Before I begin, I want to stress that humanoid occupants of UFOs is also perfectly consistent with the time traveling human hypothesis, the ancient human technology hypothesis, the Silurian hypothesis, the hypothesis that the occupants are avatars, etc. Basically we don't really know what's going on yet, but this post will focus specifically on why it is expected that aliens would be humanoid (either interstellar aliens or those from another planet in this solar system that went underground).
There would still be a lot of variation, but only variation within the humanoid form. I don't buy the idea that aliens shouldn't be humanoid, concluding that one of the other hypotheses must be correct. In this case, I think the underdog scientific theory that aliens would share a great number of similar characteristics to us is the correct one, and this will be accepted more and more over time in evolutionary biology/astrobiology circles.
1) They are likely going to have two eyes. Binocular vision is far more useful than a single eye, and any more than two eyes is going to be a waste of resources, and therefore not worth the energy expenditure and maintenance. Since eyes evolved independently on this planet at least 6 times, aliens would probably also have eyes, and two of them specifically. Among all of the most intelligent species on this planet, two eyes is universal and there would probably have to be some very unusual circumstances that lead to any creatures having more than two (spiders for example).
2) A tripod leg situation is simply not ideal. Either two or 4 legs is clearly the most efficient way to transport your body over a landmass. A third leg would be a waste of resources. The only bipedal animals on this planet kept their other two limbs for some other purpose and their ancestors started off with 4. Birds have wings. Orangutans have arms for climbing and grasping. We have arms and fingers for fine manipulation of materials. The only land-dwelling creatures on this planet that have 6, 8, or even 1,200 legs are insects/spiders, so we can probably assume that for the particular niches they fill and the uses they have for more legs is an unusual situation that is unlikely to lead to having a gigantic brain since no single insect has ever developed anything remotely resembling mammalian or avian intelligence.
3) Nature's whittling down of variety that occurred on this planet multiple times may not have been a "chance" event. The best forms that developed into what we see today originated with whatever the best forms were back then when each cataclysm occurred. Those forms were what survived because they were more suited to survival through those cataclysms and beyond. The starfish still exists today for whatever reason, perhaps simply because that is one particular case where a different body form is better suiting to that particular unusual niche. It doesn't have a "brain" per se, but its "head" is located in the center with 5 or more limbs radiating outward. If that unusual form was "better" for leading to a wide variety of other lifeforms that then move onto land, perhaps including intelligent lifeforms, then that probably would have occurred eventually, but it hasn't. (I explain later why intelligent spaceship-building aliens would probably be land-dwellers).
According to Arik Kershembaum (Cambridge zoologist), from his book The Zoologist's Guide to the Galaxy, in chapter 2,
"Presented with similar environmental challenges, similar solutions seem advantageous. Indeed, it is quite likely that given a particular problem, there exist only a limited number of possible solutions. If that is the case, it should not surprise us that birds, bats, the pterosaur, and insects have arrived at similar functions (flight), albeit with different forms. This example of the convergent evolution of flight only scratches the surface of a hugely broad phenomenon. Convergence is everywhere. Eyes, like ours with a large lens, evolved at least 6 times. The generation of an electric field from the body, either to stun prey or sense surroundings, has evolved at least as many times. Giving birth to live young, which appears to have evolved quite independently, evolved at least 100 times. Even photosynthesis, the basis for all life on Earth, probably evolved separately in at least 31 lineages."
Also see The Deep Structure of Biology- Is Convergence Sufficiently Ubiquitous to Give a Directional Signal? edited by Professor Simon Conway Morris of Cambridge University. Morris is a paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and astrobiologist.
Morris also wrote a book called The Runes of Evolution, and a few others on the subject of convergence in evolution, which I haven't read yet, but I can cite some quotes from a media interview:
An area of biology which is becoming popular, perhaps too popular, that the possibility evolution is becoming much more predictable than people thought,” he told The Independent. “The book is really trying to persuade the world that evolutionary convergence is completely ubiquitous. Wherever you look you see it.
“The theme is to try and drive the reader, gently of course, into the possibility that the things which we regard as most important, i.e. cognitive sophistication, large brains, intelligence, tool making, are also convergent. Therefore, in principle, other Earth-like planets should very much end up with the same sort of arrangement.”
Professor Conway Morris, a Fellow at St John’s College, said it follows that plant and animal life on other planets able to support life would also look similar to Earth’s.
He said: “Certainly it’s not the case that every Earth-like planet will have life let alone humanoids. But if you want a sophisticated plant it will look awfully like a flower. If you want a fly there’s only a few ways you can do that. If you want to swim, like a shark, there’s only a few ways you can do that. If you want to invent warm-bloodedness, like birds and mammals, there’s only a few ways to do that. https://web.archive.org/web/20171213113935/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/forget-little-green-men-aliens-will-look-like-humans-says-cambridge-university-evolution-expert-10358164.html
Here is a comparison photo between a dolphin and a shark. Keep in mind the dolphin comes from a vastly different creature: some kind of land animal with 4 legs: https://imgur.com/a/k0w9AKP Two entirely different looking creatures, a shark and a land animal, converged on the same general body plan in the sea, even with fins in the same exact places. The exception is that fish and shark spines move horizontally, while dolphins and land animals vertically. This was not a coincidence.
