Jump to content

Talk:Grey alien

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 116.240.144.209 (talk) at 04:30, 7 March 2021 (→Quotes: H. G. Wells describing “grey aliens”). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Untitled

From Little Green Men to Grays

Cast under silhoutte, the skin would appear to be black or dark grey to the senses or perhaps tan or brown. They are called "little green men" for their green eyes visible, if the West Virginia Mothman is noted for red eyes. Same phenomena by the visible outline of the figure besides the creature's said eyes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.153.48.25 (talk) 22:42, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is it a spoof?

I have a vague memory that the shape of 'grey' was actually created by Californian underground artists in about 1968 — as a spoof. Any comments? Harjasusi (talk) 20:01, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't heard of that idea, but all the sources I've read imply that it's derived from the alien in the movie about the Betty and Barney Hill case. Abyssal (talk) 14:21, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What about that demonic man named Aliester Crowley who drew a picture of a space Alien that he said he was in comunication with? This predates anything above. http://www.boudillion.com/lam/lam.htm

You mean the 'ascended master' or 'angel' which Crowley had his religious work dictated to him through the medium of his scarlet woman, it was named Aiwass. 66.96.79.221 (talk) 20:14, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

dark colony

the gray aliens are one of 2 playable races in dark colony. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.59.120 (talk) 05:25, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quatermas

Wasn't it the 1958 BBC serial "Quatermas and the Pit" which introduced to a much wider audience the idea of primitive humans removed from the Earth to be selectively bred to increase their intelligence?AT Kunene (talk) 09:44, 20 February 2012 (UTC) 'Quatermas and the Pit' were written by BBC television drama writer Nigel Kneale in 1952/53 and aired by the BBC first time during the summer of 1953. It was re-broadcast several times up to 1979. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Quatermass_Experiment[reply]

Greys are the Nephilim decendents

This info needs to be added to the article. They are the decendents of hybrid offspring of human's and angels who made bodies for themselves before the flood in an effort to lift man up from their fall in defience of God but these hybrids kept growing into giants called Nephilim and consumed the flesh of animals and men to feed their growing bodies. See book of Enoch. There was advanced technology before the Biblical flood and the angels returned to heaven as spirits but the Nephilim unable to do this spiritual transformation made space craft for themselves and went into space where the radiation from space weakened their DNA and so therefore their bodies appear as they do today instead of the close to God like beings of the Nephilim. They now appear mutated and demonic to radiation in space, eating the flesh of human children and alienation from God. They give the USA Government advanced technology and the USA Government keeps them secret and feeds their blood lust. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.81.134.236 (talk) 16:36, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source for that? The Book of Enoch is not a reliable source, it needs to be something more modern and not a religious work.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 21:25, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds like an opinion that the Book of Enoch is a "religious work" (only??). It's an assumption and opinion that a book containing religious concepts isn't a reliable source. What: only totally non-religious books or non-religious people are reliable?? It's a further assumption that modernity is so preferable regarding sources that ancient texts can't really count as sources. It's likely an opinion that the Book of Enoch isn't a "reliable" source. It's an assumption that skepticism is a better belief system than believ-ism. But I too would love to see sources for those statements about hybrid offspring. Misty MH (talk) 07:06, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Back in the 1990s Dan Rather of CBS reported on this and made this connection to the time before the flood and called the "Aliens" the product of the union between man and angel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.81.134.236 (talk) 22:47, 24 April 2012 (UTC) This was on the CBS evening news. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.81.134.236 (talk) 02:49, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Those are called soviets man — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.170.13.42 (talk) 22:27, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Grey aliens and the Nephilim are NOT the same entities. That is a ridiculous assumption (in my own opinion). Also, demons are NOT relevant to alien life; Why are they being listed, if they are irrelevant? User:ErednebE — Preceding unsigned comment added by EBenderednebE (talk • contribs) 20:54, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

bad picture

hey i think the cartoon picture of the grey diminishes the article by making it look unrealistic, so i we will have to find another one. moreover, i do not think greys are sexless because the have been reported to have a male or female feel when thet communicate — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowledge spouse (talk • contribs) 03:47, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Find us a photo and we'll see what we can do. Sophie means wisdom (talk) 07:40, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A trio

During the Medieval period it was Succubus and Incubus, now its the Greys. Whatever next?AT Kunene (talk) 14:24, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If we really wish to be subversive, we could call it the Dark Ages. What makes you think there weren't Incubi and Succubi? But to be fair: Grays are a term used because of their typical color. Succubus and Incubus are defined terms that someone used to hypothesize what these apparitions were. If we're going to be logical and parallel (and sound ever so wisely skeptical), we need to say "During the Dark ages, it was Succubi and Incubi; now it's "aliens". What's next??" Now, other than that skeptical "question", I am intrigued by the title "A trio". What is that in reference to? Or dare I ask? Misty MH (talk) 06:50, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

removing POV template without ongoing discussion per Template:POV instructions

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
  1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
  2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
  3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 19:10, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The lead image

It's terrible. The face is too square, the body too muscular and the belly... Well, he looks like he has been drinking too much galactic beer. It does not look like a "typical" Grey alien. 172.56.5.124 (talk) 22:30, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a real article?

