Monday, January 05, 2009

WHY ET HAS TO BE HUMANOID by Anthony Bragalia


The Bible tells us that Man was created in God's image. But what of the Extraterrestrial? Why is it that our image of the visiting Alien is almost always humanlike in form? Why do we see humanoids?

Skeptics say that such creatures would in no way resemble our human physical form. They say that "popular images" of ET are silly. They maintain that we are simply projecting how we wish the alien to appear onto ET's form. People see ET in terms of life as we know it, science writer Dr. Craig Freudenrich recently stated. He glibly remarked, "For most of history, aliens had to be played by human actors in alien costumes. This made it difficult to have shapes other than humanoid." He adds, "And you cannot make an alien look too different from a human because the audience must recognize it. Psychologically, we are very good at recognizing humanoid shapes, so an alien shaped like a coffee table would not be very good." Folks such as Freudenrich feel that we aren't satisfied with microbes or even jellyfish- we want little green men or benign Klingons- so this is what we see when we see ET.

Science has conditioned us to reject the anthropocentric viewpoint. They have done this since the Copernican Revolution showed that the Earth is not the center of the universe. When scientists interpret observations, they obsessively try to exclude human values. They loathe their humaness. They insist that Science must not be human-centric. They tell us that the chances of ET with intelligence are slim, and that -even given their existence- the probability of them in any way resembling "people" is very remote. Though we are most certainly not the center of the universe, the pendulum of thinking on this has swung far too far.

We should not fear to fathom the simplest solution- that ET is very much like us!

ET visitors often appear as forms that are human-like for very good reason. They generally have heads, torsos, four limbs and bilateral symetry because they must. A friend's young child wisely reasoned, "Well, the Aliens could be green slimey globs- but if they are coming here, hands and feet sure would be helpful!"

And the child is right. Aliens likely do exist on their respective planets as blobs, slithering things, unimaginable things. But if the Alien is able to leave its home planet and visit us, it must have manual capability. It must make be able to articulate movement to make things. To do so requires appendages with opposable digits. It would have to have limb-like structures to ambulate within the environment. It has to see in order to make. Thus it possesses "hands," "arms," "legs," and "eyes." And it must have structure- a "skeleton" or frame to hold itself upright- and "skin" to contain what is within. The Visitors are -out of necessity- humanoid. No matter how clever, a crab or a cat will never propel a spaceship through space-time.

Space Shuttle Columbia Astronaut and physicist Dr. Ulrich Walter makes this case very well in a 2004 paper. He goes against traditional scientific thought on the matter of what ET would look like. He says of the visiting alien form, "No matter from which angle you approach the problem, the only realistic approach seems to be the variant realised by the human race." He examines in fine detail why the basis of such evolutionary life has be be carbon chemistry, or organic chemistry. This is why ET cannot be that much different from earthly life with regard to its basic substances. Space-faring creatures would require the same stereoscopic vision and the same hand-eye coordination as humans. Dr. Walter says that (unless artificially created) such sentient ET life would be made of "flesh" (agglomerate of reproducing aqueous cells) and "blood" (a liquid which tranports needed substances.) The "flesh" and "blood" of a humanoid. Dr. Walter concludes that ET's functional counterparts are similar to ours, and that "the only question that remains is where these parts are located."

When another child was asked, "What does ET look like?" he replied: "They can be anything." He too is right. If the universe teems with sentient life, then there are beings that are at once ancient and advanced. And those that survive, adapt. Over the eons, technology has no doubt enabled them to appear as they wish. And if something is sufficiently Alien, it may appear as anything. Or it might not even wish to be noticed as "living" or recognized as sentient at all. Their form is likely whatever they desire it to be. It is "self-engineered." Aliens who visit us would have to be unfathomably adaptable- with the technology to change form to exploit all habitat. Just as their craft (and the material from which they are comprised) can change state, so too can ET's appearance.

