generally assumed appearance of aliens

Factual Questions
21

Yes, but…
::: g, d, & r :::
While there were a lot of different aliens before Close Encounters, there was a generally converging trend that extended well back into the 1940s (and very likely played a part in the “recollections” by Mr. and Mrs. Hill).

A general misunderstanding of evolutionary theory (or careless about or Lamarckian inclusion into evolutionary theory) had led to many comments in science fiction novels and short stories that future humanity (and, by extension, the aliens who had preceded humanity on the trail of evolution), would continue to lose their hair (not necessary in perfectly controlled climates), would suffer general atrophy of their limbs with a corresponding diminution of body size (unnecessary with all work automated), while their heads would continue to enlarge to encompass their ever-growing brains. This thought trickled out into any number of comics (both DC and Marvel had frequent small-bodied, large-headed, hairless villains) and movies (The Invasion of the Saucer Men, (1957) anyone?).

I would guess that CE3K and Strieber are continuing in a pretty well-established tradition. Both of them very clearly copied the tales from the Hills–including the addition of the “childlike” features–and I would guess that the Hills were clearly affected by encounters with the pictures and descriptions from the 1950s.

22

People seem to always assume you have to be a chordata to have intelligence. But think about it, couldn’t there be intelligent plants? Of course they wouldn’t be intelligent by our standards, but they could have they’re own branch of intellectualizm. And if we ever met these plants they would be deeply offended by all those sick vegitarians eating their primative brethren. For shame! At which point they would probably spray us with spores and steal all our dirt. Still, am I the only one who has thought about the concept of smart plants?
Wearia

23

With all due respect to The New Yorker, the “standard” image of aliens was in place prior to the release of Close Encounters.

There was a huge UFO “mania” for lack of a better word in the early-to-mid 70’s. (In fact, IIRC, this is when the term UFO replaced the earlier “flying saucers” in the popular lexicon.) UFO sightings and alien abductions were being reported right and left. There was a flood of TV specials, comic books, paperbacks, etc. devoted to UFOs. In fact, this craze led to the production (in 1975) of the aforementioned made-for-TV movie The UFO Incident (about the alleged 1960’s abduction of Barney and Betty Hill).

This was also the heyday of The National Enquirer (it was the first tabloid on the scene in the US), and the Enquirer featured a new UFO story every week. In fact, I would argue that The National Enquirer did more than any other media source to cement in the American mind the standard alien appearance. I distinctly remember seeing them weekly at the check-out stand as my mom did her shopping in the early 70’s. The Enquirer front pages in the 70’s alternated between Bigfoot sightings (another 70’s mania) and artists’ renditions of the (now standard) big-headed, big-eyed, bald, thin aliens leering out at nervous shoppers.

Close Encounters utilized this image of aliens, which was already etched in the American mind.

I seem to recall the 70’s UFO craze being kick-started by the story of a couple of Mississippi fishermen who claimed to have been abducted, and, er, probed. Can anyone confirm this? (Not the story, of course, just that these two goofballs told it.)

Everybody got in on the act in the 70’s. Heck, even Jimmy Carter claimed to have seen a UFO.

Me, I put it all down to swamp gas.

24

Ah yes, here’s the story of the Mississippi fishermen “abducted” in October, 1973.

The national exposure they received sparked the UFO craze, and The National Enquirer took things from there.

Now that I think about it, the 70’s were a sort of paranormal golden age, between Bigfoot sightings, alien encounters, the Bermuda Triangle, and In Search Of… Hey, who still has their copy of Chariots of the Gods?

25

Not only do I have “Chariots of the Gods”, but (one of?) the sequel(s), “Gold of the Gods.”

26

Actually, Susan blackmore was the first person to propose the theory of memetics and is still considered to be the world expert in that area. Dawkins might have been the first person to put the word in PRINT simply because he was good friends with blackmore and she had not finished writing herbook when he came to publish his yet.

27

A bunch of sci-fi and fiction people have, Tolkien, for example. They aren’t incredibly convincing. The first thing that comes to mind is that plants don’t need to have intelligence, because they aren’t competing (not directly competing) with other things that have intelligence.

Another thing lowering a plant’s chance of ever being intelligent is the extremely slow way they process food, etc. I read a great sci-fi story once where a guy was poisoned with a drug that slowed him down 1,000 fold, at which point he was able to see trees shifting their branches and hear them talking with one another. If a plant thought 1,000 times slower than a human, that would give most of them an effective “thinking life span” of no more than a year, more likely a month. Hard to learn to learn anything significant in that time…

28

You are asking two different questions.

  1. Why is the popular general conception of a standard alien so-and-so? Many others have posted the answer(s).

  2. Why do reputable people who think abou these things believe that? They don’t, and I doubt any reputable thinker believes that aliens would neccessarily look anything like us.

And a very minor nitpick for Finagle… I believe the intelligent stars were in The StarMaker, not First and Last Men.

29

muttrox Quote: “Why do reputable people who think abou these things believe that? They don’t, and I doubt any reputable thinker believes that aliens would neccessarily look anything like us.”

A reputable thinker, like…you? Do you carry id cards or what?

I associated professionally for years at NASA Ames with the experts in the subject. Yes, there are theories that suggest aliens would look a great deal like us, within certain tolerances.

30

Well…Douglas Adams speculated about superintelligent shades of the color blue. Does that count?

