The Aliens of Galactica

[Darrell Lawrence]

That frog one... which ep?

The last one (the "whatthehell")- That's a baby Ovian.

Anyways....

https://www.battlestar-galactica.org/library/aliens.php

That frog one... which ep?

Captured that from the "Remembering Galactica" extra. I'm guessing it was in the Casino.

[Darrell Lawrence]

Ah. I'll have to watch that again.

I wonder if that was meant to be the Hassari?

That was my instinct as well, but only the credits can tell for sure.

[Lara]

Thanks for posting these.
Great set of pics. The one of the Imperious Leader (with lizard) is especially good, as his scenes are often so dark and so quick (and great capture of Iblis' pig face, too) But I have lifted the BoL for wallpaper...I LOVE those glomesh 'n Doris Day outfits..I can hear the soft tinkling of chimes as I type!

Cheers,
Lara

[peter noble]

[Darrell Lawrence]

Peter. what's that from?

[peter noble]

They're from an issue of what was Starlog's companion magazine, Future. They're the sculpts of the background aliens for the casiono sequence.

[Darrell Lawrence]

Did it say which alien was what?

[peter noble]

Originally Posted by Warrior

Did it say which alien was what?

No, unfortunately.

Fro the left number 2 is the Frog Guy, and number three is the pig guy from the Casino. But I don't remember seeing the first, fourth or fifth ones at all.

And of course we shouldn't forget the Reptilian Cylons

[spcglider]

That's pretty cool. I'm pretty sure the last two sculpts didn't make it into the premiere.

It always bothered me a little that the galactican aliens always were humanoid. It would have been cool to come up against an alien race like StarTreks' Horta.

-Gordon

BTW: Do the Borellian Nomen count as aliens?

BTW: Do the Borellian Nomen count as aliens?

Why wouldn't they be?

It always bothered me a little that the galactican aliens always were humanoid.

Why's that?

[Sept17th]

Originally Posted by spcglider

BTW: Do the Borellian Nomen count as aliens?

I wouldn't think so, they are native to one of the colonies. It ‘d be like Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon man living side by side. Another way to think of it do we consider Gorillas aliens? Damn, did I just make a racist comment against Borllian Noman?

[spcglider]

I thought they were "human" in the broadest sense... which is why they were leaving with the "humans" to escape the cylons.

And as far as humanoid aliens are concerned, I just like the idea that intelligent life wouldn't necessarily evolve two arms and two leags and a head EVERY friggin' chance it got.

-Gordon

[Sept17th]

Yeah, they are Colonials just a more closed off segment of the society. It was probably more a budget thing...perhaps and if yadda-yadda something non-humanoid would have come along we'll never know. A fan film episode could tackle that one some day.

[spcglider]

Well, there was a reason that the Enterprise met up with so many disembodied alien energy beings and "flying space omelettes"!

Babylon 5 tried really hard at first to introduce beleivable aliens... remember the foggy room with the praying mantis alien? The main characters had to wear special breather gear to go visit him. That's a cool concept, but their execution was a little dicey. And then that bit completely disappeared from the show because it held up the action when suddenly they had to switch gears for this one alien.

And as far as humanoid aliens are concerned, I just like the idea that intelligent life wouldn't necessarily evolve two arms and two leags and a head EVERY friggin' chance it got.

I can understand that and actually agreed with you at one point. But then I started reading about Golden Ratio and the Golden Spiral. This is a set of geometry that dictates nearly everything in nature, as far as how it is formed. It dictates the curves of seashells, the placements of seeds in a sunflower, the way that branches grow on trees, the placement of the navel in the human body, etc. Once you start looking at this geometry, it does appear that nautre is more designed, and less random.

Having said that it may not be a stretch to consider that the geometric formation for an intelligent being is dictated by the humanoid form. In other words, the geometry of the Universe mandates that intelligent lifeforms manifest in humanoid form. So the idea of all these aliens being humanoid becomes far less cheesy.

Just a thought.

[spcglider]

You're right... but only as far as life on this planet is concerned.

Until recently, we thought that certain parameters of life itself were pretty cut and dried. NOTHING could live in a methane environment, right?

Wrong-o.

Suddenly we discover here on our very own little globe that creatures DO exist in methane rich environments and very happily, too.

Think of it this way: You've only ever seen one type of car in your life. It was a red car. While the only imperical evidence you have is that the only car you've ever seen is red, is it a valid point to assume that ALL cars are red? I don't think so. The sample is far too small.

