UFO Conjecture(s)

Wednesday, November 23, 2016

Plants are the ‘aliens” visiting Earth!

Many of you know that I think plant life may have evolved elsewhere (off Earth), as the movie The Thing From Another World so presciently told us in 1951.

Two items that I add to my ongoing “thesis” include a review in the December 8th, 2016 issue of The New York Review of Books and a Science Magazine article.

The review in the NYRB is by Thomas Pakenham on Page 46 [What Trees Say]: The Hidden Life of Trees: What They Feel, How They Communicate – Discoveries from a Secret World by Peter Wohlleban (Translated from the German by Jane Billinghurst), [Greystone/David Suzuki Institute]

A team from the university in Vancouver “discovered … a vast underground network, called a mycorrhiza, in which fungi connect trees of different species by passing chemical and electrical signals among the trees’ roots. It was an arboreal Internet – christened the ‘wood wide web.’ [haha] Trees could actually communicate by exchanging carbon through their roots. The exchange offer mutual support …

“ … trees not only benefited by mutual exchange of food. They exchanged vital information …

“ … if a tree’s leaves are bitten by a caterpillar. It will send a message through the mycorrhiza, prompting other trees in the network to release chemicals that repel caterpillars …

“ … that, in their own way, trees had feelings, that they knew how to communicate with one another, and that the strong were able to assist the weak.”

The Science Magazine (online) article tells us plants exude “light” through their roots to see underground.

Click HERE for that article.

My speculation has been and continues to be that plant life elsewhere in the Galaxy (or Universe) evolved into thinking, mobile beings and while on scouting missions stumbled upon Earth, with its abundance of water and nutrients, necessary for their existence.

They now come here to sustain themselves or bask in the glory of a liquid planet.

Fortunately, they are not carnivorous like the “carrot” in The Thing film, although some mutilated cattle and Snippy might disagree.

RR

15 Comments:

  • I absolutely agree. I don´t see any reason why extraterrestrial life should look like something terrestrial. They bcould be plants, they could be invertebrate (I just love octopi : ) )
    And one of my favourite moviea is the John Carpenter -remake of the Thing, one of the scariest movies I´ve watched.

    By Blogger Jerry Cornelius, at Wednesday, November 23, 2016  

  • I hated the John Carpenter take on The Thing, Jerry, even though it was (much) closer to the book than the 1951 offering.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, November 23, 2016  

  • I don't know where any of this is going, so lets take this a step further.

    Which came first:- The chicken or the egg? OR "The Plants & the AIs?"

    You might need to look this up on the, "Wood wide web":)................?

    By Blogger Daniel Yang-Clark, at Thursday, November 24, 2016  

  • Can't quite go to the 'plant ETH' but I have wondered at some length about the common seed of life and how it has diverged into all the so many differing forms of life we have.

    Happy Thanksgiving, RR.

    BD

    By Blogger Bryan Daum, at Thursday, November 24, 2016  

  • And to you Bryan...

    (My plant E TH is a stretch, of course, but that damn movie seems to offer a "possibility."

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, November 24, 2016  

  • Aside from my goofy(?) speculation, Daniel, the plant info is interesting, all by itself.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, November 24, 2016  

  • LOL, Goofy just fine Rich, but plants, I have often wondered my self,about the huge array of fauna & flora,including the various nationality of people around the world.

    I think its about verity,in the food chain, for the survival of the fittest in numbers,
    but the question of how fauna & flora differ,must have a lot to do with cross-pollination,in the evolution of other life forms,but it doesn't end there!There has been intervention in the plant life,like in the fruit trees!? But we will leave it a that for now...................

