Could aliens look like us?

[bripat9643]

Also, why are you requiring any aliens to have developed on dry land?

You can't build fires and smelt copper and steel if you live underwater.

Magnesium burns underwater. We have volcanic vents in many places at the bottom of oceans. Again, you are assuming aliens life forms follow the same development as we find on earth.

You can't even find pure magnesium in nature. It's always combined with other elements. Creating pure magnesium requires the use of heat and oxidising chemical processes. That means it requires air.

Yeah, there is lava under the ocean, but how do you use it to produce iron? Explain how that would work. Creating steal and iron above water requires blowing large quantities of air through a furnace packed with oxidizing substances. How do you do something equivalent underwater?

I am not saying I know how an alien culture developed its technology. I am simply pointing out that there are things on earth that show what I said to be possible.

For all we know, aliens developed telekinesis and need no appendages at all.

Actually the history of life on earth, and especially of human life on earth, shows that what you claim simply isn't feasible.

 

[WinterBorn]

Why can't they? There are examples of snails and other creatures that live on dry land that have tentacles. In the environment of an alien world, there is no telling what evolved.

Snails don't have tentacles. If you watch an octopus out of water you'll see that all its tentacles lie flat on the ground. They can't lift them into the air.

The only thing that even comes close on dry land is the trunk of an elephant, and having only one grasping appendage is a severe limitation. Furthermore, I doubt anything as massive as an elephant could develop stuff like a carriage or motor vehicle or any other mode of transport they could ride in. Is it possible for smaller animals to have trunks? That, we don't really know at this point. Only one animal on earth has a trunk, but numerous species have hands.

The key part of that last sentence is "...on earth...". You have no way of knowing what aliens would develop or the environment they evolved in. To dismiss everything because of what has evolved on earth is simply ridiculous.

No, the star nosed mole does not grasp things with the tentacles. But they are an example of terrestrial animals with tentacles. Your assumption that only an animal the size of an elephant would have a trunk is another example of you trying to limit the possibilities of the physical features of extraterrestrials based solely on featues you observe on earth creatures.

What I'm trying to tell you is that the laws of physics preclude animals that live in dry air from developing tentacles, especially for large animals. Tentacles are relatively heavy and weak because they don't have an internal skelaton. Water bouys them up, so their weight isn't an issue in water, but in dry air their weight becomes a big issue. Tentacles would never be very functional for an animal that doesn't live in the water. Your star nose mole doesn't have tentacles. Those are sensory organs, not tentacles.

Any species that is going to develop technology is going to need some kind of grasping appendage, and that means it will almost certainly be composed of bone and muscle. Something like a hand with an internal skeleton is about the only thing that is going to do the job. Maybe it only has 3 or 4 fingers, or maybe it has 7 fingers, but it will have fingers, and it will have an internal skeleton and have muscle to make to move. A creature with an exoskeleton will never become technological because claws simply do not have the same dexterity and sense of touch that a hand does.

As you stated, an elephant's trunk is a tentacle. Limiting aliens to only one because elephants only have one is ridiculous.

You'll notice that elephat trunks are hanging striaight down most of the time. That's because they are heavy in relation to their strength. Human appendages are much more useful because they are relatively light and can be used to lift things and carry them for long distances.

And elephants only have one trunk. Making things requires the use of at least two appendages. When you make something you often require one hand to hold the material being worked on and another to use the tool being applied to it. Just try to make a stone spear point with only one hand. It's impossible. How would an animal with a trunk sew a shirt or a tent to protect it from the cold?

Once again, why do you insist an alien would have only one tentacle?

Also, you are assuming that the aliens come from a planet with the same gravity as Earth.

 

[WinterBorn]

Also, why are you requiring any aliens to have developed on dry land?

You can't build fires and smelt copper and steel if you live underwater.

Magnesium burns underwater. We have volcanic vents in many places at the bottom of oceans. Again, you are assuming aliens life forms follow the same development as we find on earth.

