Nature creates changes only at the bare minimum requirement level of selection.

Ufology's ideas about aliens tend to be extraordinarily anthropocentric for no real good reason - even trying to draw classification comparisons like "reptile" and "mammal" in many cases.

Life evolves from random mutations, making the long term results unpredictable. The laws of biology have to be followed, but any structure that does the job will allow survival. Look at the vast array of "alien" life during the early Cambrian period; hundreds of divergent lines of evolution, of which only a handful survive today. With that much randomness to choose from, even slightly different conditions will produce unrecognizably different results, i.e. Arthropods and Vertebrates, the two known kind of air-breathing animals. Two totally different solutions to the problems of living on land, but they both work. And that's on the same planet, in identical environments.

Now, to put things in perspective, imagine if life evolved on a world in such a way that cell formation wasn't even dependent on ATP or multifunctional nucleotides to begin with. What if life develops on a world where complex molecule formations like ribosomes or RNA exchange can't even develop because of major physical constraints!?

If anyone assumes that a predictable body-plan would emerge from that, they are in for one hell of a surprise.

[edit on 3/30/2009 by LogicalResponse]

Originally posted by easynow
failed to add anything ?

they are depicted as humanoid because that's what they seen with their their own eye's

what part of that don't you understand ?

Right, just like I said.

You are pretty much saying: "They are humanoid in appearance because I know people who have seen them, but no, I can't prove anything."

So, in all honesty, it really appears that you were the one who misunderstood.

if your expecting someone to adequately explain why it is possible for a bipedal being to exist on another planet your setting yourself up for nothing but conjecture and speculation.

Yes, this was mentioned several times in the thread. People are aware this is a hypothetical proposal. Are you suggesting otherwise?

I think I'm being generous enough in even entertaining the idea that aliens are visiting earth in the first-place.

do you see any fault in that ? or are you purposely being obtuse ?

Let's look at what we have here.

• You state that alien beings visiting earth are (or would be) humanoid in appearance and base that on circumstantial evidence and personal anecdotes.

• When explained why this is not adequate evidence or proof, you immediately resort to some non sequitor about "having to see the truth for myself" and all kinds of vague hand-waving.

• When asked to elaborate on why you think aliens would be humanoid in design without relying on second-hand stories, you went right back to square one.

I mean, if you cannot discern that or even explain with reason why you believe these things I seriously doubt I'm the one being "obtuse."

So, just to be clear this time around: Do you or do you not have some sort of evidence or reasonable proposal as to why these particular people believe aliens would appear humanoid in design? Can you explain this from a biological, chemical, or evolutionary standpoint?

I've explained why I believe that they won't be humanoid throughout this thread, and even in biologically feasible terms right above this very reply.

[edit on 3/30/2009 by LogicalResponse]

reply to post by LogicalResponse


why do you assume that i was just referring to other people that have seen "them" ?

i will leave you with that because i don't want to derail your nothing but speculation and conjecture thread

peace

Interesting idea, but if we stop looking upon humans as the first and superor being, and maybe think in the terms of 'we' looking like 'them', rather than 'they' looking like 'us. We cant just take for granted that humans were or are the first intellegent life in that huge space above us.

You must take into count that our solar system is pretty young in the astronomical terms, and EArth could well be used as a 'testing ground' for bio-engeneering, who are to say..

So if the 'aliens' have humanoid featurs wouldn't be that odd if our 'design' of using two legs to stand and two arms to work is an 'working model',if you get my drift.. I tend to think along the lines of sitchin, good work he has done over the years, and it dont involve fantazillion years of a single cell turn into huge sivilizations...

I read an article last night where they claimed that for all the right enzymes(?) to get together in the right order to create life was like 10/40000nds of a chance and would take longer than the age of our 16 billion year old universe..I think I wrote this in a wrong way. I will try and find the link to that page...I dont blindly belive that, but EVo I dont buy into.. Sorry you monkeys out there, nothing personal ..

I do belive creatures adapt, they have to, but let us say an pig evolved into an flying turtle, would that be possible.. ? I think so, in a lab..

reply to post by LogicalResponse


I think your missing the point... in order for a being to come here in the first place would require it to

1) be able to cope in our atmosphear as you stated
2) Be able to entertain the prospect of coming here
3) Be able to use that brain in that wathever they use to change / adapt

Arms and eyes are universals, but two arms and two legs are parochial. The characteristic in general is a universal, but exactly how that characteristic is manifested is parochial. While it's very likely that an alien should have some sort of eye and some sort of leg, it's not very likely that it will have two eyes and two legs. Follow?


Its very likey indeed that it will because its able to happen via the basic paramaters you have set out..

Like i said A giant worm may be as smart as humans or smarter but has no way to build a spaceship as its just a blob on the floor "puddle of water"..

IF that puddle of water on another planet wanted to come to earth it would first have to be able to cope with being here...

Extreme version of this.. would an earthling go visit the sun? Nope Would an alien with a totaly different makeup visist earth Nope may have a passing intrest but thats about it..

Most if not all aliens that come here are from similar planets and the ones that aint from a simliar planet wont bother and will look for planets of there own type

logicly because its easyer "thats why we search for earth like planets" to search for life..

And not in the middle of suns or gas giants ; ) we know if we find earth like planets we stand a better chance @ finding life that will be somewhat like ours

reply to post by symmetricAvenger


I was referring to their own "homeworld" and whatever that would be like for the most part.

For that civilization to become technologically advanced or become a space faring race they would need to come from someplace first. That someplace doesn't necessarily have to be earthlike.

[edit on 3/30/2009 by LogicalResponse]