I mean lately Wikipedia seems to be writing articles about topics that are so controversial and difficult to source or prove such as esoterical and metaphysical issues (other examples Ive seen are astrology signs and "Old souls" and aliens and whatnot)....

I mean how is this article about "aliens" which western humanity typically believes aren't real (im not saying i believe theyre fake, i just think its weird that this is actually an article) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adlhgeo1990 (talk • contribs) 07:44, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Adlhgeo1990, if something is controversial then the more reason to have an article about it. If it is false, I'd say we'd have a even stronger reason, so that someone looking for information about the said controversial subject may find at least a half-decent article here, instead of (only) false claims out on the 'net. Providing, of course, we are not discussing our opinions, but are using sources. As to aliens, it sure is a common subject, and sure are plenty of serious literature about it. Okay, we certainly have silly, irrelevant, articles, agreed, and many are deleted daily. The point is not how false or true, hard or easy, provable or not, the subject is. The point is (in a short summary of my own): is there serious discussion of the subject that we can report? - Nabla (talk) 10:00, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure that much has been happening on this article "lately" - just two edits this month. There was a lot more going on back when the Paranormal Wikiproject was active. Sophie means wisdom (talk) 19:30, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's clearly the author's opinion and, although interesting doesn't really give any accepted sources or citations for what amounts to speculation. It really needs a great deal of tidying up, with the insertion of allegedly, claimed, etc. , in the appropriate places. 6Harry9 (talk) 19:24, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Authentic?

Is this video authentic, or is it a fake created to raise some youtube money? Can it be used as an external link in the article? Logos (talk) 12:27, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Logos: Thanks for asking. This editor has three problems with that: 1) On first impression it looks like some form of hoax (my own uninformed opinion). (What form of hoax, I haven't a clue.)
But more importantly 2) If we add ELs to every YouTube ET/UFO video here that happens to show Greys (I'm not in principle against YouTube use for some purposes), we'll wind up with an article that is a sea of blue YouTube links, and that probably wouldn't do the article any good. This sort of thing has happened before on WP, with 13,000 active editors.
Finally 3) Videos specific to Greys really need to be in color, we can't see what color they really are in this (purported to be 1942) video.   —Aladdin Sane (talk) 22:20, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think the main problem with it is that it was uploaded by some random person so we can't be sure that it's not copyright infringement and that it is what it claims to be (in the video description, "KGB TOP SECRET UFO/ET FOOTAGE" etc). — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 07:18, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 6 September 2015

Remove Category:Goblins. Goblins are from an earlier age, pre-dating the emergence of the grey alien concept. 203.173.186.163 (talk) 06:09, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done —Skyllfully (talk | contribs) 07:02, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Grey alien. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:32, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Main image

So, I got redirected here from an article in a tabloid's webpage... And, despite being generally uninterested in conspiracy theories, even I can tell that the alien in that image is supposed to look gangly instead of having a potbelly. Old School WWC Fan (talk) 17:38, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced it with a better one IMHO. RobP (talk) 00:47, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Grey alien. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:21, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:21, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting

The formatting on this article is, well, bad. Why is the page image on the left and also above all the header boxes?

47.196.109.224 (talk) 04:22, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Apexian / Rigel connection

I've been reading information lately about where the Grays came from. It seems as though there's a number of different sources that say Grays were originally humans that got involved in some kind of nuclear war either on a planet called Apex or in the Rigel star system. Might be interesting to include this?

www.bibliotecapleyades.net — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.102.74.189 (talk) 20:06, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:32, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An interesting article on the popular culture origins of grey aliens

Take a look at this guy's take: http://www.theironskeptic.com/articles/gray/gray_history.htm

Some of his points are already covered in the article but I feel it's worth reading. Vandergay (talk) 17:59, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting hypothesis

Hi, I have found something intriguing.

Imagine for a moment that Flores Man did *not* in fact die out 12,600 years ago and some of these proto-humans made it off the island presumably on a raft. They were certainly capable based on fossil evidence of advanced technology comparable to Homo erectus and possibly up to Neanderthal level.

Some of them might have made it to a nearby island or other land mass and when the climate began to shift, moved underground. We know that this happened in the last Ice Age and even before. Over time they might have adapted to low light and oxygen becoming speciated and unable to return to the surface except for brief periods, adapting fully over the next 20,000 years with large eyes, grey skin devoid of pigmentation and developing advanced technology along the way. This could account for many anecdotal reports of "Little People" in historical text and other strange anomalies.

