[meteorite-list] OT: Listening To Fermi

From: JoshuaTreeMuseum <joshuatreemuseum_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 01:40:10 -0400
Message-ID: <2E2D96D287384D54B227A9CC07D58ADC_at_ET>

Richard,
With all the news reports of organic compounds on Mars and fossils in
Martian meteorites I think the possibility of extraterrestrial life is very
on topic.

Eric,
Your point is well taken. According to the laws of probablity, anything that
happened once could happen again, not matter how unlikely. However I could
use your logic to argue for the existence of the Loch Ness Monster or
Bigfoot, if I chose to believe in such things. This argument was also used
by Dick Cheney to get us into the Iraq War. According to Tricky Dick lack of
evidence did not mean that the weapons of mass destruction did not exist.
Look where that got us.

If life is so common, why is it so conspicuously lacking on the close-by
formerly Earth-like planet Mars? Why was/is Mars not swarming with life?
Wouldn't conditions there have been perfect for life to exist? Yet there's
no evidence for it. No matter how many probes we send up, the results for
the search for ET always come up negative. Eventually you have to conclude
it just ain't there, no matter how much you want it to be. They keep saying,
we aren't looking in the right places, we checked the equator, it wasn't
there, lets check the polar region, nope not there, so now they're saying we
have to dig deep, it must be way underground. It kind of reminds me of ghost
hunting. You believe it's there, but you just can't find it.
And you can always come up with an excuse why you can't find it. Ghost
busting equipment just isn't advanced enough, we need more time to locate
the ghosts, the ghosts have no interest in communicating with us, etc. etc.

Phil Whitmer

-----------------------------------

Hi Phil, I agree completely with your sentiment, and respect your
belief. However I sincerely disagree that your conclusion that
intelligent extra terrestrial life does NOT exist is based on evidenced
fact. There is only a lack of evidence, and the best argument to the
contrary is us. Humans are the biggest single evidence in this universe
that the development of intelligent life forms is possible. (though the
intelligent part is arguable)

I know you believe we're the only intelligent lifeform, and I know you
think it's based on evidence, but it's actually lack of evidence to the
contrary that you are basing your belief on.

You're merely repeating Fermi's "Where are they?" question. Saying show
me... I've already given an analogy that very simply shows Fermi's
Paradox is not a paradox at all because we haven't the information to
quantify the question to begin with.

Lack of evidence is not evidence.

You'll be surprised to know, I don't "believe" in extraterrestrials.
However I can conclude they "most probably" exist because we are "here",
and the chances of them not being "there" (wherever there is) are so
minute it's statistically impossible considering the vastness and the
age of the universe.

We could also phrase this as "when" they were. Or how we "will" be in
1000 years, or 10,000 years. At the rate of technological advancement
(if we don't destroy ourselves first) where will we be in 1000 years?
That is curiously and seriously what I would like to know!

Even so, one can still safely use statistics and numbers to figure the
probability. No, I'm not hanging my alien hat on the Drake equation. I
wouldn't know how to read it any more than I could read War & Peace in
one sitting. I'm saying One must take into account ALL the variables
possible to form a conclusion. Still, probability won't make it so. We
may never know, or we might find ET tomorrow.

I'll agree with Richard in that I believe that the universe is teaming
with life. Intelligent life however is probably extremely rare.

But even that, like time itself is probably relative.

Regards,
Eric
Received on Fri 17 Sep 2010 01:40:10 AM PDT