Aliens: things they didn't ought to have done

"Keith Hazelwood" <unknown.TakeThisOut@unknown.net> wrote

> Aliens, on the other hand, are totally dependent on animals of a
> fairly narrow size-range for procreation alone. This limits their
> potential numbers. The original lifecycle limits them even more with
> a 2:1 ratio of hosts to aliens. The queen equalizes the ratio by not
> requiring hosts for egg creation, resulting in better efficiency and
> therefore greater numbers of alien soldiers.

Except that she still has to generate, or convert, biomass for those eggs
from somewhere. It's not free. It's likely to be from exactly the same
source.

With that in mind, the A1 alien's 2-into-1 approach is enormously efficient.
That rate of conversion far exceeds the rate at which we convert food into
more humans. For comparison, I read once that the efficiency of a field of
wheat is about 4% (i.e. if you compare the kilowatts of sunlight energy a
field of wheat uses to replace itself, 96% is wasted).
 >> Stay informed about: Aliens: things they didn't ought to have done 

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 01:08:12 -0000, "John Redman"
<johnphilipredman DeleteThis @hotmailREMOVETHEBLEEDINOBVIOUS.com> wrote:

>There is no evidence that any reports are sent back of what went in sublevel
>3. The marines go in, Gorman can't see what's happening, they get their ass
>kicked, they withdraw. The dropship crash immediately destroys their
>communications, and they are left trying to figure out how long it will be
>after they are overdue before they get rescued.

Mike Lynch likes to frame his essays in a fictional context to
maintain the illusion of a real scientific study within the Alien
universe. You can take all that with a grain of salt and just
concentrate on the theories themselves.

>And:-
>
>"It has been hypothesized that the Alien aboard the Nostromo managed to
>infiltrate the ship's food stores - however, this has never been verified."
>
>Well, it hasn't been refuted either, and the subsequent speculation about
>what the hatchlings eat overlooks the fact that the chestburster is
>certainly able to metabolise what Kane's eaten, hence his hunger.

I don't think anyone's denying that the aliens can metabolize regular
food, simply that they're not restricted to it like we are.

>"Yet the vast majority of the chestbursters that were born on LV-426 did not
>have the installation's food stores at their disposal."
>
>This we know how?

Deductive reasoning. The hive was in the bowels of the atmosphere
processor. The colony's food stores are no doubt somewhere in the
colony complex.

>> Again, I'm determining its efficiency compared to that of *their*
>> alternate method of reproduction, not ours.
>
>Right, but I'm suggesting that 2-into-1 is good enough not to need
>improving.

Have it your way. Clearly I'm outnumbered by the queen haters.

Keith
 >> Stay informed about: Aliens: things they didn't ought to have done 

"Adam Cameron" <adam_junk.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote

> It comes down to resource usage. We require resources to sustain
> ourselves; aliens require it to propagate. But the conversion rate is
> much
> higher for aliens. For two human-sized (say) amount of resource, you'd
> get
> one alien. But only maybe 100th of a human (number plucked out of thin
> air).

And in fact one of the arguments used in support of dinosaurs being
warm-blooded is the ratio of predator fossils found to prey fossils. Simply
put, a pride of lions needs something like 100 gazelles (either per pride or
per pride member, I forget, but it's a *huge* number) to support it, because
being warm blooded requires huge calorie input versus being cold blooded.
This requires a lot of prey per predator. The ratio of T rex types to (eg)
herbivores looks similar, ergo, a T Rex was probably warm blooded.

Leaving aside the obvious objections, my point is simply that an animal
which can support a population of 50% of that of its prey is pretty
efficient. Of course it's screwed once the prey is all gone but as long as
some get mutated into another round of eggs, and those eggs are viable for a
few hundred thousand years, the aliens are still in business.
 >> Stay informed about: Aliens: things they didn't ought to have done 

"Kryten" <kryten_droid_obfusticator.DeleteThis@ntlworld.com> wrote

> It's a bit like having landmines that not only destroy enemy personnel but
> also create new landmines.

And conveniently die off very rapidly (as the specimen in A1 seems to be
doing in the shuttle). You send in one alien, and not only does it wipe out
the enemy, but it also replaces itself as well. If you timed it right, you
could then go in and collect the part-formed eggs and the dead alien, along
with whatever asset your bioweapon has just depopulated.

> Cunning, and very nasty.
 >> Stay informed about: Aliens: things they didn't ought to have done 

"Covenant" <covenant DeleteThis @joelamb.freeserve.co.uk> wrote

> It takes two humans to make one of *them* too !!
>
> (Genrally speaking)

On average it takes more than 2, since not all humans are heterosexual or
fertile.

On average people have 1.95 legs too. Think about it :-)
 >> Stay informed about: Aliens: things they didn't ought to have done 

"Keith Hazelwood" <unknown DeleteThis @unknown.net> wrote in message
news:so7gu0do5mdpuih468s09g5snrupu9b3oc@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 18:14:50 -0000, "Covenant"
> <covenant DeleteThis @joelamb.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>> The entire lifecycle is dealt with in the Anchorpoint Essays. I
>>> highly recommend reading them since they cover much of what we discuss
>>> here.
>>
>>But written by people with no more (or indeed less) knowledge than most of
>>those involved in the discussion in here.
>
> So what? I thought my earlier disclaimer that it wasn't canon was
> enough. Just because theywere written by a fan doesn't mean the
> theories aren't well researched and thought out.