Then we start dealing with the definition of intelligence.

Ugh... I don't wanna go there. Too much work at te end of the day.

-Gordon

[spcglider]

Once you start looking at this geometry, it does appear that nautre is more designed, and less random.

Just a thought.

Nature isn't designed. Nature grows into it's place. It defines it's own design through trial and error. What works stays. What fails goes away and is not passed on. And unlike what the paranoiacs would tell you, it's not just random. Its all one big soup... life doesn't develop in a vaccuum and neither does it survive or evolve there. Environment, intellect, random events, chemical imbalance, etc. All of these are contributors. There is no one cause of adaptation.

Human beings contain appendixes. A useless piece of flesh that is evolving out. It used to have a purpose... but evidently not any more. Just a way for doctors to make money taking it out.

Both male and female humans contain vestigal evidence of bearing both sexes in one body. Ever wonder why males have nipples? The only biological reason for them to exist is to nurture young. The male of our species doesn't do that. There are other examples but I cannot address them here without risking censure. The subject and terminology might be considered inappropriate.

As for the geometric formula, it is not surprising that, because life is developing under the same planetary influences (probably influences we are ignoring like the magnetic feilds of the planet and the coreolis (sp?) effect) that a useful pattern has emerged in the life forms here. It is a pattern that works on a very basic level... at the foundation.

But if you like the idea of design being involved in life, I suggest you visit the best site available concerning the subject: www.flyingspaghettimonster.com

You're right... but only as far as life on this planet is concerned.

As far as we currently know. Granted, what I offer is only speculation, but speculation worth considering I think. The Golden Spiral and Golden Ratio could very well dictate the structure of life forms throughout the Universe. But we simply don't know, with nothing to compare to. But we also do know, that the same sorts of Newtonian physics that dictate the motion of the Earth, is the same physics that dictate the the motions of Pluto, or planets in other solar systems.

Until recently, we thought that certain parameters of life itself were pretty cut and dried. NOTHING could live in a methane environment, right?

Wrong-o.

Suddenly we discover here on our very own little globe that creatures DO exist in methane rich environments and very happily, too.

Correct, but while both types of life are chemically different and independant, the Golden Ratio and the Golden sprial geometries can be found in both.

Think of it this way: You've only ever seen one type of car in your life. It was a red car. While the only imperical evidence you have is that the only car you've ever seen is red, is it a valid point to assume that ALL cars are red? I don't think so. The sample is far too small.

I undestand what your saying, but my point isn't that all cars are red. My point is that you could have four different kinds of red cars. An internal combustion red car. A Hydrogen red car. An electric red car. A hybrid red car. They could even all be different colors, makes and models.

But even though they have different manufacturers, and different working mechanisms, they all still have 4 wheels, a steering wheel, seats, a body, etc. Things that are absolutely necessary for a car to be a car.

Similarily geometry may dictate that for an intelligent species to evolve, it must have sufficient cranium size, more than one eye to see in three dimensions, a method for locomotion i.e. two or more legs, a set of two or more arms at the ends of which appear extentions such as fingers and opposable thumbs for which to manipulate tools that have to extend in front of the eyes to be able to see what your doing. And a torso to stick them all onto. Having only two arms and two legs, would simply be the easiest way for nature to accomplish this.

Arthur C. Clark once wrote in one of his books how fish on the planet Europa had fins, like fish on Earth. And even though these two species had never any kind of evolutionary contact, they both developed fins because when presented with the same sets of problems, nature will come up with the same sets of solutions.

All this is just speculation of course.

[spcglider]

"As far as we currently know. Granted, what I offer is only speculation, but speculation worth considering I think. The Golden Spiral and Golden Ratio could very well dictate the structure of life forms throughout the Universe. But we simply don't know, with nothing to compare to. But we also do know, that the same sorts of Newtonian physics that dictate the motion of the Earth, is the same physics that dictate the the motions of Pluto, or planets in other solar systems."


But then again, it might not. In the case of Galactica, we are talking about an entirely different galaxy. Could be that the rules in the next neighborhood over are different... at least, its fun to fantasize that they may be. Just to keep it lively!

I find it a wholly depressing thought that, if the universe was "created" by an intelligence as a "design", that the basis for that design would be so easily perceptible by the elements of the design itself. I don't know about you, but I'd like a deity that was smarter than we are.


"Correct, but while both types of life are chemically different and independant, the Golden Ratio and the Golden sprial geometries can be found in both."


