They’ll be able to tell by looking at our cities and engineering works that we are land dwellers; assuming they want to land in a neutral location they’d land in international waters. If they want to land at an important part of the world, I’d bet New York; a big population in one of the most and best developed parts of the planet. And if they know a good bit about us, the UN makes a sensible place to show up, diplomatically speaking.
The surface.
That’s even closer to me! I haven’t met the lady, but I’ve heard she’s a little nuts. Her website does nothing to dissuade me of the idea.
Next time you’re in the area let me know and we’ll have a San Luis Valley Dopefest!
Too late. They are already here.
Mount St. Helens - Still photo.
Mount St. Helens - Nighttime image sequence.
As Art Buchwald once put it: “how come every time somebody sees a UFO it’s always Elmer Fudd and his brother out frog fishing?” Why can’t they do us all a favor and just land RIGHT HERE?
I will go with the traditional landing place.
Washington DC.
From The Day the Earth Stood Still
Where would we land if we were approaching a planet bursting with life and intelligent civilisation? I think we’d go for somewhere remote - conceal the landing craft as well as possible, then conduct exploratory sorties. There’s no particular reason to imagine that interstellar travellers (if such exist) would have the technology to do everything and be immune to every possible threat - I think they’d be cautious.
:rolleyes: Any alien would realise you need to use the proper landing facilities. You can’t land just anywhere.
St Paul Alberta, More info here.
I don’t doubt that they’d display some amount of caution, and likely conceal themselves and observe–heck, it wouldn’t even take much in the way of concealment, so long as they don’t come blazing in with a fusion drive thrusting or something obvious like that–but we’d have every reason to expect their technology to be vastly beyond anything we can imaging. The scale of energy required to cross interstellar space–even in a slow-moving craft–is magnitudes beyond what humanity can currently produce as a whole. Landing on a planet–if they would choose to do so–would be figuratively no more than a twitch of the cheek in comparison to the marathon of interstellar transit.
Stranger
That map would suggest that they land in Bangladesh.
I vote for someplace where they would fit right in and not be noticed, like San Franscico.
I think it would be beyond cool if they landed at Devil’s Tower, WY
They’ll probably just nuke us from orbit; it’s the only way to be sure. 
lessee…these aliens have been terrifying people since about 1948…and yet, they can’t figure out where to land? why not on the lawn, in front of the UN? it would make sense. But this would make more sense-i guess the aliens will just keep mutilating cattle, and doing anal probing on hysterical humans.
The lawn is over a subterranean part of the UN complex and surrounded by trees. If they did not get tangled in the greenery, they would probably crush the roof.
There is a UFO base under some plates where the Indian subcontinent meets the mainland of Asia. It’s near Kashmir. They deal with the Indian and Chinese governments.
Ants build. They are complex, but not sapient.
Bees buiild. They are complex, geometrically regular, but not sapient.
Hey Man, but we drive cars and stuff.
All the more reason for them to land in the ocean as I suggested then. A non-sapient technological hive species could easily be quite dangerous, and irrational. If that’s a real possibility, it would be best to avoid triggering any territorial instincts.
Well, hell, why not just land on the moon? Put up a big flashing sign: “We’ll be here for eight of your days. If you’re capable of coming here to meet us, we’d love to chat. Otherwise, piss off.” 