You can't even find pure magnesium in nature. It's always combined with other elements. Creating pure magnesium requires the use of heat and oxidising chemical processes. That means it requires air.

Yeah, there is lava under the ocean, but how do you use it to produce iron? Explain how that would work. Creating steal and iron above water requires blowing large quantities of air through a furnace packed with oxidizing substances. How do you do something equivalent underwater?

I am not saying I know how an alien culture developed its technology. I am simply pointing out that there are things on earth that show what I said to be possible.

For all we know, aliens developed telekinesis and need no appendages at all.

Actually the history of life on earth, and especially of human life on earth, shows that what you claim simply isn't feasible.

It shows it has not happened on earth. YOu want to use life forms on earth to limit what could be possible everywhere in the universe.

At one time the limits of where life could develop were thought to be set. Then we found life existing in places we thought it could not.

 

[bripat9643]

Tentacles can't exist in dry air, and creatures that live under water are never going to develop technologies like metal working.

Why can't they? There are examples of snails and other creatures that live on dry land that have tentacles. In the environment of an alien world, there is no telling what evolved.

Snails don't have tentacles. If you watch an octopus out of water you'll see that all its tentacles lie flat on the ground. They can't lift them into the air.

The only thing that even comes close on dry land is the trunk of an elephant, and having only one grasping appendage is a severe limitation. Furthermore, I doubt anything as massive as an elephant could develop stuff like a carriage or motor vehicle or any other mode of transport they could ride in. Is it possible for smaller animals to have trunks? That, we don't really know at this point. Only one animal on earth has a trunk, but numerous species have hands.

The key part of that last sentence is "...on earth...". You have no way of knowing what aliens would develop or the environment they evolved in. To dismiss everything because of what has evolved on earth is simply ridiculous.

No, the star nosed mole does not grasp things with the tentacles. But they are an example of terrestrial animals with tentacles. Your assumption that only an animal the size of an elephant would have a trunk is another example of you trying to limit the possibilities of the physical features of extraterrestrials based solely on featues you observe on earth creatures.

What I'm trying to tell you is that the laws of physics preclude animals that live in dry air from developing tentacles, especially for large animals. Tentacles are relatively heavy and weak because they don't have an internal skelaton. Water bouys them up, so their weight isn't an issue in water, but in dry air their weight becomes a big issue. Tentacles would never be very functional for an animal that doesn't live in the water. Your star nose mole doesn't have tentacles. Those are sensory organs, not tentacles.

Any species that is going to develop technology is going to need some kind of grasping appendage, and that means it will almost certainly be composed of bone and muscle. Something like a hand with an internal skeleton is about the only thing that is going to do the job. Maybe it only has 3 or 4 fingers, or maybe it has 7 fingers, but it will have fingers, and it will have an internal skeleton and have muscle to make to move. A creature with an exoskeleton will never become technological because claws simply do not have the same dexterity and sense of touch that a hand does.

As you stated, an elephant's trunk is a tentacle. Limiting aliens to only one because elephants only have one is ridiculous.

The trunk is a mutation of the animal's nose. I suppose it's plausible that an animal with multiple trunks could evolve, but I don't know how this would occur. Elephants evolved their nose into a grasping appendage because all their other limbs were needed for holding up its enormous bulk. How would an animal with two trunks evolve? What body parts would evolve into these trunks? I don't see any plausaible pathway for that to occur.

On the other hand (no pun intended), hands have evolved multiple times in nature. Many dinosaurs had hands. All primates have hands. Koalas have hands with two thumbs. Chamelions have hands. It seems hands are a very common solution to a common problem: how to grab and hold onto things for animals that live in dry air.

 

[bripat9643]

You can't build fires and smelt copper and steel if you live underwater.

Magnesium burns underwater. We have volcanic vents in many places at the bottom of oceans. Again, you are assuming aliens life forms follow the same development as we find on earth.

You can't even find pure magnesium in nature. It's always combined with other elements. Creating pure magnesium requires the use of heat and oxidising chemical processes. That means it requires air.