But that doesn't necessarily dictate that those geometries exist in life outside of this sphere. Once again, I prefer to imagine a much more diverse panoply of "aliens". Life forms that actually DO challenge our perceptions of life and intelligence. That's what science fiction is all about. Star Trek had aliens that were silicon based. Definitely a departure from just about everything we think of as "alive". Minerals are tools for life, but not capable of life itself... as far as we know.

As far as those little methane breathing critters on vents at the ocean floor, I cannot speak to whether or not the geometries you're talking about apply to them. I haven't seen or heard any research to that effect. But I'm willing to admit that it's just as likely to be true as not.


"I undestand what your saying, but my point isn't that all cars are red. My point is that you could have four different kinds of red cars. An internal combustion red car. A Hydrogen red car. An electric red car. A hybrid red car. They could even all be different colors, makes and models.

But even though they have different manufacturers, and different working mechanisms, they all still have 4 wheels, a steering wheel, seats, a body, etc. Things that are absolutely necessary for a car to be a car."


But the problem there is that they aren't. Three wheeled cars exist. Cars without steering wheels exist. Cars that do not have seats, but instead have lying-prone couches exist. A car is not an irreducably complex mechanism. In fact, it has become a redundantly complex mechansim. Like Cylons.

One can argue that these things are all only slight modifications of the "real" car design, but by that one would have to admit that a horse and carriage IS a car. Yet we know it's not.


"Similarily geometry may dictate that for an intelligent species to evolve, it must have sufficient cranium size, more than one eye to see in three dimensions, a method for locomotion i.e. two or more legs, a set of two or more arms at the ends of which appear extentions such as fingers and opposable thumbs for which to manipulate tools that have to extend in front of the eyes to be able to see what your doing. And a torso to stick them all onto. Having only two arms and two legs, would simply be the easiest way for nature to accomplish this."


That all depends on your definition of intelligence. Have you ever read "Flatworld"? Its all about intelligent life in a two-dimensional universe. These speculative creatures were intelligent, but wouldn't need to see in three dimensions since there wasn't a third dimension to see in. Octopods have proven themselves to be an exception to your theory of fingers on the end of arms and their positioning on the body (non existant torso, by the way). They've shown remarkable problem-solving capabilities including logical progression, retention, and perception. Are they intelligent? The jury is still out on that one.
Douglas Adams mentions our perception of intelligence in The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy in a witty but very pointed and cutting indictment: "Humans had always thought of themselves as more intelligent than dolphins. After all, they had invented so much- wars, the wheel, and New York to name but a few things; and yet the dolphins had always considered themselves more intelligent too, and for exactly the same reasons."


"Arthur C. Clark once wrote in one of his books how fish on the planet Europa had fins, like fish on Earth. And even though these two species had never any kind of evolutionary contact, they both developed fins because when presented with the same sets of problems, nature will come up with the same sets of solutions.

All this is just speculation of course."

A good example of parallel evolution. Another good example: coloration of species. Look at a ring-tailed Lemur and a common North American Raccoon. Body shape is different, but the same coloration mechanisms are present... stripey tails, dark rings around the eyes, creamy-colored underparts versus a darker overcoat. Yet one is order primate and one is order carnivora (a monkey and a rodent, basically). To go even farther, there are the Japanese Tanuki, which bear similar traits as well. Though they are also carnivora, they fall under the family canidae (dog) versus procyonidae (raccoon).

So please, don't get me wrong... I'm still absolutely willing to accept that two hominoid species could develop completely independently of one another on separate planets across the void. In fact, its more likely than not.

I just like the thought that alien life can be and possibly is MUCH more diverse than what we see on TV dictated by filming budgets and uncreative screenwriters.

-Gordon

But then again, it might not. In the case of Galactica, we are talking about an entirely different galaxy. Could be that the rules in the next neighborhood over are different...

I would guess that this would be highly unlikely. The Universe is the Universe. You can't have two seperate realities or sets of physics working in the same Universe side by side. This is why scientists currently pursue the Superstring and Unified Field theories.

I find it a wholly depressing thought that, if the universe was "created" by an intelligence as a "design", that the basis for that design would be so easily perceptible by the elements of the design itself. I don't know about you, but I'd like a deity that was smarter than we are.

I'd have to disagree. I believe that anything that exists, can be understood. And if there is a God, he may very well be waiting for us to come to these discoveries and level of knowledge, so we can get on with the really important stuff.

But that doesn't necessarily dictate that those geometries exist in life outside of this sphere.

