And yes the subject IS funny. It's cartoonish. Have any of you thought about why the idea of alien life is so easy to reduce to the level of the absurd? When infinite space in the form of "aliens" intrudes into the mundane, it's been considered funny. Another type of punchline is created when supposed superior intellect bumps up against inferior intellect. The alien is often portrayed encroaching into the mundane realm of the lowly farmer. Hilarious.

The collective unconscious plays up the aspect of contact that has different planes of existance,meaning, or opposites, colliding. This seems to soften the impact ON ITSELF. Tension turns to laughter.

Another thing that makes the subject of little green men automatically cartoonish, is the fact that aliens are generally drawn by gag cartoonists, as they draw everything, with large heads and small bodies. Since it is generally assumed and reported that these creatures are indeed small with large heads, they're just naturally kind of "funny". Which makes me wonder. What is so funny about having a big head? As a culture have we taken something potentially threatening and softened it's impact by drawing it with neotenized
features?

Can the universe, itself, be viewed as a riddle, a mystery, a joke or all three?

Just a few thoughts from an armchair observer of human nature.

I suppose it all rather has to do with the actual extent the idea's people insist on imposing on the overall concept of intelligent alien life have outside the confines of the only biosphere in the Galaxy we actually know life exists - this one.

The concept in the popularist sense of visiting aliens is one of staggeringly anthropomorphic construct - upright, bipeds demonstrating bilateral radial symmetry. Heads with recognisably humanoid features. Hands terminating in digits with opposable thumbs....

Where's the alien in any of it?

Size, proportion, skin tone - all the classic, visual identifying markers we hone in on in order to establish differences between race we apply to the common concept of Gray's.

That's not a description of alien life, it's a gross characterisation of Johnny Alien Foreigner...

It could be that they are portrayed as cartoonish precisely for that reason--to make them appear non-threatening. The more childlike they look, theoretically the more endearing they are, and more importantly not seen as a threat. If that's the objective of the artist, to portray the alien as someone we should not fear, that would explain the Solomons, (3rdRFTS) ALF, My Favourite Martian et. al.

It occurs to me that this could be a secret government plan, ;) known to only a few :p that will lead to aliens arriving on Earth in a few years, where everyone will welcome them because they all look like cute, long nosed hairy dwarves. :D

I suppose it all rather has to do with the actual extent the idea's people insist on imposing on the overall concept of intelligent alien life have outside the confines of the only biosphere in the Galaxy we actually know life exists - this one.

The concept in the popularist sense of visiting aliens is one of staggeringly anthropomorphic construct - upright, bipeds demonstrating bilateral radial symmetry. Heads with recognisably humanoid features. Hands terminating in digits with opposable thumbs....

Where's the alien in any of it?

Size, proportion, skin tone - all the classic, visual identifying markers we hone in on in order to establish differences between race we apply to the common concept of Gray's.

That's not a description of alien life, it's a gross characterisation of Johnny Alien Foreigner...

Staggerlingly anthropomorphic?

If you know anything about bio-mechanics and convergent evolution, you realize that 2 very different creatures, from completely different phylums, on this planet, end up looking very much the same if they share the same environment. Whales and fish spring to mind.

If there is any planet out there that is similar to our own, the bio-mechanical model can likely be extended to include them. It is also worth noting that planets which share similar characteristics could be inhabited by beings that look a bit like us and may share a curiosity about their "sister" planets.

If you know anything about bio-mechanics and convergent evolution, you realize that 2 very different creatures, from completely different phylums, on this planet, end up looking very much the same if they share the same environment. Whales and fish spring to mind.

Mmmm, interesting. I was always under the impression a Whale actually looks remarkably similar to a Whale, and a fish somewhat more generally descriptive as being.... Oh yes, a fish.

You are of course referring to the convergent evolution of similar structures - the wing for example is a structure that has independently evolved throughout the major orders of life - reptiles, insects, avids, mammals, even fish have all developed wing like structures in order to avoid competition....