Yeah, there is lava under the ocean, but how do you use it to produce iron? Explain how that would work. Creating steal and iron above water requires blowing large quantities of air through a furnace packed with oxidizing substances. How do you do something equivalent underwater?

I am not saying I know how an alien culture developed its technology. I am simply pointing out that there are things on earth that show what I said to be possible.

For all we know, aliens developed telekinesis and need no appendages at all.

Actually the history of life on earth, and especially of human life on earth, shows that what you claim simply isn't feasible.

It shows it has not happened on earth. YOu want to use life forms on earth to limit what could be possible everywhere in the universe.

At one time the limits of where life could develop were thought to be set. Then we found life existing in places we thought it could not.

The fact that it hasn't happened on earth means it probably hasn't happened anywhere else. it hasn't happened here because the laws of nature preclude it from happening. I'm not sure what "limits" you're referring to, but our ignorance of certain organism doesn't mean that anything is possible.

 

[Balancer]

Ever seen a creature with a tentacle that doesn't live in the water?

It's hard to make steel when you live under water.

Above in the topic of this issue discussed in detail

 

[WinterBorn]

Why can't they? There are examples of snails and other creatures that live on dry land that have tentacles. In the environment of an alien world, there is no telling what evolved.

Snails don't have tentacles. If you watch an octopus out of water you'll see that all its tentacles lie flat on the ground. They can't lift them into the air.

The only thing that even comes close on dry land is the trunk of an elephant, and having only one grasping appendage is a severe limitation. Furthermore, I doubt anything as massive as an elephant could develop stuff like a carriage or motor vehicle or any other mode of transport they could ride in. Is it possible for smaller animals to have trunks? That, we don't really know at this point. Only one animal on earth has a trunk, but numerous species have hands.

The key part of that last sentence is "...on earth...". You have no way of knowing what aliens would develop or the environment they evolved in. To dismiss everything because of what has evolved on earth is simply ridiculous.

No, the star nosed mole does not grasp things with the tentacles. But they are an example of terrestrial animals with tentacles. Your assumption that only an animal the size of an elephant would have a trunk is another example of you trying to limit the possibilities of the physical features of extraterrestrials based solely on featues you observe on earth creatures.

What I'm trying to tell you is that the laws of physics preclude animals that live in dry air from developing tentacles, especially for large animals. Tentacles are relatively heavy and weak because they don't have an internal skelaton. Water bouys them up, so their weight isn't an issue in water, but in dry air their weight becomes a big issue. Tentacles would never be very functional for an animal that doesn't live in the water. Your star nose mole doesn't have tentacles. Those are sensory organs, not tentacles.

Any species that is going to develop technology is going to need some kind of grasping appendage, and that means it will almost certainly be composed of bone and muscle. Something like a hand with an internal skeleton is about the only thing that is going to do the job. Maybe it only has 3 or 4 fingers, or maybe it has 7 fingers, but it will have fingers, and it will have an internal skeleton and have muscle to make to move. A creature with an exoskeleton will never become technological because claws simply do not have the same dexterity and sense of touch that a hand does.

As you stated, an elephant's trunk is a tentacle. Limiting aliens to only one because elephants only have one is ridiculous.

The trunk is a mutation of the animal's nose. I suppose it's plausible that an animal with multiple trunks could evolve, but I don't know how this would occur. Elephants evolved their nose into a grasping appendage because all their other limbs were needed for holding up its enormous bulk. How would an animal with two trunks evolve? What body parts would evolve into these trunks? I don't see any plausaible pathway for that to occur.

On the other hand (no pun intended), hands have evolved multiple times in nature. Many dinosaurs had hands. All primates have hands. Koalas have hands with two thumbs. Chamelions have hands. It seems hands are a very common solution to a common problem: how to grab and hold onto things for animals that live in dry air.

It is indeed a common solution on earth. To assume that is the only solution found on every planet is unrealistic.