Though they appear as they wish- ET's core nature remains humanoid. The reason that their form is so familiar is because we are from the same source. We share ultimate origin. And one day we will do what they do. The truth is that Man and Visitor both reflect the infinite image of God- rendering meaningless the very use of the term "Alien."


Blogger Bruce Duensing said...


Primarily, I wanted to comment how much I enjoy your posts, which I have been meaning to for some time inasmuch as everything else I read are essentially the same recycled ruminations that cant seem to find any compelling reason to go below the surfaces of these appearances. My own speculations in this regard are on the surface, rather simplistic. I suspect that they are a totemistic ghost of an indeterminate nature that we are joined or, if you will, entangled with at the hip, and as a consequence will never appear as a jellyfish, etc. We are their parents, but as offspring, they have the behaviors of children..they like to play dress up, or confound us in the nonsensical ways as they are all parodys of our own nature. Perhaps the best description of this species is a doppleganger. However, all of this is simply a operating platform to explore other issues. I said elsewhere that the ET -UFO phenomenon is a nifty metaphysical coat hanger. Whatever we seem to don as metabeliefs can be hung on it with some amount of reasonable justification.

Best Wishes From Intangible Materiality

Bruce Duensing

January 06, 2009  
Blogger Mark said...

They appear to be what we are most afraid of.

A superior species that treats the same fashion as we treat those other species that live here.

A reflection of those things about our species...that we are in denial of.

They look like us...because they are us.

January 06, 2009  
Blogger Joseph Capp said...

Dear Anthony,
I agree also. It seems to me the height of arrogance to have never witnesses and alien and decide what they must be like. The human shape was sufficient enough to rise to the top of the heap and sufficient enough to build spaceships to explore other planets why would evolution use it again. I believe we will even find some mammals and insects similar to what we have.
Joseph Capp
UFO Media Matters
Non-Commercial Blog

January 06, 2009  
Blogger Conley said...

The idea that any species capable of interstellar flight must be enough like us to pass for human by moonlight at a hundred yards is one that no science-fiction reader would accept. But if this were true, it would not mean that every species traveling among the stars is humanoid; it would mean that no one is traveling among the stars. The chance that a completely independent line of evolution would lead to an intelligent species very similar to man is infinitesimal, and this probability is independent of whether a humanoid form is or is not a prerequisite for interstellar flight.

January 07, 2009  
Blogger bigbradwolf said...

I stopped reading this article as soon as you mentioned Bible hocus pocus. Which is a shame, I was intrigued to know what you were talking about, but if you're going to bring a fictional Western parable into the equation, I hold little hope I'll find anything of genuine scientific value in it.

January 07, 2009  
Blogger qraal said...

Simon Conway-Morris points out the ubiquity of convergence throughout the biosphere - Nature produces what's possible, not just any old "hopeful monster".

But biochemistry wise a whole lot of different arrangements are possible, yet at the same time, similar "forms" appear again and again. Cytochrome-c, for example, can differ in virtually 100% of its amino acid sequence, yet it still does the same cellular job. Convergence seems to rule the molecules too.

January 08, 2009  
Blogger Brian W said...

Aliens are not humanoid, humans are alienoid.

Evolution isn't responcible for growing our enourmous brains, of which we can only access 10% and which consume 90% of the nutrients we ingest each day. These massive brains which have lead to us ravishing every creature and natural resource on this planet in a mere 4000 years of so called civilization.

Nothing evolutionary about all that I say.

Chimpanzees dont have 98% of our DNA, we are chimpanzees with 2% ET.

January 23, 2009  
Blogger Juhani said...

So, are the UFOs benevolent or malevolent? For those of you who believe in UFOs and have not yet thought about this, it is worth your while to do so now in the light of the following points. These points have been presented earlier and seem to point to the fact that the UFOs are not at all spacecrafts from other planets but that they are, as a matter of fact, evil spirits that can appear as humanoids and try to delude the mankind.

June 23, 2009  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home