That's just how they want you to think...

Huh.

That's where my troll doll went.

The only possible way for that to happen is if everybody was plotting together of which they are not. The battlegrounds of politics seem to be the same as yesterday and what it was about 6 months ago too, this would stir things up a bit so I don't think this is logical or even possible. Also, an alien being wouldn't be 92% related to us. It doesn't make sense due to single celled organisms forming humans through the process of evolution (With Natural Selection). How could either of those occur on two different planets? Unless they meant that the "thing" is made up of many things that we are, such as oxygen and stuff.

I wouldn't say it's impossible that they'd be anything like us, either. Everything involved is speculation, though some things (such as the likelihood of them being carbon based) are backed up by our current science, but even those things are probabilities, not certainties. The simple fact is that we can't know what we don't know .

We do know that all lifeforms found on Earth are possible, because, well, they exist , which makes something along similar lines more probable than a chlorine-breathing silicon-based floating jelly square. Doesn't mean the end result would be at all familiar, but plenty of critters from Earth's past -and present!- fall into that box .

Anyway, rambling aside, it's entirely possible that we'll eventually bump into extraterrestrials who are humanoid at least in shape (there's only so many things you can do with limbs, after all) and surprisingly similar to one or more of our societies. So, while it may be tiring to see so many stories use that as a premise (especially if the majority of species look much the same), it isn't exactly wrong.

I know. Star Trek being the worst offender...grrrr. I don't mind the series that do this if they make up for it in other ways.

Star Trek was originally done without CGI and a very low budget. Much cheaper to dress up humans. Still is.

Yea, but boy does it svck. Thankfully it makes up for it in other ways. I would prefer a quality to quantity approach. Design something a little more detailed that will be used often to justify its price.

http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1458137-ata-boy/

I still don't know what to make of it.

What if when life forms evolution happens in a very similar pattern and random mutations advancing a species is debunked as a theory.

Just as possible as them being totally different.

They wanted to make money from a documentary, so they hyped something up too convince people to fund it for them.

At least, that's what I think has occurred here.

I think it's your avatar.

I've also mentioned how aliens could be clouds of dusts that make fart noises to communicate. I just have to cover the entire spectrum here.

I have an awesome idea of what an alien looks like to me.

But I prefer to keep it to myself. If I ever get around to designing my own video games.

ID4

Now all we need is Will Smith and Jeff Goldblum.

Why does no one ever pay attention to the fossil record...

I think its called the theory of panspermia, IIRC. It's an interesting theory, but it still doesn't really explain how abiogenesis occurred in the first place.

maybe because the fossil record is incomplete and inaccurate? not to mention the fact that most of our planet is covered with water making digging for the missing pieces impossible

every so often we unearth something that throws accepted theories for a spin...if this is true human remains then it does just that

I'm pretty sure mummification affects bone density, which is how they calculated its age, right? This likely isn't anything other than your "typical" mummified fetus.

EDIT: Yeah, http://paolov.wordpress.com/2013/05/04/atacama-alien-mystery/ when I googled "Atacama alien". Observe the warning if you're squeamish.

That's a fetus. And they miscalculated. It's obvious.

Yeah. Fossils are just for the show. The real deal is molecular biology. The current trend in evolutionary science are Modern Evolutionary Synthesis and Evolution of development (evo-devo).

And every time they are proven hacks/false/insane or just plain idiotic. To get through the monolith that is the world's scientiffic community you need more than "I can dissprove Einstein, lol" bullcrap.

This does nothing. It's a journalistic bait, that we see now and again. Like with the 8th Noah's Ark found in Turkey, where that one was the real deal....yeah . It certainly looks like a miscalculation of the fetus age from a mile. A similar thing happened in the LHC a year ago, when they thought that they observed a particle moving faster and the speed of light and like with all of those baits it was proven false. They screwed up, which happens a lot.

And for all that is holy. Theory=/=hypothesis. A quote from the AAAS "A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world."

By definition. Panspermia, RNA-world, PAH world and Iron-Sulfur world are hypothesis.

I remembered that part about the FTL particle, I think it turned out to be that the particle (effected by gravity) was on a curved trajectory and appeared to get from point a to point b faster than light. Either way, blog science svcks.

my grandma had a calcified baby fetus somewhere

That's right. First rule of science. You can accept it as a fact only if there are one or more articles on the subject, one ore more anolysis of that article and a metanolysis of those on pubmed/Science/Nature etc. If not - It's bullcrap.

But without it, what would we have to make fun of now? Spock, trying to pretend that styrofoam rock is preventing him from getting up and walking, and of course ... the http://www.beertripper.com/startrek_images/races/Tellarites_Star_Trek_TOS.jpg

I read some of the actor's books about their ST:OS years, and how the budget really affected what they wanted to do. Makes you feel bad for them.

I do know what you mean tho. I liked some of the mixture of practical and CGI they were doing in the early-late 90's. It's just become too much CGI now in some cases, for me anyway. And even with expensive CGI/200 million movies, they still largely dress up humans with some CGI additions in post-processing. And then there's Jar Jar....

I don't think he's joking...

Ay tis more believable then i find this toy looking fossil to be. Looks almost to be made of furniture.