Again, you are looking at earth creatures and saying that is the only way it could happen, despite differences in atmosphere, gravity, and physiology.

I will give you a hypothetical example.

Suppose something developed underwater on a planet with lighter gravity. Suppose this creature developed intellectual capabilities which involved problem solving. (that is seen even here on earth) If these creatures developed shells or built shelters with natural substances (which could include secretions from them or other animals), they would be safer and more able to devote time to intellectual pursuits, like farming.

Now suppose these creature discover another animal that secrets a slime that bonds well and is watertight. Some enterprising member of this species covers itself with this slime, and ventures above the water. It could easily have a bubble of water with which to breathe. As social creatures, they band together to cultivate these slime producers and begin to explore the dry land. Discovering fire would be simple then.

Or suppose this planet has pure magnesium. Just because it does not occur in nature here does not mean it never occurs in pure form anywhere in the universe. Or, just because an element or mineral does not occur here does not mean it does not occur anywhere in the universe. So fire could be had underwater.

Or these creature developed a ceramic material that has most of the properties of copper or steel. This could be produced without fire, but could lead to the development of technologies that allow colonization of dry land.

 

[Balancer]

You can't build fires and smelt copper and steel if you live underwater.

Well discussed already above. What can not be done underwater can always be done over water. The atmosphere for a water inhabitant is incomparably more accessible than space for a land-dweller.

 

[WinterBorn]

Magnesium burns underwater. We have volcanic vents in many places at the bottom of oceans. Again, you are assuming aliens life forms follow the same development as we find on earth.

You can't even find pure magnesium in nature. It's always combined with other elements. Creating pure magnesium requires the use of heat and oxidising chemical processes. That means it requires air.

Yeah, there is lava under the ocean, but how do you use it to produce iron? Explain how that would work. Creating steal and iron above water requires blowing large quantities of air through a furnace packed with oxidizing substances. How do you do something equivalent underwater?

I am not saying I know how an alien culture developed its technology. I am simply pointing out that there are things on earth that show what I said to be possible.

For all we know, aliens developed telekinesis and need no appendages at all.

Actually the history of life on earth, and especially of human life on earth, shows that what you claim simply isn't feasible.

It shows it has not happened on earth. YOu want to use life forms on earth to limit what could be possible everywhere in the universe.

At one time the limits of where life could develop were thought to be set. Then we found life existing in places we thought it could not.

The fact that it hasn't happened on earth means it probably hasn't happened anywhere else. it hasn't happened here because the laws of nature preclude it from happening. I'm not sure what "limits" you're referring to, but our ignorance of certain organism doesn't mean that anything is possible.

I am not ignorant of biological life forms on earth. What I was referring to is the discovery of life forms on volcanic vents or in geothermal waters. In both cases, the scientific descriptions of the parameters of life were changed by these discoveries.

There is absolutely no reason to assume our planet's life forms are examples of the limits of life forms that evolved in very different environments.

 

[Balancer]

Creating pure magnesium requires the use of heat and oxidising chemical processes. That means it requires air.

Surprisingly, you can not creating magnesium in the air You will need an inert atmosphere or at least an inert melt. If we can make an inert atmosphere on the ground, what prevents to make an inert atmosphere under water?

 

[Votto]

I have been arguing for dozens of years that an alien that is capable of building a spaceship, would probably look like us. Not exactly, but they will have similar traits that we recognize as "humanoid". This is due to natural selection and the capabilities needed to build a spaceship. A "blob" is not going to land on earth and roll out of its spaceship.

It has to have the capabilities to build the spaceship, and being that natural selection will favor the maximum and minimum requirements for those capabilities, and the necessities they need to survive and evolve, aliens that land on earth could very well look similar to us. I've been saying this for over 30 years.

So Oxford finally did some science on the subject, and came up with the same conclusion that advanced life on other planets could be similar to us. Of course, it's not proof, but it's nice to see one of my 2170 theories get some recognition. ;-)

Aliens may be more like us than we think | University of Oxford

I sure hope not or we are all doomed.