Yes, thank you. I am actually quite familiar with the process. I had rather taken that into account when answering you the first time around. And of course, you're perfectly correct:

Staggeringly anthropomorphic?

Monumentally, by rights, should have been the correct preface to the term anthropomorphic there.

Sorry about that, it's a British thing. Always with the understatement.... oi vey! :rolleyes:

There is no reason why intelligence should be restricted to naked monkey types. We are still not sure why we are a 'naked' ape. Why would the typical alien be naked too? Why does it have a humanoid face?

Let's put up a picture of 2 random intelligent beings on this planet and a grey alien:
http://www.timesharevalues.com/images/dolphin.jpghttp://www.qtm.net/~geibdan/newlookimages/grey5.jpghttp://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/qq/portrait.jpg

Why is the alien looking exactly like an alien version of a human and not for instance a dolphin or a chimpansee?

Because it is a work of fiction of humans and not that of dolphins or chimps.

Spurious, It's kind of tough to develop and implement technologies with flippers, or the claws of a crustacean, for that matter. That's why Lobster boy ended up working for Ringling brothers rather than becoming a world famous touch typist.

That doesn't change the fact that the alien is humanoid. Why didn't it resemble an octopus? A landliving octopus like creature? Why isn't it covered with fur? or something like feathers? Why doesn't it have scales? Why does it have a human face and a human hand?

Well it strikes me that aliens would appear small and kinda funny so as not to appear threatening. Perhaps they have no fixed physical form as we know it.

Spurious, It's kind of tough to develop and implement technologies with flippers, or the claws of a crustacean, for that matter. That's why Lobster boy ended up working for Ringling brothers rather than becoming a world famous touch typist.

Mmmmm, a certainly interesting turn of logic - UFO's are extraterrestrial technological artifacts, therefore obviously aliens developed apposal thumbs.

Kind of skirts that whole issue regarding the actually quantitatively known providence of your average flying saucer's point of origin rather neatly. How empirical. Demonstrate something spurious in terms if something equally neither proven or known at all as an actual fact.

You're perfectly right of course, the whole subject is an hysterically funny one.

Mmmmm, a certainly interesting turn of logic - UFO's are extraterrestrial technological artifacts, therefore obviously aliens developed apposal thumbs.

Kind of skirts that whole issue regarding the actually quantitatively known providence of your average flying saucer's point of origin rather neatly. How empirical. Demonstrate something spurious in terms if something equally neither proven or known at all as an actual fact.

You're perfectly right of course, the whole subject is an hysterically funny one.

What does your second paragraph mean? I'm serious. What exactly are you talking about? Perhaps if you phrased it another way I could get a handle on the meaning, but you've lost me. If your purpose is to make me look silly, good luck.

It means exactly what it says, but very well - lets just stick to your response to Spurious regarding the problems Lobby The Lobster Boy would have with typing...

Originally Posted by Agitprop -
Spurious, It's kind of tough to develop and implement technologies with flippers, or the claws of a crustacean, for that matter. That's why Lobster boy ended up working for Ringling brothers rather than becoming a world famous touch typist

I fully realise your just giving a facetious answer, but actually in the context what spurious brings up it's perfectly fitting. Spurious was mentioning the unlikely development of the human hand in an alien species, you respond with pointing out the problems of a species developing technology without hands would have.

Consider the function of the apposal thumb - mechanically it's simplest expression is that of forming a pincer like grip. This allows us humans to grip and pick things up.

Stop me if I'm going too fast now, I wouldn't want you to feel silly or anything.

Multiple limbs amongst crustaceans isn't at all uncommon, there's no reason at all to suppose that in the evolution of some other form of life on some other world the usage of multiple limbs working in concert could not, if occurring in a species where higher brain function is also becoming emergent, that a form corresponding to something vaguely lobster-like couldn't infact developer a degree of dexterity equal too, if not actually surpassing that of our own.

