Is it scientifically possible for aliens to look like Humans?

I feel that it is highly unlikely, we are not perfect for the environment, just good enough to survive.

I don't think that most other planets will even have multiple genders . So inefficient.

>>8387603
Humans look like humans because we evolved on earth, so no.

>>8387603
>scientifically possible for aliens to look like Humans?
Does adding "scientifically" somehow makes this question less ridiculous for you?

>>8387611
Everything you said is bullshit, why even bother to post.

File: ayy lmao.gif (1MB, 364x188px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 364x188px

>>8387603
>the humanoid shape is very succesful here

Only among primates and apes. Maybe some rodents and marsupials, if you want to be generous about the term "humanoid". Other intelligent animals that are into grasping things but are non-humanoid are elephants and octopuses. Crows and ravens seem to make due by standing on one leg and using the other along with their beak. Whales don't have shit.

The most successful shape on Earth among multi-cellular organisms is a snaky, worm shape. And if you break into a more advanced clade, multiple legs on a compact body is an all-time hit.

>>8387603
I would think some sort of amphibious flying land octupus wolf eagle with higher than human intellect and maybe some psychic powers would be more successful

>>8387603
First :
Look the Humans on Earth. We are almost all the same: two legs, two arms, etc.

But just a slightly different climate or a slightly different biological environment for a French, a Senegalese or Japaneses are not alike. And we are in the same planet.

Second :

We must define what is a successful life form : Prokaryotes represent the larger population on Earth. Insects have also colonized all the surface of the Earth effectively.

Cephalization (the clustering of sensory organs in the direction of movement) seems like a likely universally beneficial adaptation among multicellular organisms that possess locomotion. I wouldn't be surprised if that is found quite often in animal-like creatures with sensory organs. Otherwise, aliens are likely to be wildly different

>>8387617
It's not that random. Our bodily structure is the way it is because it makes sense. It's wrong to say that there is no other conceivable configuration, but it's also wrong to say there's no specific reason why we look the way we do and ascribe it all to pure chance.

Mouths need to be in front (ends up on top with walking upright). Eyes too. Neural mass behind the eyes for processing leads to brains. A brain makes in sensible to develop olfactory and auditory sensory organs nearby. It helps to make that bunch of organs pivot independently from the rest of the body, leading to a head. And so forth, and so on.

>>8387652
Why does it make sense to die from touching a peanut?

>>8387648
All humans are exactly the same you retarded mongloid. Facial features and skin color mean nothing you pol cuck.

File: 1460544478361.jpg (68KB, 600x827px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 600x827px

>>8387652
>Our bodily structure is the way it is because it makes sense.
No, it's the way it is because our ancestors were brachiators that adapted to life on the savanna.

>>8387664
>All humans are exactly the same
Nearly. But populations living at higher altitudes tend to be shorter. Some populations develop lactose tolerance among adults.
I'm sure there are other examples.

>>8387699
>populations living at higher altitudes tend to be shorter. Some populations develop lactose tolerance among adults.

which is completely irrelevant. they are still human beings. when a lactose intolerant short man mates with a tall black woman you dont get a strange hybrid creature, you get a fucking human being.

Intelligence could have just as easily evolved from the aquatic branch of animals. We would be completely different.

>>8387720
>Intelligence could have just as easily evolved from the aquatic branch of animals
Dolphins and fish and shit could be 100x more intelligent than humans and it wouldn't make a difference. You can't build anything with a fucking flipper.

>>8387664

Yes, that was the point...

>>8387726
He didn't say anything about hands or flippers, but on that note: a life form could certainly evolve an interactive operator entirely different from a five-fingered hand on an arm. Leaving the composition and number of digits aside, what about articulate mouthparts? Ants and termites have tremendous success here on Earth building with their mouths.

>>8387603
Of course it is. It's just that the chance is very small.

File: partyhat.gif (1KB, 160x160px) Image search: [Google]

1KB, 160x160px

It's morning in the cosmos. We are the first intelligent lifeforms ever to evolve.

>>8387603
evolutionary convergence blah blah blah. physics blah blah blah

File: 1472763733749.png (334KB, 640x464px)

334KB, 640x464px

>>8387617
Sad life :(, I'll just have to wait until full immersive VR until I fuck hot aliens chicks.

>>8388333
>I can*

>>8387627
hmu when tapeworms come out with their first smartphone

>>8387603
no

>>8387652
You're examples are shit but I completely agree with what you're talking about

File: hubrids.jpg (33KB, 734x350px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 734x350px

>>8387603
Yes, every new generation comes closer.

>>8388333
That's some good taste and nice numbers. Now how long until full immersive vr?

