1.Different Gravity-Some would say that differentials in gravity would drastically change the appearance and evolution of alien creatures:
Yes because, evolution decides that in an environment where one of the variables is "weight" (connected to gravity), how large an individual of any given species CAN grow.en.allexperts.com
The reason being there is an upper limit on how much blood can be pumped "up" into the head without creating undue strain on the heart!
So from that we can see how the type ‘A’ Greys come from a planet closer to Earths gravity,while the ‘B’ type likely come from a much lower gravity,and finally the ‘C’ type come from a much stronger gravity.
1a.Lower Than Earth Gravity-It is speculate this would create either advanced aerial beings or very tall and limber beings. In reality it would take quite a considerable difference than Earth in gravity to change anything drastically from what we see here on our planet. Even so it would still account for the ‘Type C’ Greys, or the ‘Tall Greys’.
1b.Like-Earth Gravity-Well obviously this would be the same as our planet. The only difference would be ELE’s(Extinction Level Events) and if they happened at the same time as ours did. If not than it would be highly likely that Reptilians,Insects,Dolphins,Squid,etc would become the ‘human-like’ species on this hypothetical planet.
1c.Higher Than Earth Gravity-Belief in this dictates that any species coming from this environment would be short,stocky,and muscular. Maybe so, but this falls into the fallacy of a planet being significantly higher in gravity than Earth. Even if this were true it would more than account for the short stature of Greys. Also this theory leads some to believe that intelligent life would develop in the oceans. Well this is not far from the theoretical evolutionary line of the Greys, which are widely believed to be evolved from a dolphin like species.
Here is some more…
2.Does Brain Size Matter?Some say that an equally intelligent species does not require large, human-like brain size. The skeptics’ stance is simple; the large human brain size is directly related to our species complex emotional and social processes. In reality the human emotional and social processes are directed by a very small and lizard like part of the brain:
The amygdalae (Latin, also corpus amygdaloideum, singular amygdala, from Greek αμυγδαλή, amygdalē, 'almond', 'tonsil', listed in the Gray's Anatomy as the nucleus amygdalæ)[1] are almond-shaped groups of nuclei located deep within the medial temporal lobes of the brain in complex vertebrates, including humans.[2] Shown in research to perform a primary role in the processing and memory of emotional reactions, the amygdalae are considered part of the limbic system.[3] In complex vertebrates, including humans, the amygdalae perform primary roles in the formation and storage of memories associated with emotional events. Research indicates that, during fear conditioning, sensory stimuli reach the basolateral complexes of the amygdalae, particularly the lateral nuclei, where they form associations with memories of the stimuli.Courtesy of timboucher.com
The association between stimuli and the aversive events they predict may be mediated by long-term potentiation, a lingering potential for affected synapses to react more readily.[3]
Memories of emotional experiences imprinted in reactions of synapses in the lateral nuclei elicit fear behavior through connections with the central nucleus of the amygdalae. The central nuclei are involved in the genesis of many fear responses, including freezing (immobility), tachycardia (rapid heartbeat), increased respiration, and stress-hormone release. Damage to the amygdalae impairs both the acquisition and expression of Pavlovian fear conditioning, a form of classical conditioning of emotional responses.[3]
The amygdalae are also involved in appetitive (positive) conditioning. It seems that distinct neurons respond to positive and negative stimuli, but there is no clustering of these distinct neurons into clear anatomical nuclei.[8]
Different nuclei within the amygdala have different functions in appetitive conditioning.[9]
wikipedia.org
The Believers Argument- All life in the Universe for the most part should take the same path as our planet did. Humans have become successful more than any other known species on the planet, so why would any other Earth-like planet differ? How do you dispute the numerous accounts of human-like species? Is everyone lying or insane? The believers have multiple pieces of evidence ranging from antiquity to the present to argue these facts. Also is it not possible that these beings are simply machines?Bio-mechanical entities sent afar to perform various functions. Another point I should make is that it is highly rumored that the Greys are at least a billion years more advanced than us, and due to significant, chronic genetic manipulation they are dying and are mostly all clones.
In this scenario we must also take into account that these beings would be able to completely control their environment for many millennia and therefore their bodies would not need the common functions and skeleton-muscular arrangement that non environment altering beings such as us require. Now back to the genetic manipulation and clones, that would more than account for the ‘frail’ and ‘non-feasible’ appearance of these beings.Simply, their genetic ode is corrupt and totally reliant on artificial management.
The Skeptics Argument- Any form of humanoid life other than Earth is improbable and thus highly unlikely. Any other form of life in the Universe would be totally different than us. All the people who report humanoid aliens are either lying, mentally ill, or being deceived by a hologram perpetrated by either the government (Project Bluebeam) or these advanced lifeforms.
Final Conclusions-It seems that the believers arguments have much more backup than the skeptics.If this was a court room than I believe the verdict would be in favor of the believers.There is evidence, eyewitness testimony, and logic behind the believers. While the skeptics have nothing but postulation on unknown and extremely unverifiable evidence. As it stands right now there is no logical reason to believe that accounts of humanoid ET life is farce. It seems the evidence provided for is much more than the evidence provided against.In my opinion the skeptic side HAS MUCH MORE to refute and prove than anything else.
I know that any truly neutral person would be in favor of the believer stance if looking at the evidence for and against the existence of humanoid aliens. It also appears that due to overwhelming evidence towards the appearance of ETs we must believe they are humanoid and like in appearance as accounts tell.Obviously this issue is likely not going to be resolved unless there is a disclosure or concrete proof of the existence and appearance of these beings. Thanks for rading.
History Channel’s UFO Hunters “Greys Conspiracy” clip:
Sources
ufos.about.com
wikipedia.org
en.allexperts.com
[edit on 9/24/2009 by jkrog08]



You really shouldn't get me started on the subject of possible things - I could wax philosophical for hours about it. Suffice it to say, that I
believe the possibile is an infinite and varied field that encompasses any and all ideas. 