[meteorite-list] Alien Contact Predicted

From: Phil Whitmer <prairiecactus_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 10:40:09 -0400
Message-ID: <18FE14665E964495A7581FA3190FB201_at_whitmerjbqtim1>

The Drake Equation is a prime example of mental masuturbation. It proves
absolutely nothing. How can an equation prove anything when none of the
variables are known with any certainity? As Rob points out, one zero
nullifies the whole silly thing. How about Ne; the number of known Earth
like planets supporting life=0. If you want dumb equations, the
creationists have a bunch of them that proves there is exactly one planet
that supports life. I can make up an equation that proves the existence of
mermaids, bigfoot, Nessie, unicorns, dragons, what imaginary being do you
want to believe in? I'll write a formula to prove it's existence. I'll be
easy, because I already know that life begets life. The Drake Equation
misses the key concept in the alien debate; mainly how does abiogenesis
occur? How does non living matter become alive? Once we figure out the
mechanics of this most basic problem, then we can extrapolate about whether
this seemingly miraculous event could happen more than once. If you're going
to believe in spontaneous generation on other planets, you had better
understand how it happened here first. Someone has to explain to me how
those left handed isomer amino acids from meteorites organized themselves
into living, self replicating DNA. (See this thread is related to
meteorites!)

Crichton summed it up best at a lecture at Caltech :
The problem, of course, is that none of the terms can be known, and most
cannot even be estimated. The only way to work the equation is to fill in
with guesses. [...] As a result, the Drake equation can have any value from
"billions and billions" to zero. An expression that can mean anything means
nothing. Speaking precisely, the Drake equation is literally meaningless...

And puhleez, don't give me that stupid absence of evidence argument, it
didn't hold water when Rumsfeld used it for imaginary WMDs, and it doesn't
justify the belief in phantasmagorical alien creatures.

Mental masturbation is fun, but don't confuse it with real science!

>From the Urban Dictionary:

Mental masturbation:

1. The act of engaging in useless yet intellectually stimulating
conversation, usually as an excuse to avoid taking constructive action in
your life.

2. The act of engaging in intelligent and interesting conversation purely
for the enjoyment of your own greatness and individuality. Subjects range
from obscure lp's to cultural movements in preindustrial societies. Either
delivered through grand monlogues or subtle conversation orientation, it
links large words and random references resulting in nothing acually being
communicated.

3. Overly intensive self gratifying procrastination, thought and
contemplation for a subject not necessarily warranting such effort.


4. The pretense of superior knowledge or intelligence by claiming
conjecture, theory, feeling or opinion as fact.

5. The act of engaging in impractical/nonproductive mental exercise /
thinkings / writings / etc., through which a practitioner only comforts
oneself mentally. Such acts don't lead to any constructive results what so
ever in the real world; some might even imagine oneself being transformed
into superman, or simply the opposite sex, etc.
In short, it's just bs/crap.

Phil Whitmer
Received on Fri 28 Aug 2009 10:40:09 AM PDT