Alien's eyeballs

[SoCalGNX]

Along time ago, I was watching some science program about either anthropology or genetics. It was suggested that Asian people have the eye shape they do to protect from harsh winter conditions. I was thinking that if this is true, why would aliens supposedly have these huge, seemingly lidless eyes? Traveling thru space would subject one to all sorts of radiation, lights, debris etc. It would seem to me that they would have more protection for their eyes than a huge, lidless eyeball.

 

[Gareth]

Along time ago, I was watching some science program about either anthropology or genetics. It was suggested that Asian people have the eye shape they do to protect from harsh winter conditions. I was thinking that if this is true, why would aliens supposedly have these huge, seemingly lidless eyes? Traveling thru space would subject one to all sorts of radiation, lights, debris etc. It would seem to me that they would have more protection for their eyes than a huge, lidless eyeball.

Well like has been discussed on the show (I think David mentioned that Dr. Sue mentioned it) maybe they have those huge eyes (the greys) because they live in a very dark light-less area. ie. Under ground here on earth in bases etc.

Might explain the skin too.

 

[skunkape]

I've heard some claim that the black eyes are artificial lenses with more normal eyes underneath.

 

[Gareth]

I've heard some claim that the black eyes are artificial lenses with more normal eyes underneath.

That makes a huge amount of sense to me. That would provide protection as well as whatever enhancements the lens allows such as night vision etc.

 

[fitzbew88]

...why would aliens supposedly have these huge, seemingly lidless eyes? Traveling thru space would subject one to all sorts of radiation, lights, debris etc. It would seem to me that they would have more protection for their eyes than a huge, lidless eyeball.

Well, I guess (just for the sake of recreational discussion) we should ask ourselves: How do we know these large black surfaces are eyes? We are sort've making an assumption, aren't we?

 

[Gareth]

Well, I guess (just for the sake of recreational discussion) we should ask ourselves: How do we know these large black surfaces are eyes? We are sort've making an assumption, aren't we?

You mean why are we assuming that the 2 black almond shaped things on the face of a humanoid creature above an apparent nose and mouth are eyes?

Because theyre eyes

I get what youre saying, but thats an assumption Id be prepared to make 99% of the time. The only possibility that theyre not eyes is if its some sort of biological construct and the placement of those things on the apparent face were meant to deceive.

 

[fitzbew88]

...thats an assumption Id be prepared to make 99% of the time.

Yes.

The only possibility that theyre not eyes is if its some sort of biological construct and the placement of those things on the apparent face were meant to deceive.

Nonsense. The possibilities are limited only by our imagination.

They could be ears. Or telepathic projectors. Or used for balance. Or to gauge wind direction. Or reproductive organs. Or pheromone emitters.

Merely evolving into the shape of a humanoid doesn't mean that all organ placement and function would also be mirrored.

All we know about is us. Everything else is just guess work.

 

[Gareth]

Yes.



Nonsense. The possibilities are limited only by our imagination.

They could be ears. Or telepathic projectors. Or used for balance. Or to gauge wind direction. Or reproductive organs. Or pheromone emitters.

Merely evolving into the shape of a humanoid doesn't mean that all organ placement and function would also be mirrored.

All we know about is us. Everything else is just guess work.

Us + all the relevant species on the earth. I understand what youre saying but assuming its a face and the other features are a nose and mouth, Id put large amounts of money down on them being eyes.

 

[fitzbew88]

Us + all the relevant species on the earth. I understand what youre saying but assuming its a face and the other features are a nose and mouth, Id put large amounts of money down on them being eyes.

Assuming assuming assuming assuming assuming assuming.

Based on one single planet in the boondocks of the Galaxy.

"They must be eyes .... that's where mine are."

 

[Aaron LeClair]

Us + all the relevant species on the earth. I understand what youre saying but assuming its a face and the other features are a nose and mouth, Id put large amounts of money down on them being eyes.

Same here, if I had the money. Especially since in many cases they blink and even have irises and can be seen looking around. They may serve other purposes, but vision seems to be a given. This assumes how we see them is how they actually are though.

 

[Gareth]

Assuming assuming assuming assuming assuming assuming.

Based on one single planet in the boondocks of the Galaxy.

"They must be eyes .... that's where mine are."

It just seems to me like youre trying to make a point that doesnt need to be made. That being that we shouldnt expect a true extraterrestrial to be anything like us, or for that matter anything we can even predict.

I get it. You can stop beating that drum in this instance.

 

[fitzbew88]

Same here, if I had the money. Especially since in many cases they blink and even have irises and can be seen looking around. They may serve other purposes, but vision seems to be a given. This assumes how we see them is how they actually are though.

Nonsense. Whether anyone has actually seen any aliens remains highly speculative, and drawing conclusions from fanciful Streiber-induced imaginings is only making serious discussion more difficult.

We know nothing.

...vision seems to be a given...in many cases they blink...have irises...can be seen looking around..."

I'm sorry but there is just no substantive reason to believe that any of this is true. Although I know that you want it to be true.

