reply to post by Gorman91
Your logic is very sound, but, I disagree when you say that humans are a complete anomaly. The number one reason humans survived and Neanderthals did
not is simply because humans hunted in larger parties, making it easier for them to catch prey. When Neanderthals and humans began hunting in the same
areas, they saw each other as competition for scarce food sources due to the Ice Age, and ultimately Neanderthals were killed off. Many due to
starvation because their hunting parties were wiped out by humans. Fact is, had there not been an Ice Age during such a crucial stage in both
specie's evolution, it's entirely plausible that Humans and Neanderthals would be sharing this planet today.
Also, when you say any human-like species from another planet would likely be less intelligent is also incorrect. We know that had the Neanderthals
survived, they may have been equally successful as the humans. We can draw this from Neanderthals' advanced vocal chords, their use of art to express
themselves, and their burying of the dead. due to their burial of the dead, we can assume they either had some form of religion/respect for the dead,
or, they had an understanding of disease. Maybe they just didn't like the smell, because due to their close family units, they generally buried their
dead within their dwelling.
Neanderthals weren't the bumbling stupid species that many believe them to have been. Not only is it plausible for two intelligent species to
coexist, this shows that outside of humans, humanoids have proven 3 times out of 3 to be a capable life form in Earth's history (it's unknown what
happened to Cro Magnon man, though, the evidence seems to point to them assimilating to the Human species.) If humanoids hit the right genetic
blueprints, mixed with the prime geographical necessities on another planet, there's no reason to believe that they would not be as successful as
humans on Earth.
Also, you mention that UFO designs have changed very little, thus implying humans may be more intelligent than extraterrestrials. This may be true,
but, without knowing the technology, it may be a bit naive. After all, any UFOs that are seen on Earth would have to travel very far to come here.
Using current Earth technology, it would take decades to reach the nearest planet which we believe to have life, and that's assuming the nearest
planet which may sustain life actually does. We don't know if the shapes seen be witnesses on Earth are the most efficient for traveling great
distances through space, nor if there's some other reason for them to be so.
On topic, it's indeed a fact that many crop circles are man-made, but, to me it seems silly for someone to think ALL of them are. Think of it this
way, crop circles were first reported in 1966 (not necessarily the first ones, simply the first ones seen and reported.) If they were man made, what
would be the purpose? Why create an intricate design in a far off field in the middle of nowhere that can only be seen from above? If it were a
marketing ploy by a farmer on hard times who just happened to have great geometrical knowledge, he seems to have overlooked that people back then were
very afraid of nuclear contamination and likely wouldn't have purchased his crops from that season. Then, there's the fact that some crop circles
use geometry and mathematical symbols to form musical notes. To make these shapes creating notes requires an even further knowledge that a simple
farmer is unlikely to have.
Haha I do find it amusing that in the OP the beings are said to be over six feet tall, yet, in the artistic rendering, they are shown to be closer to
20 feet tall.
Nice find OP, S+F