On UFOs and making contact with them?

[Krupski]

My mouse melted and my fingerprints on my right hand dissolved when I re-posted it. The feeling in my fingers is just starting to come back now.

No matter which race claims her, she is one ugly bitch.

Well then I guess you've suffered sufficiently.....

[Cypher]

What if there are millions of other planets with life on them but earth is the only one technologically advanced. Will earthlings inhabit the moon of one of these planets one day?

[Krupski]

What if there are millions of other planets with life on them but earth is the only one technologically advanced. Will earthlings inhabit the moon of one of these planets one day?

Statistically there MUST be countless billions of planets with life on them. And of those, I'm sure most if not all of them have sentient self-aware life.

If they've been around longer than humans, they no doubt have technologically progressed way beyond what we can even imagine.

I think the big "decider" is if a sentient, self aware society can make it through their industrial revolution and atomic age without extincting themselves.

If they can get past that hurdle, there's probably no limit to how far they can advance (of course, there may be other technological "milestones" that can prove fatal to an immature society).

I really do wish I knew if the speed of light can be beaten or cheated. It would be a bummer if we are stuck in our solar system "forever" (until it dies).

[alismith]

What if there are millions of other planets with life on them but earth is the only one technologically advanced. Will earthlings inhabit the moon of one of these planets one day?

We have to colonize our moon first, then see how that goes. Then, we can look elsewhere. The main problem will be how will we be able to travel to them. The distances are too far for us, or our science, right now. Unless some major breakthrough in propulsion, or speed, is discovered, we're pretty much stuck to our own solar system.

[alismith]

Statistically there MUST be countless billions of planets with life on them. And of those, I'm sure most if not all of them have sentient self-aware life.

If they've been around longer than humans, they no doubt have technologically progressed way beyond what we can even imagine.

I think the big "decider" is if a sentient, self aware society can make it through their industrial revolution and atomic age without extincting themselves.

If they can get past that hurdle, there's probably no limit to how far they can advance (of course, there may be other technological "milestones" that can prove fatal to an immature society).

I really do wish I knew if the speed of light can be beaten or cheated. It would be a bummer if we are stuck in our solar system "forever" (until it dies).

That's a big "IF." Mammals wouldn't be the dominant life form on earth if it weren't for the KT Event. The dinosaurs were so far advanced over our puny mammal ancestors, that the only way we achieved dominance was because the dinos were, largely, eradicated, opening up the world for our ancestors.

IF events like the various extinctions are considered normal, then there's a good chance sentient life forms aren't that "old."

However, if major extinctions didn't occur on other planets, then the mammal-equivalent for that planet, wouldn't have had the opportunity to evolve like we did.

There's a lot of factors to consider when given the whole universe to think about.

[Krupski]

That's a big "IF." Mammals wouldn't be the dominant life form on earth if it weren't for the KT Event. The dinosaurs were so far advanced over our puny mammal ancestors, that the only way we achieved dominance was because the dinos were, largely, eradicated, opening up the world for our ancestors.

IF events like the various extinctions are considered normal, then there's a good chance sentient life forms aren't that "old."

However, if major extinctions didn't occur on other planets, then the mammal-equivalent for that planet, wouldn't have had the opportunity to evolve like we did.

There's a lot of factors to consider when given the whole universe to think about.

The dinosaurs were around for millions of years and, to my knowledge, none of them were self-aware, tool building societies.

I wonder why they didn't evolve a lot more in the time they were here (or conversely, why humans became self-aware in such a short time span)?

Give the billions of planets that have conditions to sustain life, I'm sure there is a wide variety of mass extinction events in their history.

Some planets may have intelligent "dinosaur" styled, others may be mammal-like, yet others may have a design that we couldn't even imagine.

Using the example of a "dinosaur", I'll bet that if there are intelligent, evolved "dinosaur beings" on a planet, they probably started out like ours (large and dumb). As they evolved, they probably got smaller, their heads (brains) probably got a lot larger and their forearms probably evolved from "claws" to fingers capable of fine, precision movements.

Lifeform design that I'll bet NEVER goes anywhere on the path of "evolutionary improvement" are reptiles, large predatory fish and insects.

Sharks, alligators, crocodiles and other reptiles plus insects are the same design that they were in the days of the dinosaurs. They survived the K–T extinction event and have not evolved in the millions of years that they've been around, which suggests that their design is perfect and cannot be improved upon.

[alismith]

The dinosaurs were around for millions of years and, to my knowledge, none of them were self-aware, tool building societies.

I wonder why they didn't evolve a lot more in the time they were here (or conversely, why humans became self-aware in such a short time span)?