You've heard the expression many hands make light work - in the development of life purportedly originating somewhere out there, there's no prohibitation.

Granted, such a form of life is going to find working a standard keyboard somewhat possibly vexing, but then again, what would an alien species be doing developing technology it can't actually use in the first place? Lobby the Lobster Boy might suffer a handicap in this regard, but a highly evolved extraterrestrial crustacean?

I think not.

In short, the development of technology, biologically speaking, doesn't at all presume the evolution of the hand and apposal thumb as being requisite to it happening - even here on earth, that still remains the case. Evolution isn't done with any of the forms of life on this world, yet.

All sorts of other structural solutions are perfectly possible, and yet our alien friends naturally have hands...

Human ones. And that doesn't give you the slightest pause?

Oh, and by the way, why exactly would I be wanting to make you look silly, as you put it?

It means exactly what it says, but very well - lets just stick to your response to Spurious regarding the problems Lobby The Lobster Boy would have with typing...



I fully realise your just giving a facetious answer, but actually in the context what spurious brings up it's perfectly fitting. Spurious was mentioning the unlikely development of the human hand in an alien species, you respond with pointing out the problems of a species developing technology without hands would have.

Consider the function of the apposal thumb - mechanically it's simplest expression is that of forming a pincer like grip. This allows us humans to grip and pick things up.

Stop me if I'm going too fast now, I wouldn't want you to feel silly or anything.

Multiple limbs amongst crustaceans isn't at all uncommon, there's no reason at all to suppose that in the evolution of some other form of life on some other world the usage of multiple limbs working in concert could not, if occurring in a species where higher brain function is also becoming emergent, that a form corresponding to something vaguely lobster-like couldn't infact developer a degree of dexterity equal too, if not actually surpassing that of our own.

You've heard the expression many hands make light work - in the development of life purportedly originating somewhere out there, there's no prohibitation.

Granted, such a form of life is going to find working a standard keyboard somewhat possibly vexing, but then again, what would an alien species be doing developing technology it can't actually use in the first place? Lobby the Lobster Boy might suffer a handicap in this regard, but a highly evolved extraterrestrial crustacean?

I think not.

In short, the development of technology, biologically speaking, doesn't at all presume the evolution of the hand and apposal thumb as being requisite to it happening - even here on earth, that still remains the case. Evolution isn't done with any of the forms of life on this world, yet.

All sorts of other structural solutions are perfectly possible, and yet our alien friends naturally have hands...

Human ones. And that doesn't give you the slightest pause?

Oh, and by the way, why exactly would I be wanting to make you look silly, as you put it?


My response to Spurious wasn't meant to be facetious, nor was it an attempt to minimize his point of view, which has merit. I was attempting to briefly summarize a point using humour. I trust you understand that. Why do use the term "my alien friends" if you're not trying to make me look silly? I can't communicate with you if you mock me. Sorry.

.... and yet our alien friends naturally have hands.

And if you're going to represent something I've said, I'd appreciate it if you'd actually read what I actually say, not write your own take on it.

Who says they're even physical?
What if they're living dreams, instead, capable of being real and unreal at the same time?

Certainly, anything is possible in the 1990's.

For that matter, why don't we resemble some ambiguous, mammal-like, octopus-looking, furry creature?

Anyway, this angle of the discussion — why must they be so human-looking? — brings about, curiously enough, an accommodating thought that favours — even endorses — parallel UFO/ETI claims.

If, as it's claimed, certain ETI are conducting physiological and psychological practices involving things like mind-melds and procreation — both of which presuppose a complicity, perhaps an interference, of their own make-up with our own — then it can only stand to reason that their "visitations" here are not so coincidental after-all but a result of distinct biocompatibilities pertinent between our species. Or, to look at the more far-fetched and disturbing theory that humans are a genetic by-product of their bio-tampering with components of terrestrial DNA. Humanoid to humanoid. In His own image?

Regardless, I see no abnormality in the humanoid-look being so, uh, abnormal: in fact: (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2009914,00.html)

We are an evolutionary accident.