 

[DGS49]

If you buy into Evolution, then the mutations that survive are random, and specific to the environment. There were millions of mutations that all contributed to the evolution of homo sapiens. Even assuming that it took place on another planet like earth there is no statistical chance that another life form would evolve looking like "us." No chance whatsoever.

Seriously, this is the strongest argument for the existence of "god." We are fucking unique. There is NO CHANCE that we could have evolved through random mutations.

 

[bripat9643]

Creating pure magnesium requires the use of heat and oxidising chemical processes. That means it requires air.

Surprisingly, you can not creating magnesium in the air You will need an inert atmosphere or at least an inert melt. If we can make an inert atmosphere on the ground, what prevents to make an inert atmosphere under water?

magnesium processing

The British chemist Humphry Davy is said to have produced an amalgam of magnesium in 1808 by electrolyzing moist magnesium sulfate, using mercury as a cathode. The first metallic magnesium, however, was produced in 1828 by the French scientist A.-A.-B. Bussy. His work involved the reduction of molten magnesium chloride by metallic potassium. In 1833 the English scientist Michael Faraday was the first to produce magnesium by the electrolysis of molten magnesium chloride. His experiments were repeated by the German chemist Robert Bunsen.
​

None of the processes listed above can be performed under water. If you need electricity, then you need a power source. How is a creature living underwater going to produce electricity? Using molten magnesium chloride means you need a heat source. The last process needs both electicity and molten magnesium chloride.

 

[bripat9643]

If you buy into Evolution, then the mutations that survive are random, and specific to the environment. There were millions of mutations that all contributed to the evolution of homo sapiens. Even assuming that it took place on another planet like earth there is no statistical chance that another life form would evolve looking like "us." No chance whatsoever.

Seriously, this is the strongest argument for the existence of "god." We are fucking unique. There is NO CHANCE that we could have evolved through random mutations.

You don't understand what the term "natural selection" means. The mutations are random, but the ones that survive are not random. The environment and competition from other species determine which ones surive.

 

[WinterBorn]

If you buy into Evolution, then the mutations that survive are random, and specific to the environment. There were millions of mutations that all contributed to the evolution of homo sapiens. Even assuming that it took place on another planet like earth there is no statistical chance that another life form would evolve looking like "us." No chance whatsoever.

Seriously, this is the strongest argument for the existence of "god." We are fucking unique. There is NO CHANCE that we could have evolved through random mutations.

You don't understand what the term "natural selection" means. The mutations are random, but the ones that survive are not random. The environment and competition from other species determine which ones surive.

And yet, you decided that only things that have evolved on earth, a very specific environment, would evolve on other planets which will have very different environments in almost every way.

 

[bripat9643]

Ever seen a creature with a tentacle that doesn't live in the water?

View attachment 158935

It's hard to make steel when you live under water.

Above in the topic of this issue discussed in detail

Ok, if you want to call a trunk a "tenticle." However, you will still never see an organism with a trunk produce a techonological society. The reason? Because creatures with hands will also exist on that planet and they will out compete any animal with a trunk.

Vertebrates have had hands almost since the day they crawled out of the oceans onto dry land. In fact, they had hands while they still lived in the water. hands have evolved over and over again. Early amphibians had primitive hands. So did early reptiles, and many species of dinosours had hands. Once life moved into the trees, hands were essential. No creature living in the trees with only tenticles for grasping is going to out-compete an animal that has hands. No creature with tentitcles is going to be able to leap from tree to tree the way a gibbon does. Creatures with hands are simply much better adapted for the aboreal lifestyle than a creature with tenticles. Tenticles are always going to lose the battle of survival if they have to compete with creatures that have hands.

Any intelligent technical species is going to have hands. It's inevitable.

 

[bripat9643]

If you buy into Evolution, then the mutations that survive are random, and specific to the environment. There were millions of mutations that all contributed to the evolution of homo sapiens. Even assuming that it took place on another planet like earth there is no statistical chance that another life form would evolve looking like "us." No chance whatsoever.