File: phd.png (38KB, 1259x197px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 1259x197px

op just wants us to feed his alien fucking daydream

get a girlfriend

>>8387603
if the planet theyre from has the exact same conditions and for some fucked reason the completely random genetic mutations that happened to us during evolution somehow occur again, yes

>>8387603
Form meets function, dolphins and sharks are from different evolutionary lines but have similar forms.
Just some extra terrestrial life probably wouldn't look human, but something technologically advanced would likely have a large brain relative to body size and hands/tentacles/etc for object manipulation. Other than that, I don't think there's any guarantees on similar form.

>>8387603
Somewhere in the universe there is 1 planet filled with beings identical to Humans.

We need to genocide them. There can only be 1 Human like species in the universe.

>>8388432
idk 20 years maybe, vr is still fresh.

File: hihi.jpg (67KB, 526x400px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 526x400px

>>8389170

they call it China, if i'm not mistaken ( :7])

>>8387647
Not without opposable thumbs. And if it flies it would have to have hollow bones, not very strong. And where does the octopus part come in? Tentacles are very mechanically inefficient compared with skeletal structures, out of water.

>>8387611
I feel like youre a dumbass

>>8387652
/sci/did this thread a couple of months ago and I brought up similar points. Wish I'd saved what I wrote because there is a lot of anatomy and physiology which leads to humanoid being the best form for intelligent tool-using lifeforms. And all the evolutionary steps which got us to this are relevant as being also the best adaptation to those particular circumstances. And there are many anat/phys reasons why forms like insectoid, octopoid (is that a word?) won't cut it. The only deviation from exactly us which I could consider is that I believe it would be possible for a reptilian form to evolve along similar lines to us. Like a Cardassian.

I'd actually go one step further than asking if there can be humanoid aliens, I'd say it is inevitable. On Earth, similar forms have evolved from different regions if the function is beneficial, the principle is known as parallel evolution.

All the above is subject to minor differences in gravity, O2, temperature etc, but it's reasonable to assume that any world which lies within the Goldilocks zone will inevitably produce humanoid life. Why is it reasonable to assume? Because consider the alternatives, and how they would not compete with our ancestors or would lead to evolutionary dead-ends.

Somebody must have written a book about this stuff.

In b4 silicon-based life.

>>8387603
It their planet has trees then yes a humanoid shape would be possible.

File: treesmeanhuman.png (182KB, 513x173px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 513x173px

A lifeform that doesnt have the luxuries of arthopod vertical scaling will mutate a humanoid shape to move around in the trees eventually as proven by this Permian creature that has a primate like shape.

>>8387603
While human-like body shape is unlikely to be popular over all, it might be fairly common with other civilizations if it turns out that stacking an ever expanding brain on top of a spine is the simplest body plan that allows sapience.

>>8387603
yes its possible.

no we have no idea what the probabilities are.

File: ScaredTaung.jpg (489KB, 569x1013px) Image search: [Google]

489KB, 569x1013px

>>8387748
This notion always scared me.

>>8388432
We are already in one.

Is is scientifically possible for humans to look like humans?

>>8389079
Imagine being a highly intelligent creature, perhaps more than a human, but have no arms. You move around like a snail or a fish. Man, that'd suck. O'well, at least they might figure out the meaning of life... whatever that is for a creature whose sole purpose is doing pretty much nothing.

The possiblity of that occurring somewhere isn't that low I'd imagine... Just imagine... Somewhere out in space, there is a being capable of nothing other than thinking. What if there is no way for it to die except wait 500 "years".

I'm sorry if this is a shitpost, I'm not a scentist by any means, but fuck, I thought this was pretty funny.

Consider me less of a over consumed temporal accountant and more of a chill Dutch student. What if it is only you?

>>8387623
>Everything you said is bullshit, why even bother to post.
Same back at you. Contribute to the discussion or get the fuck out.

File: lsdalien_by_juniorwoodchuck-da0w2o6.jpg (114KB, 1024x789px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 1024x789px

>>8389563
>there is a lot of anatomy and physiology which leads to humanoid being the best form for intelligent tool-using lifeforms
Only if you work backwards. The fact hat you think there are "evolutionary steps" shows you're looking at this the wrong way.

>And there are many anat/phys reasons why forms like insectoid, octopoid (is that a word?) won't cut it
Only when very narrowly defining "Insectoids" and using exactly Earth conditions.

It is not reasonable to assume most life would evolve on Earth-like planets, because we have no other planets to really compare to. With all of the discoveries about subterranean oceans (Europa, Enceladus, Ganymede, Callisto, Dione, Ceres...) it's possible life is most common on icy worlds with oceanic interiors.

Also consider that other types of stars will have different goldilock zone ranges and conditions, and there may be multiple "goldilock zones" around a single star for different types of life and conditions.

>>8387603

Possible, yes. Probable, no. there are a large number of potentially inhabitable planets in the universe, but I would be amazed if there was even a single alien species that was even passably human-looking.