Give the billions of planets that have conditions to sustain life, I'm sure there is a wide variety of mass extinction events in their history.

Some planets may have intelligent "dinosaur" styled, others may be mammal-like, yet others may have a design that we couldn't even imagine.

Using the example of a "dinosaur", I'll bet that if there are intelligent, evolved "dinosaur beings" on a planet, they probably started out like ours (large and dumb). As they evolved, they probably got smaller, their heads (brains) probably got a lot larger and their forearms probably evolved from "claws" to fingers capable of fine, precision movements.

Lifeform design that I'll bet NEVER goes anywhere on the path of "evolutionary improvement" are reptiles, large predatory fish and insects.

Sharks, alligators, crocodiles and other reptiles plus insects are the same design that they were in the days of the dinosaurs. They survived the K–T extinction event and have not evolved in the millions of years that they've been around, which suggests that their design is perfect and cannot be improved upon.

This is your "sentient" dinosaur, based on the idea that dinosaurs didn't go extinct.



Here's the hypothetical "dinosauroid" and the dinosaur he might have evolved from.



One aspect of most of the so-called alien "sightings" is the angular head and very large eyes.....Could those "aliens" have come from a planet where the dinos didn't go extinct?




Interesting mental journey, if nothing else....

[N/A]

So what kind of environment would aliens have that caused them to evolve into the color grey?

Low light, no chlorophyll, aluminum based blood, et cetera?

[Helen Keller]

Evolved skin to reflect UV rays.

[PROBASCO]

1975, my room mate and I saw one 50 ft off the ground. say what you will, but we know what we saw

[Helen Keller]

Earth is the realm, not the planet.

[Krupski]

This is your "sentient" dinosaur, based on the idea that dinosaurs didn't go extinct.



One aspect of most of the so-called alien "sightings" is the angular head and very large eyes.....Could those "aliens" have come from a planet where the dinos didn't go extinct?




Interesting mental journey, if nothing else....

There's a lot wrong with this concept.

First of all, the name "Dinosaur" is completely wrong and inaccurate. "Saur" or "Saurus" refers to to lizards. Anyone with half a brain and at least one eye can see that a "dinosaur" is not a "lizard". They are not built like lizards, their metabolisms are not like lizards, their skeletons, joint locations, etc... do not match any "lizard" template.

"Dinosaurs" are prehistoric BIRDS. Look at a bird skeleton and a predatory (carnivorous) dinosaur and compare. Perfect match. Look at the body design, body shape, number of claws on the "hands" and feet. Perfect match. Notice the hollow bones. Both birds and dinos have them.

Bird skeleton:



Raptor skeleton:



Note the ischium, the location of the acetabulum (the "socket" that the femoral head fits into). Note the femur and the "backwards bending" joint below the knee. Note the hands and feet... three fingers and a "thumb" or "dew claw". Note the caudal vertebrae (tail bones). Aside from the "arms" of the raptor evolving into wings, they almost perfectly match (as do other similar dinos like T-Rex, Allosaurus, etc...).

Also, dinosaurs HAD to be homeothermic (constant body temperature a.k.a "warm blooded"). No way could they output the metabolic energy required for high speed running and capturing prey if they were slow moving "cold blooded" animals (not to mention being vulnerable to attack from predators while they were in a cold and low energy state). And, of course, birds are also warm blooded.

With regard to the "alien" drawing up top, no way would the eye iris be a slit. It would be a round iris (like humans).

Anyone who has ever done any "serious" photography (that is, more than Instamatic snapshots) knows what "depth of field" is and how the camera lens iris size affects image sharpness AND how sharp objects closer or further from the focal point appear (sharpness-wise).

The smaller the iris opening, the greater range of sharpness you get.

Predatory animals like cats and lions have a vertical slit iris (and a corresponding HORIZONTAL fovea centralis (the area of highest sharpness and resolution on the retina)).

While humans have a small circular fovea (sharp spot), cats and other similar animals have a horizontal LINE of sharpness across the rear of their retina.

This allows them to observe prey and "notice" prey with their sharp vision all the way from the left to the right of their field of view without moving their heads or eyes left and right.

Therefore, the cat can remain motionless and undetected by the prey until the prey becomes dinner. Another way to look at it... if humans had retinas like a cat, we could read a book without looking from left to right to take in a whole line of text.

Getting back to the vertical slit iris... the vertical iris creates maximum depth of field (sharpness) across the whole horizontal fovea. If a cat had human-like irises, only the center of their vision would be sharp and their wide sharp fovea would be wasted.