Seriously, this is the strongest argument for the existence of "god." We are fucking unique. There is NO CHANCE that we could have evolved through random mutations.

You don't understand what the term "natural selection" means. The mutations are random, but the ones that survive are not random. The environment and competition from other species determine which ones surive.

And yet, you decided that only things that have evolved on earth, a very specific environment, would evolve on other planets which will have very different environments in almost every way.

The same forces that guide evolution on this planet will also guide evolution on other planets. Life evolves on planets that have liquid water. if there is no dry land on the planet, then not technical species will evolve. It's simply impossible for creatures living underwater to develop techology beyond a primitive level.

 

[bripat9643]

You can't even find pure magnesium in nature. It's always combined with other elements. Creating pure magnesium requires the use of heat and oxidising chemical processes. That means it requires air.

Yeah, there is lava under the ocean, but how do you use it to produce iron? Explain how that would work. Creating steal and iron above water requires blowing large quantities of air through a furnace packed with oxidizing substances. How do you do something equivalent underwater?

I am not saying I know how an alien culture developed its technology. I am simply pointing out that there are things on earth that show what I said to be possible.

For all we know, aliens developed telekinesis and need no appendages at all.

Actually the history of life on earth, and especially of human life on earth, shows that what you claim simply isn't feasible.

It shows it has not happened on earth. YOu want to use life forms on earth to limit what could be possible everywhere in the universe.

At one time the limits of where life could develop were thought to be set. Then we found life existing in places we thought it could not.

The fact that it hasn't happened on earth means it probably hasn't happened anywhere else. it hasn't happened here because the laws of nature preclude it from happening. I'm not sure what "limits" you're referring to, but our ignorance of certain organism doesn't mean that anything is possible.

I am not ignorant of biological life forms on earth. What I was referring to is the discovery of life forms on volcanic vents or in geothermal waters. In both cases, the scientific descriptions of the parameters of life were changed by these discoveries.

There is absolutely no reason to assume our planet's life forms are examples of the limits of life forms that evolved in very different environments.

The life forms discovered around volcanic vents are extremely primitive. The idea that they could develop into intelligent lifeforms doesn't pass the smell test.

 

[WinterBorn]

If you buy into Evolution, then the mutations that survive are random, and specific to the environment. There were millions of mutations that all contributed to the evolution of homo sapiens. Even assuming that it took place on another planet like earth there is no statistical chance that another life form would evolve looking like "us." No chance whatsoever.

Seriously, this is the strongest argument for the existence of "god." We are fucking unique. There is NO CHANCE that we could have evolved through random mutations.

You don't understand what the term "natural selection" means. The mutations are random, but the ones that survive are not random. The environment and competition from other species determine which ones surive.

And yet, you decided that only things that have evolved on earth, a very specific environment, would evolve on other planets which will have very different environments in almost every way.

The same forces that guide evolution on this planet will also guide evolution on other planets. Life evolves on planets that have liquid water. if there is no dry land on the planet, then not technical species will evolve. It's simply impossible for creatures living underwater to develop techology beyond a primitive level.

So you keep saying. Without any real basis, I might add.

 

[Moonglow]

I have been arguing for dozens of years that an alien that is capable of building a spaceship, would probably look like us. Not exactly, but they will have similar traits that we recognize as "humanoid". This is due to natural selection and the capabilities needed to build a spaceship. A "blob" is not going to land on earth and roll out of its spaceship.

It has to have the capabilities to build the spaceship, and being that natural selection will favor the maximum and minimum requirements for those capabilities, and the necessities they need to survive and evolve, aliens that land on earth could very well look similar to us. I've been saying this for over 30 years.

So Oxford finally did some science on the subject, and came up with the same conclusion that advanced life on other planets could be similar to us. Of course, it's not proof, but it's nice to see one of my 2170 theories get some recognition. ;-)

Aliens may be more like us than we think | University of Oxford

I got a pic just the other day of a space alien amongst us..