>>8390357
That's honestly some Douglass Adams tier stuff right there. I can just imagine a bunch of super intelligent blobs waiting to die while figuring out the mysteries of the universe with no practical applications.

Oh wait, that's just theoretical mathematicians.

>>8390609
The manipulating appendages still touch the ground making this an impractical form for building technology.

>>8390407
Genders (diploid organisms) provide more genetic variation then haploid organisms.

Or you're suggesting their genetics work totally different from ours in which case I'm interested to know.

>>8388363
They could have developed an interface to control tapeworm-made devices with their breathing, but you had to be a massive mongoloid and mention Instagram selfie devices as a landmark of human scientific development. Go die in a fire.

Upright-walking, bipedal aliens would probably be pretty common considering how effective and relatively simple it is.

>>8391056
Dunno man, it would be kinda disappointing if aliens also had frail spines, shit knees and incredibly inefficient muscle insertions just like we do.

>>8390609
>Only if you work backwards.
Yes and no. You're correct in assuming a certain backwards-facing logic but there are some good reasons for this. For one, opposable thumbs. Do we need opposable thumbs to become intelligent? If we are considering intellingent life which uses tools, possibly. There is a recent theory that the use of fire, and hence the nutritional benefits of cooked food enabled our brains to grow to their current size and functional capacity.

>The fact hat you think there are "evolutionary steps" shows you're looking at this the wrong way.
Don't get too hooked on the semantics. I take your point, but let's consider e.g. fins -> legs an evolutionary 'step'.

>Only when very narrowly defining "Insectoids" and using exactly Earth conditions.
If we use the current definition and consider say the insect respiratory system based on diffusion, then under Earth conditions insects will never be able to take in enough oxygen to power a large brain. I doubt even under higher O2 levels this would be possible. That's not to say evolution wouldn't come up with a solution, but animal lungs are mechanically driven by diaphragm and ribs which rely on internal mobility, something which creatures with exoskeletons don't score highly on.

>It is not reasonable to assume most life would evolve on Earth-like planets...of the discoveries about subterranean oceans..

Yes but I was only talking about intelligent tool-using life. You only have to go into our Earth oceans to see a range of cretures which look more alien than stuff the science fiction writers dream up. But there are reasons why dolphins are top of the tree there, and we are here.

>>8390630
See this seems to be the knee-jerk reaction. But when you think about it, can you explain why it should be so? When this thread ran a few months ago, this question was asked and was never satisfactorily answered. When you consider the advantages of anatomy, physiology and evolutionary biology employed by life on Earth, anything else seems unlikely.

When you start to posit alternatives they quickly become obvious non-starters. I'm open to be proved wrong. I'm really hoping someone can. Imagine, an actual possible intelligent technologically advanced lifeform completely different than us. What would they look like, and why would they not be bipedal, binocular/binaural, homeothermic, and with two arms and opposable thumbs.

File: same-ish.jpg (243KB, 1000x665px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 1000x665px

>>8387664
So skull structures aren't different?

>>8391143
>When you consider the advantages of anatomy, physiology and evolutionary biology employed by life on Earth, anything else seems unlikely.
>employed by life on Earth
>on Earth

>sample size of 1

you answered your own question

>>8387603
It's not possible for 'scientifically' possible for humans to look the way they do.

Only god can create perfection.

>>8391218
>>sample size of 1
>you answered your own question
My assumption is of Earth type environments. But please feel free to describe possible intelligent technologically advanced life forms from non-Earth type environments.

>>8391150
No, actually, they aren't. The same bones in the same arrangements. The only minor differences are in the size and shape of the bones.

This is a crap example of differences in humans. You could have chosen from many physiological differences if you knew anything.

Who says alien life would have been multicelular individual organisms anyway?
The only way to "scientifically" study alien life forms is to figure out how abiogenesis works.

>>8387603
It depends on the environment. Gravity alone will play a huge part. Astronauts can only stay in decreased g environments for so long before their spine starts to deform due to the lack of force.

File: life.png (223KB, 571x672px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 571x672px

>>8391320
I mean the only reason life on earth even has individuals and evolution is because it started as a bunch of shells made up of some carbon atoms which had the ability to accumulate mass and split in two.
This can't be the only way life can begin. I'm sure you can imagine "sticks" of molecules that grow outwards at the sides due to some chemical process until the physical stresses break it and both two rods start growing, etc etc. I'm sure this would through evolution result in organisms that don't have an "inside" and are entire dependent on the environment. Or some form of a molecule chain that never splits but just accumulates mass and stays connected. The parts that accumulate mass slower fall off and die, the parts that accumulate mass fast and efficient stay connected or something.