In my opinion, the phenomena of convergent evolution sufficiently explains why aliens capable of building spaceships would be humanoid. Nature tends to gravitate toward the best solutions, which are always trade offs. The popular idea that alien planets could contain all manner of extremely strange animals, everything we can imagine, is likely not correct. There could be specific reasons why extremely advanced intelligence cannot arise in other kinds of animals, such as the elephant, octopus, etc. Their intelligence could plateau at some point, whereas a bipedal creature could be the most likely candidate template for super advanced intelligence for whatever reason, including the fact that two of their limbs could be specialized in fine manipulation of materials rather than locomotion, leading to tool creation and inventions.
The elephant has a single manipulative arm, not two like us. The octopus probably won't ever build a spaceship because it can't create fire, and discovering fire may be one of the prerequisite events that leads to super advanced intelligence because then you can break down food to feed the growing brain, chemistry, tool making, etc. There aren't any intelligent land-dwelling molluscs (of which the octopus is a part). Fire is easily created, controllable, and transportable, whereas an octopus attempting to use hydrothermal vents for chemistry doesn't sound plausible, useful, or long term. Although some birds are pretty intelligent, most of a bird's energy is focused on fueling the wings, not their brains, so a bird-like creature may be less likely to eventually build spaceships, but I wouldn't rule it out yet (although we do have the 'Mothman' phenomenon to deal with).
PBS: Why Do Things Keep Evolving Into Crabs?
When there is a very open set of niches unoccupied, the creativity of Darwinian evolution would be in full swing, but over time, a limited set of body plans would outlast the others. 4 limbs to move around on land could be the best solution. Any less is a hassle, and any more would require the growth and maintenance of unnecessary body parts, and evolution tends to minimize things for efficiency and limiting the number of limbs that could be grabbed by a predator and that would slow you down in a run. The 4 legged creatures will outlast everyone else. However, some insects have over a thousand legs for some reason. The exception might be planets with much more gravity than Earth, which may lead to a larger number of legs to distribute the weight of large creatures on land, but we don't know if it's even possible for a super advanced organism capable of building spaceships to arise on such a planet.
Out of this pool of 4-limbed creatures, the most likely lineage that may one day lead up to a super advanced intelligence would be those who became bipedal. Keep in mind there is a difference between advanced intelligence, such as in the elephant, octopus, etc, and exceptionally advanced intelligence, such as what we have. Perhaps there simply isn't another likely option for nature to create something as smart as us without making it humanoid. There are other intelligent creatures on earth, but nothing like a technology-obsessed super intelligent species like us. However, it seems possible that chimpanzees or orangutans might one day reach that level, likely once they go fully bipedal so their hands can fully specialize in fine manipulation of materials rather than locomotion and swinging through trees.
So I think humanoid aliens capable of building spaceships might be expected to exist, rather than the Hollywood idea of ink blobs and slug aliens and all manner of other strange variations of creatures that our imaginations have conjured up. I think there is a very good reason why aliens are almost universally sighted as humanoid, with over 4,000 reports so far, rather than being described as Hollywood aliens (of course, many Hollywood aliens are humanoid as well, but there are many, many other variations). Their skin might be different. The arrangement of the organs, total number of teeth, total number of bones, their size, number of fingers, etc might also be different. But I think aliens capable of building spaceships are probably going to be humanoid.
Note: the lack of a visible breathing apparatus in many of these reports might suggest something. I wouldn't be surprised if alien planets look somewhat close to conditions on Earth. Since photosynthesis happened here at least 31 times, then it might be the case that there is some leveling off eventually in terms of oxygen percentage on most planets with life, so a lot of aliens may easily hop from one planet to the next and breathe the air without much or any support. This would explain why only some of them have some sort of breathing apparatus, while many do not, although you could argue that in some cases, there is some kind of very advanced internal breathing support device.
Now I'm going to throw a wrench in my own post. A little known fact about humanoid cases is that a fair percentage of them look like they are actually human, aside from larger eyes, weird mouths, etc.
Out of the approximately 2,500 cases [as of 1968] in which witnesses have reported seeing the UFO pilots themselves, roughly 90 per cent of these ''pilots'' have been described as humanoid beings dressed in coveralls or tight-fitting "space suits." In about 30 percent of these cases, the ''pilots'' were said to look exactly like us with only minor differences in facial features (overly-large eyes, peculiar mouths, etc.)
From Secret bases Across the US, by John Keel, Saga Magazine, 1968.
So about 30 percent of them look too similar to us to be a coincidence, and this has to be explained in some way. I highly doubt that evolutionary convergence would cause this, but I guess I could be wrong. My thinking on this is 1) this is exactly consistent with the time traveling human hypothesis, and 2) it is consistent with the extraterrestrial hypothesis with weird extra steps. You'd have to assume one of a few things. One possibility is that humans long ago were abducted in a mass "Rapture" of sorts and transplanted on other nearby planets, perhaps genetically engineered in some way, and they routinely travel here for whatever purpose. Another possibility is that these are "workers" who were genetically engineered from us and perhaps live underground on earth. A third possibility is that these diverged from us long ago and developed on their own path in some parallel civilization, either here underground to avoid cataclysms or colonized other planets on their own, perhaps in this solar system or otherwise. Either way, this is a very strange aspect to the humanoid phenomenon.
Thanks for reading.
Edit: fixed wording.
Submitted January 10, 2023 at 10:06AM by MKULTRA_Escapee https://ift.tt/ljiy7eD