I don't have much faith in accidents happen twice, thrice or a million times over because we think much of ourselves.

I think UFO sightings, and alien abductions should be kept separate most of the time. They are both different phenomena, and are judged by different criteria/standards.

This thread is degenerate.

We are an evolutionary accident.


Did you get a photo of the scene of the accident? Can you post it, so that we can all see what happened?

I think UFO sightings, and alien abductions should be kept separate most of the time. They are both different phenomena, and are judged by different criteria/standards.

This thread is degenerate.

My brother attended a convention about sasquatches once and said a fist fight nearly broke out between proponants of the big hairy apemen theory and the hairy fairy from other dimension devotees. :D

Sightings and abductions should probably be kept apart, as we could be talking about at least 2 completely different categories, as your post implies. Still, respect is due the nuts and bolts crowd's take on alien visitation as well as the more esoteric interpretations.

There could be aliens who are flesh and blood as well as beings who are fully autonomous "tulpas", somehow symbiotically linked with humanity through dreams, as you suggest in an earlier post. Maybe there are even species who surf morphogenetic fields and settle into belief systems that resonate best with their particular temperments.

We're taking baby steps in understanding the science behind spirit and we can't begin to develop categories until unambiguous information (if that's even possible) becomes available.

Those involved in seriously looking at the esoteric and extraterrestrial should understand that these two forms likely have points of convergance and divergance. It's a conceptual minefield through which we must tiptoe, careful of other's viewpoints, sensitivities and limitations.

The seeker born every minute can mature into the sage who is produced only once in a generation, given time, patience and guidance.

Are you itching for a response?

I know I am. I have to put on the lotion first.

My brother attended a convention about sasquatches once and said a fist fight nearly broke out between proponants of the big hairy apemen theory and the hairy fairy from other dimension devotees. :D


WHOA! I knew it would happen, someday!
Some stories do tend to lean toward the "hairy fairy" side of the road.

Sightings and abductions should probably be kept apart, as we could be talking about at least 2 completely different categories, as your post implies. Still, respect is due the nuts and bolts crowd's take on alien visitation as well as the more esoteric interpretations.

Alot of the evidence of UFOs/possible alien craft is visual or photographic, and is recalled easily. Alot of abduction accounts are more in the realm of waking dreams, and are often only recalled under hypnosis.
Lumping the two together, or validating/invalidating the other because of the one is ridiculous.
I think there may be a tendency to do that with abductions: they sound crazy, the memories are hazy, they may be fantasizing things under the suggestion of the hypnotist, so therefore the entire thing is a myth, and so are the flying saucers.
What's REALLY crazy, is invalidating the whole thing because of a small study on sleep paralysis. It's such a cute, simplistic theory, and it certainly does not make room for all the characteristics of either phenomenon. Apparently, when dealing with the notion of non-human entities flying around in vehicles or abducting people, even the most rudimentary of hypotheses and theories INSTANTLY becomes a law.

There could be aliens who are flesh and blood as well as beings who are fully autonomous "tulpas", somehow symbiotically linked with humanity through dreams, as you suggest in an earlier post. Maybe there are even species who surf morphogenetic fields and settle into belief systems that resonate best with their particular temperments.

It's starting to look like a "Holographic Universe" around here!

Those involved in seriously looking at the esoteric and extraterrestrial should understand that these two forms likely have points of convergance and divergance.

Some people, yes, are capable of looking seriously at the subject!

Did you get a photo of the scene of the accident? Can you post it, so that we can all see what happened?

Just look in the mirror.

Just look in the mirror.

I don't see an accident when I do that. Are we talking about the same thing?
I actually see a very good-looking young man when I do that.

So. You lost the picture, did you?

And I was all prepared to show you the picture of my Pleaidean family arriving on the mothership!

What? Did you actually have DEFINITIVE proof of the accident you were talking about? Not just a blurry photo with little lights or smudges?