 

[fitzbew88]

It just seems to me like youre trying to make a point that doesnt need to be made...

I get it. You can stop beating that drum in this instance.

The only possibility that theyre not eyes is if its some sort of biological construct and the placement of those things on the apparent face were meant to deceive.

Hmmm. No, I think the point still needs to be made.

 

[Gareth]

Hmmm. No, I think the point still needs to be made.

eeeerrrm, no it didnt.

 

[fitzbew88]

eeeerrrm, no it didnt.

Yes it did. Because people make statements like this:

The only possibility that theyre not eyes is if its some sort of biological construct and the placement of those things on the apparent face were meant to deceive.

They have no idea what the truth is so they are filling up reality with sci-fi based fantasy and second-hand "experiencer" reports from the delusional.

In the paranormal field, when someone uses the phrase: "the only possibility" it's a sure sign that they have not gotten the point.

 

[Gareth]

Yes it did. Because people make statements like this:



They have no idea what the truth is so they are filling up reality with sci-fi based fantasy and second-hand "experiencer" reports from the delusional.

In the paranormal field, when someone uses the phrase: "the only possibility" it's a sure sign that they have not gotten the point.

This is getting tiresome.

That particular quote was made within the context of assuming that a) its humanoid, b) it has a mouth, c) it has a nose. Given those 3 facts I was saying that I would assume them to be eyes 99% of the time. ie. If this creature with the aforementioned features was a biological product of nature then I would assume them to be eyes 99% of the time. My example about the construct was meant to further illustrate that IMO the possibility of them not being eyes on a naturally evolved creature was very small.

 

[Aaron LeClair]

Nonsense. Whether anyone has actually seen any aliens remains highly speculative, and drawing conclusions from fanciful Streiber-induced imaginings is only making serious discussion more difficult.

We know nothing.



I'm sorry but there is just no substantive reason to believe that any of this is true. Although I know that you want it to be true.

I don't draw from "Streiber".

You miss understand both mine and Gareth's stance it seems.

PS. WTF do you come from with knowing my wanting? Yes, for X-mas I have asked that greys have black eyeballs..... I want it to be so... I am just being wishful. Not reasonable at all.

I could use your logic and say you want me to want it in order to prove your imagined bias that Gareth and I are being perceived to have by you.

To say we know nothing, is you being a know it all. In order to know that we don't know, you'd have to know, therefore proving the notion we know nothing is wrong. If you include yourself among "we" that is.

I've spoken with abductees that may know. For me to say they don't seems dogmatic to me. I don't know, but they might.

Fitz can have the last say.

 

[fitzbew88]

This is getting tiresome.

That particular quote was made within the context of assuming that a) its humanoid, b) it has a mouth, c) it has a nose. Given those 3 facts...

No, you still do not get the point. There are no facts here.

I was saying that I would assume them to be eyes 99% of the time. ie. If this creature with the aforementioned features was a biological product of nature then I would assume them to be eyes 99% of the time.

Yes, because they are like you. Right?

My example about the construct was meant to further illustrate that IMO the possibility of them not being eyes on a naturally evolved creature was very small.

I wish you had said: "...there is a possiblity that they are biological constructs", which would be a reasonable statement. Unfortunately, you said: "The only possibility that theyre not eyes is if its some sort of biological construct..." which is entirely different.

I'm betting you do not find this nearly as tiresome as I do.

 

[Gareth]

You decided form the start that it was your duty to inform and educate. If you got that impression from the 'construct' remark, then fine. But I have explained that.

Or maybe you just like to assume that most people arent up to speed on "Extraterrestrial Possibilities 101", and its up to you to educate the masses. This is a paranormal message board after all, and the aforementioned course is a first year subject.

 

[fitzbew88]

I don't draw from "Streiber".

Ok.

You miss understand both mine and Gareth's stance it seems.

I guess you could say wishful thinking is a stance.

PS. WTF do you come from with knowing my wanting? Yes, for X-mas I have asked that greys have black eyeballs..... I want it to be so... I am just being wishful. Not reasonable at all.

You are discussing alien anatomy as a matter of fact, and getting defensive when your belief system is questioned. I don't think it is any mystery what you want.

I could use your logic and say you want me to want it in order to prove your imagined bias that Gareth and I are being perceived to have by you.

I'm not using logic; I am making an observation that you both are presenting as fact something that is unproven and highly dubious. You are using dubious unproven alien sightings to justify conclusions about dubious unproven alien anatomy. I am not applying logic, I am thinking critically.

To say we know nothing, is you being a know it all.

Nonsense. All I am saying is that we know nothing and that soft-minded assumptions about unproven aliens is unhelpful.

In order to know that we don't know, you'd have to know, therefore proving the notion we know nothing is wrong. If you include yourself among "we" that is.

Nonsense. To know that we don't know, I just have to look around.

I've spoken with abductees that may know. For me to say they don't seems dogmatic to me.

I'm sure they think they've been abducted. Nobody is making you say anything, dogmatic or otherwise.

I don't know, but they might.

They might be mistaken.

Fitz can have the last say.

Shocking.