If they sent out an exploratory craft based on primitive rockets using liquid fuels then it could account for the reports in 1897, as well as later incidents. This might be speculative science fiction but its sufficiently interesting to justify some more research. (note, duplicate as seems to be relevant to Roswell and Aurora TX incidents) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.190.161.223 (talk) 12:03, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Picture Book on The Evolution of People's Descriptions of Aliens

This would be an important addition to the article if we can find the book. Around 1985-90, I discovered a book (via an article I read about it, I think) primarily containing drawings based on people's descriptions of aliens they claimed to have seen. The descriptions were shown in order of the year they were "seen" and showed that in the early days, pre-1950, there was a wide variety of types of aliens, but over time, as alien sightings became more widely shared in the media, the descriptions gradually averaged closer and closer to the "grays," to the point that they were what most people claimed to have seen. I'm still Googling this every so often, but if more people searched I bet we could find it quickly. Thanks! :-) Genepoz (talk) 08:44, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Direct plagiarism

The History section of this article has been directly plagiarised from...

[1]

Beginning from page 56 on...

116.240.144.209 (talk) 01:56, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

After a cursory investigation, it appears quite clearly that Iman Ital plagiarized the Wikipedia article instead. Sentences that were added over the course of several months (and later removed) in the article appear wholesale in the book (example on WT:CP. MLauba (Talk) 10:04, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you MLauba. It seems the CHILAM BALAM book was published in 2015 (looking at Lulu.com), while the Wikipedia section was being updated before that time, so it is Ital who is the plagiarist. Apologies for not delving deeper to get to an original (dated) source. A lesson I should have learned by now, but it does trip me up every so often when I forget to take that one extra research step - to locate the original source! 116.240.144.209 (talk) 21:30, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Quotes: H. G. Wells describing “grey aliens”

In the interests of complete accuracy, the History section of this article should contain Wells’ direct alien descriptive quotes for ease of reference. This is so people can immediately see for themselves how the attribution of “grey alien” to Wells’ descriptive writings (as posited by this section) might apply. After all, we must allow Wells’ writings speak for themselves in order to prevent any potential error in attribution.

(Apologies, I do not yet possess the technical knowledge to appropriately insert Wells’ descriptive quotes into the main article. Is it possible an editor with more knowledge than I do that? Thank you)

In Wells’ The Man of the Year Million (1894), speculating on what evolution might do to humankind over the course of one million years, Wells describes future humans as,

“The coming man, then, will clearly have a larger brain and a slighter body than the present. (…) The human hand (…) will become constantly more powerful and subtle as the rest of the musculature dwindles. (…) Eyes large, lustrous, beautiful, soulful ; above them, no longer separated by rugged brow ridges, is the top of the head, a glistening, hairless dome, terete and beautiful ; no craggy nose rises to disturb by its unmeaning shadows the symmetry of that calm face, no vestigial ears project ; the mouth is a small, perfectly round aperture, toothless and gumless, jawless, unanimal, no futile emotions disturbing its roundness as it lies, like the harvest moon or the evening star, in the wide firmament of face. (…) There grows upon the impatient imagination a building, a dome of crystal, across the translucent surface of which flushes of the most glorious and pure prismatic colors pass and fade and change. In the centre of this transparent chameleon-tinted dome is a circular white marble basin filled with some clear, mobile, amber liquid, and in this plunge and float strange beings. Are they birds ? They are the descendants of man — at dinner. Watch them as they hop on their hands — a method of progression advocated already by Bjornsen — about the pure white marble floor. Great hands they have, enormous brains, soft, liquid, soulful eyes. Their whole muscular system, their legs, their abdomens are shrivelled to nothing, a dangling, degraded pendant to their minds." [2]

In Wells’ The First Men in the Moon (1901), Wells describes the native Selenites variously as,

“Clumsy quadruped with lowered head”, “slender pinched body and short and extremely attenuated bandy legs”, “head depressed between his shoulders”, “somewhat hunchbacked, with a high forehead and long features”, “walked like a bird”, “no nose”, “dull bulging eyes at the side—in the silhouette I had supposed they were ears”, “no ears”, “mouth, downwardly curved, like a human mouth in a face that stares ferociously”, “The neck on which the head was poised was jointed in three places, almost like the short joints in the leg of a crab”, “The joints of the limbs I could not see, because of the puttee-like straps in which they were swathed” (pp. 136-7), “soft tentacle-hand” “The skin, like everything else, looked bluish, but that was on account of the light; and it was hard and shiny, quite in the beetle-wing fashion, not soft, or moist, or hairy, as a vertebrated animal’s would be”, “Along the crest of the head was a low ridge of whitish spines running from back to front, and a much larger ridge curved on either side over the eyes” (pp. 152-3), “Selenite came and patted each of our faces with his tentacles”, “spiked round helmets and cylindrical body-cases” (p. 155)[3]