    By Blogger Daniel Yang-Clark, at Thursday, November 24, 2016  

  • Rich and I often clash (in good fun) but I have to agree with his opinions on "The Thing"...the original and the remake. Of all of the movies that I saw as a kid, watching the black and white version in a movie theatre when I was eleven (with my sister)was unquestionably the scariest and creepiest movie experience I've ever had. (The only movie that comes close was seeing the original "ALien" in a movie theatre. Close, but not equal). Carpenter's tepid remake of "The Thing" does not measure up to either one of those classics. Did my interest in UFOs stem from that original exposure? Perhaps.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Friday, November 25, 2016  

  • Dominick:

    The overlapping dialogue and intertwined action of the characters, -- via screen writer Charles Lederer -- made the Original film realistic in ways seldom achieved in movie-making.

    (I'll have to see Robbie Graham says in his book Silver Screen Saucers about it)

    Obviously, the film struck a chord with me...the flying disk under the ice and the voracious "carrot" are still with me.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, November 25, 2016  

  • Philosopher Michael Marder is worth checking out for this topic, if you haven't yet run across his materials.

    This link is a good start, IMHO: http://philosoplant.lareviewofbooks.org/

    By Blogger Parakletos, at Saturday, November 26, 2016  

  • Hey, the original one is a great movie too, one of the best sf movies of fifties. But I think the Carpenter movie has a superior atmosphere, it´s claustrophobic and scary and the Thing is pretty frightening (actually I´m glad that it´s an older movie and I can see that the violent scenes are just FX, otherwise I´d be disgusted). But I like the 50´s period of sf movies, when they didn´t have a big budget or great FX so there had to be a good story. Nowadays it´s more like flashy FX and CGI stuff (or maybe I´m so old [I´m 42] that it feels like that? I mean, in the 90`s the sf movies were so much better....)
    (Just for the record, the best sf-movies of the fifties: Invasion of the Body Snatchers, Forbidden Planet, Invaders From Mars. The Fly and The Day The Earth Stood Still. Oh and The Plan From Outer Space of course.)
    But why should an alien lifeform be anything like what what we have here on Earth? Couldn´t they be plasma creatures that live on the surface of stars or maybe beings that make up the dark matter? Or something even more exotic? But hey, plants yeah, humanoids no (actually, that´s a one thing why I dismiss most UFO encounters: they´re so unimaginative, I mean, a humanoid with two hands and two legs who tells us that we should stop fighting and live in peace, wow, I could figure that out myself...I´d expect the real encounter with ET to be a bit more strange/scary/weird/psychotic.)

    By Blogger Jerry Cornelius, at Saturday, November 26, 2016  

  • I'm looking forward to seeing the new film "Arrival" Jerry.

    It touches a lot of bases that I try to deal with here.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, November 26, 2016  

  • Yeah, Arrival looks very promising, it has got some glowing reviews. It would be nice to see an intelligent sci-fi movie for a while, not just battles and explosions (well, Interstellar was good -- and you gotta love a movie that features time dilation as a plot point).

    By Blogger Jerry Cornelius, at Sunday, November 27, 2016  

  • RR,

    As Jerry noted, among others, Forbidden Planet was a great film that came out in 1956 and saw it as a boy that year -and it scared me.

    Reviewed it again just a week or so ago and I considered the 'classic' saucer shape, the faster than light speed ship and other technology.

    Quite a bit of sci-fi development that following the Arnold sighting in 1947.

    BD

    By Blogger Bryan Daum, at Sunday, November 27, 2016  

  • Sorry, I´m late but, Bryan

    I guess you know that the "classic saucer shape" was featured in sf magazines and comics already at 1920´s? And of course you know that the things that Arnold saw weren´t saucer-shaped, it was just a misunderstanding?
    I saw the Forbidden Planet first time in the 90´s and it was a good movie. But something that really was interesting was how the movie was so 50´s. I felt that it was wonderful and strange because of that (like, why all the people are white, why women seem to be very absent and stuff like that...pretty weird future : ) but yes, I loved that).
    But does anyone know has the original Thing been released as a blu-ray? The DVD-version I saw was quite awful, grainy and so on. Or did I borrow some pirated version (no, I don´t think I did)?

    JC

    By Blogger Jerry Cornelius, at Wednesday, November 30, 2016  

Post a Comment

<< Home