>>8388693
i remember that thread in the pic, too bad it was underrated

>>8391339
Imagine bubbles forming when you boil water. Now imagine this water being so viscous that it takes a very long time for a bubble to pop.
When two bubbles collide, they merge into one bigger bubble. Once a bubble gets too big, it pops. Over time, it could happen that when a bubble forms, it traps some sort of a solid compound inside it, which makes it resistant to merging with other bubbles. This bubble will persist for longer than others. Eventually over time, you will see greater number of these resistant bubbles. Etc etc. Life.

File: 1456005058913.png (40KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 600x800px

>>8390999
Can't see how they can bend up and around?

>>8391114
>For one, opposable thumbs
But again, you don't necessarily need opposable thumbs to manipulate tools. Even other intelligent animals like dolphins have used rudimentary sponge tools to protect their snouts when hunting in coral , and elephants can use their noses for a number of things.

I agree with the theory that fire was vital, but again you don't have to be humanoid to make fire.

>If we use the current definition and consider say the insect respiratory system based on diffusion

But that's exactly the problem. There is 0 reason to believe alien life would have the same lung or circulatory system. In reality, they wouldn't fit into any Earth taxonomy. So it is very well possible there are very large creatures with exo-skeletons, especially considering different possibly environments that could support them.

While being aquatic would hinder use of fire, that wouldn't stop intelligence from developing, it would simply hinder their technological development. The point I was making, though, is even non-aquatic environments can drastically differ. Just think of what life on Titan would be like, on an environment that isn't underwater but also nothing at all like on Earth.

Lots of animals have opposable thumbs. Lots of animals have complex language. If we assume these two elements, tool manipulation and language, are the precursors to intelligence than most aliens will not look human.

>>8391388
No reproduction or adaptation, not life.

>>8387611
When people where first discussing self replicating and adaptive algorithmic simulation, they quickly realized that it is very difficult to create a function that has no abstraction between replication process and the environmental interaction process. There must be a division of the function who is just in charge of generating composition based on some sort of code, and the function that is in charge of interacting with the environment. So like the difference between the cell nucleus and the cell membrane. The reproductive organs and the rest of the human body. Ant queen and the rest of the ant colony. This is one reason why sex exist, too a much lesser degree with humans. It s division of the function of reproduction and interaction, female and male sex.

>>8391449
The line gets really blurred between what is life and what isn't.

>>8391453
Not enough in your example. Stable low entropy system are fairly common outside of life. Are celestial bodies life forms?

>>8391480
Depends on what your definition of life is.

>>8391495
>muh subjective definition
Get rekt kiddo.

>>8391509
Are viruses alive?

>>8391516
Stable bubble--celestial bodies--------viruses--------------------cellular organism-me>you.

>>8387611
Having multiple genders is awesome for genetic diversity, which allows things like the immune system to work.

>>8387603

Yes.

Humans appeared once, can appear again.

fish will look like fish on any planet. Environment dictates form. Which is why whales, dolphins, manatees, seals, and walrus all have similar shapes to fish. Even though marine mammals started as land creatures.

the aquatic reptiles and dinosaurs that existed, were still fish shaped.

Sentient life will even be similar across all planets. as you need a body that can use tools and support a large brain relative to body size.

>>8391986
multiple humanoids appeared on earth.

Homo Sapien just out competed the Neanderthals, Erectus, Desnovians, Flores Man, Red Deer Cave people.

>>8392111
>fish will look like fish on any planet. Environment dictates form.

what are octopuses
what are manta rays
what are jellyfish
what are squids
what are seahorses
what are mollusks
what are coral
what are sea snakes
what are crocodiles

>>8390946
kek

File: Huntress_by_Abiogenisis.jpg (128KB, 619x750px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 619x750px

>>8392114
They were all closely related and had recent common ancestors. Aliens won't be either.

Anons stating that the human form is the most beneficial for an intelligent species are only basing that off of what we know, what we've observed. Which is fair.
But who's to say definitively there isn't a more superior form of manipilation than human hands? Just because it didn't evolve here doesn't mean a better solution didn't arise elsewhere.

Is it likely?
Probably not man.
Is it possible?
Yeah, sure it's possible.

>>8392188
>Is it likely?
>Probably not man.
We have no idea to know that

>>8392188
It definitely isn't. Our bodies are pretty good for running and wielding/making basic tools. But that's it really. The most beneficial form would be formlessness or something malleable. As our world changes we are still stuck with bodies that don't really fit. A form that can alter itself consciously would be far superior. Depending on it's ability to do that, it might not even need technology to begin with. Everything could be replaced with more intuitive biological processes.

In any case, there is always better optimisation. Evolution doesn't optimise anything, or have a particular goal. If it works out and circumstances permit (if it's lucky) then it will live on. That's it. There is nothing special about the humanoid form. In addition, it's retarded to think that developing as we have is the only path to a developed, sapient species. We can't attempt to align aliens, who will likely have 100% different DNA to us. Even completely different structures; to ourselves.