But neither does it preclude it. Again, I only offer speculation as food for thought.

Once again, I prefer to imagine a much more diverse panoply of "aliens". Life forms that actually DO challenge our perceptions of life and intelligence. That's what science fiction is all about.

Science Fiction is about speculation based on the current level of scientific knowledge. Pure and simple. The only fact about alien life that we have, is that we have no facts about alien life. So any discussion regarding them is pure speculation. Having said that, the more I read about physics and geometry, and natural processes, the more I become convinced that a seashell on Earth, will look much like a seashell on Zeta Prime with slight variations.

As far as those little methane breathing critters on vents at the ocean floor, I cannot speak to whether or not the geometries you're talking about apply to them.

The geometries apply to nearly ever aspect of just about every life form on the planet.

But the problem there is that they aren't. Three wheeled cars exist.

Of course there will be exceptions, or in the case of species, variations. This could also be explained as mutation or genetic defects. Certainly, people are born with out the "normal" appendages from time to time. But we're talking about the vast majority here. And, even though a particular car may have only three wheels, they are wheels nontheless.

One can argue that these things are all only slight modifications of the "real" car design, but by that one would have to admit that a horse and carriage IS a car. Yet we know it's not.

You're actually getting closer to my point here. Yes, the carriage is not a car, but it has similar operating principles. The horse is the engine. It has four wheels. A body. A steering mechanism. Seats.

It's not the fact or non-fact they they are both cars or not. It's that they both contain similar elements, necessary for their successful operation in their environment.

And that's what I'm looking at here. Not necessarily alien beings a whole, but the parts or elements that make them up. Which elements migh be commonly expressed?

Have you ever read "Flatworld"?

No. I don't much read Science Fiction these days, or fiction in general for that matter. I tend to stick with non-fiction, primarily physics and ancient history.

Its all about intelligent life in a two-dimensional universe. These speculative creatures were intelligent, but wouldn't need to see in three dimensions since there wasn't a third dimension to see in.

But here we're discussing alien beings in our own third dimension. A two dimensional being wouldn't necessarily be pertinent to this discussion, because a 2nd Dimension would operate by a wholly different set of physics. Furthermore, a 2nd Dimensional being is even more speculative, than alien beings in our own dimension.

Octopods have proven themselves to be an exception to your theory of fingers on the end of arms and their positioning on the body (non existant torso, by the way). They've shown remarkable problem-solving capabilities including logical progression, retention, and perception.

Actually it's not a theory, I'm only speculating. But in any case, it actually doesn't prove to be an exception, because we're talking exclusively about a potential inherent design in intelligent beings only. I know of no intelligent octopod, at least none that have read "Flatworld."

Douglas Adams mentions our perception of intelligence in The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy in a witty but very pointed and cutting indictment: "Humans had always thought of themselves as more intelligent than dolphins. After all, they had invented so much- wars, the wheel, and New York to name but a few things; and yet the dolphins had always considered themselves more intelligent too, and for exactly the same reasons."

Yes, mankind awaits its final dethronement.

A good example of parallel evolution. Another good example: coloration of species. Look at a ring-tailed Lemur and a common North American Raccoon. Body shape is different, but the same coloration mechanisms are present... stripey tails, dark rings around the eyes, creamy-colored underparts versus a darker overcoat. Yet one is order primate and one is order carnivora (a monkey and a rodent, basically).

But you have to go deeper. What is the reason or purpose for these types of markings. Therein lies the answer.

So please, don't get me wrong... I'm still absolutely willing to accept that two hominoid species could develop completely independently of one another on separate planets across the void. In fact, its more likely than not.

And don't get me wrong either, I'm not saying the Universe is populated by bumpy headed aliens like the ones that populate Star Trek. To me, those guys just look like malformed humans. But maybe probably more like what we see in some Farscape or some Star Wars is what I may be suggesting.

But everything I've written on the topic above is pure speculation. In fact at the current time, pure speculation is the only way anyone can discuss this topic. The only certainty, is that there are no certainties.

[Darrell Lawrence]

I'm from Orion, and I look human (at least I *think* I do!)

[dilbertman]

Originally Posted by Warrior

I'm from Orion, and I look human (at least I *think* I do!)

You do.

Jim

[Senmut]

Maybe God uses variations on a theme?

[WarMachine]

Originally Posted by Senmut

Maybe God uses variations on a theme?

