Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei
What is so fundamentally flawed with that arguement will? In the context of this discussion it is seemingly the most viable. Have you heard of the Drake equation? X amount of planets in our solar system. X amount has stars similar to our own. X amount are in similar proximity as earth is to her sun. X amount has/had the basic starting conditions. X amount of planets fostered tie foundation of life. X amount of life took. X amount grew. X amount grew intelligent. I am forgetful of the exact equation, but the point remains. IN our galaxy of some 200 billion stars, it is seemingly mathimatically improbable (impossible being to strong a word) for there to no intelligent life else where.
|
I know all about the Drake equation. It calculates the number of technological civilizations we should expect to find in our galaxy by multiplying a small amount of estimated quantities and probabilities. Good old SETI scientists assume so much that it makes my head spin. The funniest thing is that I saw all sorts of students passing their astro classes by applying DE to the Martian Meteroite. Guess what students and teachers: they have not proven that meteor was a meteor at all, they certianly have not proven that it was from Mars, and they haven't proven that the critters in it were actually critters at all.
Let me put it this way: our understanding of the universe is insignificant. Our understanding of the variables that can create life (note: I don't just mean life here on Earth, but life et all) is basically nothing. Could hydrogen based life forms exist? No one on Earth has any idea. Could life forms life on solar waves? Pfft, we have no idea. Could life exist in a vaccume? You tell me. We don't have life from other planets to compare to our own, so therefore we have nothing to compare our planet to. Because there are no numbers to put in the equation when it comes to actual life, there is no way that anyone - scientist or not - can say with any credibility that there is intelligent life elsewhere. Sure there could be, but based on what we know now, there is no way to say yes or no. Bottom line:
life exists on Earth, however that fact does not give us any likelyhood of life elsewhere. It is entirely possible that life is a fluke that only developed on one planet, in one solar system, in one galaxy, and in one universe. It could be that the variables needed to make life are so unlikely that our existence is a fluke. There is no way to know because we only have a tiny part of the whole picture. To assume that small part of the picture has all the answers is quite an assumption.
I can't tell you how many times I've said this to people. I suspect that the "math says" explaination is more based in hope than math.
Edit: I'm not a fan of the Fermi Paradox aswell, as it generalizes and assumes just as much as DE.