In Wells’ War of the Worlds (1898), Wells describes how the invading Martians bring with them another species of Martian, the blood of which they use for food via intravenous injection (the Martians come to earth seeking animal blood, the delicacy for them being human blood). This other species of Martian is described by Wells as,

“bipeds with flimsy, silicious skeletons (almost like those of the silicious sponges) and feeble musculature, standing about six feet high and having round, erect heads, and large eyes in flinty sockets.” (Sec. II)[4]

116.240.144.209 (talk) 22:05, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Iman Ital (undated) THE BOOK OF CHILAM BALAM OF THE RIVER CITY. Lulu.com. ISBN: 1329755219, 9781329755215. Retrieved from https://books.google.com.au/books/about/THE_BOOK_OF_CHILAM_BALAM_OF_THE_RIVER_CI.html?id=VPpCCwAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y, 05 Mar 2021.
  2. ^ Wells, H. G. (1894) The Man of the Year Million. Tuapeka Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 4079, 28 February 1894, Page 5. Retrieved from https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TT18940228.2.30, 06 Mar 2021.
  3. ^ Wells, H. G. (1901) The First Men in the Moon. The Project Gutenberg EBook. Retrieved from http://www.gutenberg.org/files/52501/52501-h/52501-h.htm#Page_132, 06 Mar 2021.
  4. ^ Wells, H. G. (1898) The War of the Worlds. The Project Gutenberg EBook. Retrieved from https://www.gutenberg.org/files/36/36-h/36-h.htm, 06 Mar 2021.
WP:NOTEVERYTHING. A massive wall of text from Welles books would not improve understanding of the concept. The existing summary is quite adequate. - LuckyLouie (talk) 23:05, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply LuckyLouie. The contention of the article is that the history of grey aliens can be traced back to H. G. Wells and 1894. However, to claim that the aliens described by H. G. Wells can be in any way construed as a progenitors or otherwise prototypical of the icon modern grey alien is to fall victim to confirmation bias - cherry picking the evidence for salient features while ignoring those that don’t fit – in other words, falling victim to Pareidolia.[1] I was merely quoting Wells to demonstrate that one could as easily describe a normal human head as a prototypical grey in that way (which would be far more accurate by the way, but still fallacious). The bottom line is, seeing prototypical grey aliens in the writings of H. G. Wells is like claiming an elephant is a table because each has four legs. It’s a nonsense. 116.240.144.209 (talk) 01:58, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ETA: And don't you find it passing strange that in Wells’ The Man of the Year Million (1894), he is describing humans, not aliens, who walk on their hands, and otherwise have no legs or torso at all? That future human cannot by any stretch of the imagination be considered to be a "grey alien" of any description. So why is it included as a reference? Does Wikipedia make a habit of promulgating falsehoods in this way? And if for this article, then that immediately begs the question - if this article, then for what other articles do these lax and fallacious standards apply? 116.240.144.209 (talk) 02:27, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Robinson, D. (2014) Neuroscience: why do we see faces in everyday objects? BBC Future. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20140730-why-do-we-see-faces-in-objects, 07 Mar 2021.
Read the footnotes in the section you are questioning. Wikipedia goes by what secondary sources say about a topic, rather than have editors analyze and interpret primary sources. More detail at the links I provided on your Talk page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Introduction_to_policies_and_guidelines/2).- LuckyLouie (talk) 03:49, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Haha. Indeed yes, I had noticed that ... "This work is based on the author's experience of a five-day UFO conference...",. Come on, please, The author's experience? You're having a laugh surely. Are you seriously telling me that Wikipedia's standard is people's "experience" of something? I mean, that goes against everything we are taught about citing independent sources. In my own personal experience the whole of the grey alien article is absolute unattributed nonsense - but that's my experience and I am sure you would not want me just overwriting the article with my own personal experience. The article is unsourced - from the very first line we have "Grey aliens, also referred to as Zeta Reticulans, Roswell Greys,..." Who refers to them in such terms? What is the source for this information? Has Wikipedia just made that up from thin air? If you cannot cite sources for the information you provide, then we, the public, are entitled to dismiss such claims as entirely unfounded (false and misleading, utter nonsense in other words). I have already demonstrated that citing H. G. Wells' aliens as a grey alien progenitors is nonsensical. So the question remains unanswered - if for this article, what other articles does Wikipedia treat in such cavalier fashion? What is the worth of Wikipedia if it allows false and misleading information to stand as truth? 116.240.144.209 (talk) 04:30, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Grey_alien&oldid=1010758922"