About ten years ago, there was a book called "Making Contact", by Bill Fawcett; it was an anthology of articles discussing everything from biology to "How to Talk to an Extraterrestrial".

One of the articles that stuck out for me was a discussion of biology, and how at least some ET's should be bipedal, two-armed, two-legged, with a head on top that has a pair of eyes above a nose and mouth...and yet, having said that, there is no reason to expect an ET to be able to pass without comment on the street of some major city.

Favorite line(paraphrased): "...There may, in fact, be many, many Sarek's out there - but there will never be a Mr. Spock; [Spock's mother, Amanda] would have an easier time breeding with an ear of corn, than with Sarek."(This, from a discussion about the effects of DNA...)

Also, you have to consider what "sentience" means: I have heard a very serious argument - one I am fully comfortable with, incidentally - that dolphins are fully sentient...they just don't use or make tools as we understand them

[spcglider]

"I would guess that this would be highly unlikely. The Universe is the Universe. You can't have two seperate realities or sets of physics working in the same Universe side by side. This is why scientists currently pursue the Superstring and Unified Field theories."

But in the end, you cannot prove a negative. Who says you can't? Since we've never been to another galaxy, we cannot say for certain that the rules of life, intelligence, whatever are the same or even similar to what they are here. It is not even "highly unlikely" that my ideas about it are less possible than those of the most learned string-theory scientist... because we haven't been there to see.

"I'd have to disagree. I believe that anything that exists, can be understood. And if there is a God, he may very well be waiting for us to come to these discoveries and level of knowledge, so we can get on with the really important stuff. "

Well, flat out, I do not subscribe to any religion, so the point is really moot. I agree with you that anything that can be perceived can be understood.


"But neither does it preclude it. Again, I only offer speculation as food for thought."

Same here. Like I said, I prefer to imagine a universe filled with wild and challenging definitions of life and intelligence and reality. That's what makes it fun.

"Science Fiction is about speculation based on the current level of scientific knowledge. Pure and simple. The only fact about alien life that we have, is that we have no facts about alien life. So any discussion regarding them is pure speculation. Having said that, the more I read about physics and geometry, and natural processes, the more I become convinced that a seashell on Earth, will look much like a seashell on Zeta Prime with slight variations."

So you're saying there's a vast difference between speculation and PURE speculation? Then I submit that, on the basis of absolute lack of knowlege concerning alien life, that my PURE speculation is just as valid as your plain old, everyday speculation!

"The geometries apply to nearly ever aspect of just about every life form on the planet."

But not ALL? Oops. There is hope for my assertions after all!


"Of course there will be exceptions, or in the case of species, variations. This could also be explained as mutation or genetic defects. Certainly, people are born with out the "normal" appendages from time to time. But we're talking about the vast majority here. And, even though a particular car may have only three wheels, they are wheels nontheless."

Okay, I get your meaning. Nature uses the same mechansims to cope with the same environmental tasks... even if those mechanisms need to evolve independently from each other. Agreed. But I still submit that there is always room for wild innovation unseen here on this planet. Imagine a planet that is different enough in environment from ours to require Nature to innovate. Environment that is completely unheard of here would require answers we had never seen before. Perhaps (and I am speculating here, I realize that) answers that pervade this particular planet's life system and do not fall under the same geometrics as ours.


"And that's what I'm looking at here. Not necessarily alien beings a whole, but the parts or elements that make them up. Which elements migh be commonly expressed?"

I understand your point, and will say that if there isn't any sort of similarity or commonality between us and an alien species, there really wouldn't be a basis for interaction.

"Actually it's not a theory, I'm only speculating. But in any case, it actually doesn't prove to be an exception, because we're talking exclusively about a potential inherent design in intelligent beings only. I know of no intelligent octopod, at least none that have read "Flatworld." "

Okay, I misspoke for poetic license. Shouldn't have mis-used "theory"... sorry. But now we're moving into definitions of "intelligence". Of course no octopod has read "Flatworld"... but by your own admission, neither have you. Does that make you as un-intelligent as an octopod? So using reading as a singular indicator of intellect is invalid. Perhaps the octopod would consider you stupid since you don't know how to locate the best supply of fresh, live shellfish for lunch.



"But you have to go deeper. What is the reason or purpose for these types of markings. Therein lies the answer."

Yes... for BOTH our posits.


"But everything I've written on the topic above is pure speculation. In fact at the current time, pure speculation is the only way anyone can discuss this topic. The only certainty, is that there are no certainties. "

Then we DO agree!!!

-Gordon