The slit also can close more tightly (let in less light) than a round one can... important for cats who primarily have high sensitivity, monochrome rod cells in their retinas (they give up cone (color) vision for high sensitivity night vision - but bright daylight can overwhelm the rods, hence the importance of an iris that can close "tighter" than a round one).

A being like the "grey alien" would most certainly have evolved away from the need for night vision in preference for color vision and, not needing to stealthily stalk prey, would evolve away from a "cat retina" and towards a "human type" retina (and therefore no need the slit iris).

I'd really like to meet a real "alien" (an ET, not a muslim).

[Krupski]

So what kind of environment would aliens have that caused them to evolve into the color grey?

Low light, no chlorophyll, aluminum based blood, et cetera?

Although a LOT of people who claim to have encountered an "alien" describe the exact same being, I don't ever recall there being a mention of their skin color (that would be racist).

In fact, human skin would be a sickly grey color if it were not for our rusted iron based blood coloring our skin.

The "aliens" may use something other than iron as a gas exchange mechanism in their blood.

There are many animals on earth (crabs, scorpions, tarantulas, etc...) that use copper as a gas exchange mechanism in their blood.

Copper based blood is mostly clear when it's venous (deoxygenated) and blue when it's arterial (oxygenated).

I don't know what characteristics make any particular metal a good oxygen carrier, but there are probably even more than iron and copper that would work.

Some of there type of blood may be different colors or colorless and explain why "grey" aliens are grey.

(or maybe they don't even use oxygen... other elements can act as oxidizers to burn nutrients for energy)

[JTHunter]

Have you ever watched "horseshoe crabs" Krupski? They are one of those strange creatures with copper-based blood. I remember some show on PBS where they were talking about these "crabs", which are more closely related to spiders and other arachnids. There is a lab on the east coast that catches these critters, extracts a small amount of their blood, then returns the crabs to the same beach and releases them. The blood is used for some medical procedure/product for humans, but I don't remember exactly what.

[alismith]

Have you ever watched "horseshoe crabs" Krupski? They are one of those strange creatures with copper-based blood. I remember some show on PBS where they were talking about these "crabs", which are more closely related to spiders and other arachnids. There is a lab on the east coast that catches these critters, extracts a small amount of their blood, then returns the crabs to the same beach and releases them. The blood is used for some medical procedure/product for humans, but I don't remember exactly what.

I live about 20 minutes from that lab. A group of teachers took a tour of it about 5-6 years ago. It was pretty interesting to watch what they do and to see all those crabs get a small amount of their blood removed. It's supposed to be painless to the crab and proposes no ill effects on them. Yes, they are released back into the same area they came from. I think they only keep the crabs about 2 days before they're released.

Their blood is used to check and see if a serum will have any ill effects on a human before that serum is injected into them. If the serum coagulates or changes color in crab blood, then it isn't given to humans. If it doesn't coagulate or change color, then it's safe for humans. As far as I know, it's the only way to test for these serums.

[1 Patriot-of-many]

Not sure we would like it if they did come here.

One of my favorite Twilight Zones, Have all of them, cutting edge at the time. Even a lot of the new ones are pretty good, But Serling was a smoking genius, though some ideas are taken from scifi books written previously,

[1 Patriot-of-many]

The dinosaurs were around for millions of years and, to my knowledge, none of them were self-aware, tool building societies.

I wonder why they didn't evolve a lot more in the time they were here (or conversely, why humans became self-aware in such a short time span)?

Give the billions of planets that have conditions to sustain life, I'm sure there is a wide variety of mass extinction events in their history.

Some planets may have intelligent "dinosaur" styled, others may be mammal-like, yet others may have a design that we couldn't even imagine.

Using the example of a "dinosaur", I'll bet that if there are intelligent, evolved "dinosaur beings" on a planet, they probably started out like ours (large and dumb). As they evolved, they probably got smaller, their heads (brains) probably got a lot larger and their forearms probably evolved from "claws" to fingers capable of fine, precision movements.

Lifeform design that I'll bet NEVER goes anywhere on the path of "evolutionary improvement" are reptiles, large predatory fish and insects.

Sharks, alligators, crocodiles and other reptiles plus insects are the same design that they were in the days of the dinosaurs. They survived the K–T extinction event and have not evolved in the millions of years that they've been around, which suggests that their design is perfect and cannot be improved upon.

I'll disagree here, Carbon dating isn't accurate period. All conjecture on dates and especially further than actually sampled carbon in the air. Scientists just presume carbon percentages always remain the same. I'll stick with the Tornado in a Junkyard which destroys most of the commonly accepted evolution we're spoon fed with. So much fraud so little science in the theory of evolution.