Ages ago in Omni magazine they had biologic artists (people who draw stuff for biology textbooks and the like) speculate what humankind might look like far in the future. They used evolution to this point to extrapolate what we will likely turn into down the road. Interestingly they all came up with slightly varying themes on the ‘Grey’ alien. Hairless, big heads, big eyes and so on.

I also once saw something that speculated what life might look like elsewhere in the universe. It was interesting because they tried to apply reasoning to their speculation. Organisms on a high gravity world would tend to be squat, low to the ground and more solidly built as a fall on such a world would be more dangerous. Conversely, low gravity planets would allow for more frail lifeforms to develop. Behind everything, however, would be the unique pressures on an evolving organism based on temperature, habitat, nature of predators they face, the type of prey they chase and so on. In the end just about anything you could dream-up is a possibility. The chances that aliens are bi-pedal humanoids is pretty slim unless such aliens ‘seeded’ our planet such that we would evolve along the same lines they had. Left to its own devices nature will come up with all sorts of weirdness…just look at the diversity on our own planet to see the truth in that.

31

fair enough, educate me. I’ve never seen any theory any like that… by what kind of reasoning would aliens neccessarily look like us? Are these theories widely accepted?

32

I assume you’re talking about the speculated progress of human evolution I mentioned. It’s not so much that aliens look like us but that we’ll look like them. Of course, this assumes the ‘Grey’ type alien even exists at all. There is also the possibility that aliens ‘seeded’ our planet to cause our species to come about and the aliens intentionally seeded with something that would be like them. I don’t subscribe to that theory but I’ve heard it bandied about.

The artists, who presumably had a scientific background in biology, simply looked at where we came from to extrapolate where we’re going. Over the millenia humans have become less hairy, taller and more frail overall. Our brain size has also been increasing from what you see in human fossil records. If you assume such trends will continue then our heads will tend to continue to grow, we will become hairless, we’ll probably lose our nose and little toe and so on thus getting us to something like the ‘Grey’ alien.

Of course, any of these people will admit it is all speculation and there is no guarantee that anything like this will occur. For instance, if the human head continues to grow there will sooner or later be some serious problems with childbirth unless women adapt to ever wider hips. Still, I think it is interesting.

33

Actually, my previous post was directed to partly_warmer. A simulpost gotcha.

34

BTW, the novel “If the Stars Are Gods” by Gregory Benford and Gordon Eklund also mentions the possiblity of intelligent stars. A basic theme is–and it’s been a while since I read it–that aliens could be so. . . alien. . . that we might not even recognize them as intelligent life.

35

I think the best take on The Alien Encounter so far has been Rendezvouz with Rama by Arthur C. Clarke.

It also shoots down the whole biped thing.

36

I actually have an autographed Chariots of the Gods…

Don’t ask…

37

Whack-a-Mole Thanks fer answering muttrox all the same! You broached three points I was going to bring up.

As Whack-a-Mole observed, the entire body of knowledge about exobiology is speculative, since we haven’t any empirical information about life anywhere but Earth. So the experts are reduced to theories based on considerable extrapolation and guesswork. It’s still worth doing, since we have no alternative, would you say?

It’s been awhile since I presented any of this stuff in public (or indeed since I read anything) but three theories that lend to a more or less humanlike alien are:

First, the least plausible, but one which is believed by a surprisingly large portion of the general public: that we were planted on Earth by aliens, that we are, in fact aliens to this world. Experts dismiss this as science-fiction because of the great distances between stars, and the hard-to-explain reason a race wouldn’t leave their culture at the same time. One could imagine a situation where this would happen. For example, supposing Earth sent a manned ship to Alpha Centauri. The ship crash lands, and only a few people remain, at sustenance level. After 10,000 years none can remember where they came from. They forget they are aliens… Makes a good story…

Second theory, much more plausible. The basic “building blocks” of life, amino acids and etc. (I don’t remember the details) have been found in asteroids. Whether these are very simple, or more than that (get wild and imagine a whole human DNA strand), if those “seeds” reach the surface of a habitable world they could start evolution going that was on the same track as the place where the asteroids came from.

Third theory, also plausible. Life is only possible within certain narrow bands of temperature, gravity, solar radiation, planetary rotation, etc. When a planet develops water oceans it automatically, by the process of evolution, starts creating life. The forces acting on that life (so goes the theory) lead to similar evolutionary experiments, any time the process is started. Sooner or later, when brains become evolved, animals develop that rely more on their brains than their brawn to stay alive, and because brains need protection, and sensory organs, and because those organs must be able to see stereo at a distance…etc…etc.

At the risk of utterly contradicting an earlier statement however, muttrox, I will admit that even the experts in this field who are well thought of (I’ll name Christopher McKay, who I knew slightly, and thought exceptional), are not always respected at “sober” scientific conferences. I guess it depends on who’s respect he wants.

38

I’m thinking of collecting pictures of Greys. (Not a believer, I just like weird things.) Does anyone have any good links?

39

Btw, when did the Grey take over from the BEM or the LGM?

40

Thanks for the reply, partly. I’m familiar enough with those theories at a layman level. Although those are some good mechansims that might explain human-looking aliens, I don’t think anyone would be so taken with any of them, particularly the first two, that they would believe that aliens would ** neccessarily** look like humans.

In other words, Christopher McKay (who I don’t know) may believe that the odds are with human looking aliens, and may have some good reason why that might be so, but would he be shocked if non-human aliens showed up?