Ooh, if JEyers were here to read that.....he'd be calling you a stupid
fanboy by now...:-)
 >> Stay informed about: Aliens: things they didn't ought to have done 

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 23:36:37 -0000, "John Redman"
<johnphilipredman.DeleteThis@hotmailREMOVETHEBLEEDINOBVIOUS.com> wrote:

>> So what? I thought my earlier disclaimer that it wasn't canon was
>> enough. Just because theywere written by a fan doesn't mean the
>> theories aren't well researched and thought out.
>
>Ooh, if JEyers were here to read that.....he'd be calling you a stupid
>fanboy by now...:-)

And I'd be telling him to kiss my ass.

Keith
 >> Stay informed about: Aliens: things they didn't ought to have done 

"John Redman" <johnphilipredman.TakeThisOut@hotmailREMOVETHEBLEEDINOBVIOUS.com> wrote in
message news:cs9krd$28q$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> "Covenant" <covenant.TakeThisOut@joelamb.freeserve.co.uk> wrote
>
> > It takes two humans to make one of *them* too !!
> >
> > (Genrally speaking)
>
> On average it takes more than 2, since not all humans are heterosexual or
> fertile.

I *did* say *generally speaking !
;' )


> On average people have 1.95 legs too. Think about it :-)


I'd rather not !!!!


--
Covenant
A Man With Far Too Much Time On His Hands
 >> Stay informed about: Aliens: things they didn't ought to have done 

"Keith Hazelwood" <unknown.TakeThisOut@unknown.net> wrote in message
news:so7gu0do5mdpuih468s09g5snrupu9b3oc@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 18:14:50 -0000, "Covenant"
> <covenant.TakeThisOut@joelamb.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >> The entire lifecycle is dealt with in the Anchorpoint Essays. I
> >> highly recommend reading them since they cover much of what we discuss
> >> here.
> >
> >But written by people with no more (or indeed less) knowledge than most
of
> >those involved in the discussion in here.
>
> So what? I thought my earlier disclaimer that it wasn't canon was
> enough. Just because theywere written by a fan doesn't mean the
> theories aren't well researched and thought out.


Didn't say it didn;t.
But they hold no morer weight that anyone else with more than a passing
interest in the movies, arguments.


--
Covenant
A Man With Far Too Much Time On His Hands
 >> Stay informed about: Aliens: things they didn't ought to have done 

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 09:04:52 -0000, "Covenant"
<covenant DeleteThis @joelamb.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

>> So what? I thought my earlier disclaimer that it wasn't canon was
>> enough. Just because theywere written by a fan doesn't mean the
>> theories aren't well researched and thought out.
>
>Didn't say it didn;t.
>But they hold no morer weight that anyone else with more than a passing
>interest in the movies, arguments.

They do with me.

Keith
 >> Stay informed about: Aliens: things they didn't ought to have done 

"John Redman" <johnphilipredman.DeleteThis@hotmailREMOVETHEBLEEDINOBVIOUS.com> wrote in
message news:cs9kut$2aq$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> "Keith Hazelwood" <unknown.DeleteThis@unknown.net> wrote in message
> news:so7gu0do5mdpuih468s09g5snrupu9b3oc@4ax.com...
> > On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 18:14:50 -0000, "Covenant"
> > <covenant.DeleteThis@joelamb.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >>> The entire lifecycle is dealt with in the Anchorpoint Essays. I
> >>> highly recommend reading them since they cover much of what we discuss
> >>> here.
> >>
> >>But written by people with no more (or indeed less) knowledge than most
of
> >>those involved in the discussion in here.
> >
> > So what? I thought my earlier disclaimer that it wasn't canon was
> > enough. Just because theywere written by a fan doesn't mean the
> > theories aren't well researched and thought out.
>
> Ooh, if JEyers were here to read that.....he'd be calling you a stupid
> fanboy by now...:-)


Now THERE'S a name from the past !!!!

;' )


--
Covenant
A Man With Far Too Much Time On His Hands
 >> Stay informed about: Aliens: things they didn't ought to have done 

"Keith Hazelwood" <unknown.TakeThisOut@unknown.net> wrote in message
news:8mtgu0hk97rch7rh2d86i25n8r40mm15mq@4ax.com...


> I don't think anyone's denying that the aliens can metabolize regular
> food, simply that they're not restricted to it like we are.


But there is absolutely NO evidence to suggest otherwise.


--
Covenant
A Man With Far Too Much Time On His Hands
 >> Stay informed about: Aliens: things they didn't ought to have done 

"John Redman" <johnphilipredman.RemoveThis@hotmailREMOVETHEBLEEDINOBVIOUS.com> wrote in
message news:cs9ko6$k0u$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> "Kryten" <kryten_droid_obfusticator.RemoveThis@ntlworld.com> wrote
>
> > It's a bit like having landmines that not only destroy enemy personnel
but
> > also create new landmines.
>
> And conveniently die off very rapidly (as the specimen in A1 seems to be
> doing in the shuttle). You send in one alien, and not only does it wipe
out
> the enemy, but it also replaces itself as well. If you timed it right, you
> could then go in and collect the part-formed eggs and the dead alien,
along
> with whatever asset your bioweapon has just depopulated.


Hence, obviously, Ridley's original bio-weapon musings.


--
Covenant
A Man With Far Too Much Time On His Hands
 >> Stay informed about: Aliens: things they didn't ought to have done