Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Drake Equation

Expand Messages
  • rlbaty@webtv.net
    ... That is, in part, why I said you were exceptional . Sincerely, Robert Baty
    Message 1 of 4 , Nov 5, 2003
      "Mathewmaury", you wrote, in part:

      > But using the Drake equation seems
      > a weak argument to 'prove' this
      > conclusion. I do not say to throw the
      > argument away, but it seems to lack
      > force.

      That is, in part, why I said you were "exceptional".

      Sincerely,
      Robert Baty
    • Todd S. Greene
      ... [snip] ... Hi, Mat. Exactly! Thank you for repeating, in different words, what I have already pointed out. The premise of David s argument that
      Message 2 of 4 , Nov 6, 2003
        --- In Maury_and_Baty, "Mathew Maury" wrote (post #2725):
        > --- Robert Baty wrote:
        [snip]
        >> As to the actual force of your argument, I haven't noticed any.
        >> Are you talking about all that stuff about the "Drake Equation"?
        >
        > The force of the argument seems obvious to David. But Robert and
        > Todd do not see it. This seems the argument David presents:
        > Evolutionary parameters in the Drake equation predict Aliens
        > will play the radio. We have not heard their radio.
        >
        > Is there a single conclusion to be drawn? No! Either the
        > Aliens do not exist. Or they prefer to listen to CDs. Or
        > some parameter in the equation is wrong. Or we have not been
        > listening hard enough.
        >
        > There are many parameters in this Drake equation. David
        > tries to force the conclusion 'the parameter that says
        > evolution happens is wrong.' But this is not the only
        > conclusion. If another parameter is wrong, then the result
        > would be the same (no alien boombox).
        >
        > My opinion is that there is no alien boombox because there
        > are no aliens because evolution does not happen. But using
        > the Drake equation seems a weak argument to 'prove' this
        > conclusion. I do not say to throw the argument away, but it
        > seems to lack force.

        Hi, Mat.

        Exactly!

        Thank you for repeating, in different words, what I have already
        pointed out. The premise of David's argument that "Evolutionary
        parameters in the Drake equation predict Aliens will play the radio"
        is a false premise. When the premise of an argument is wrong, it has
        no force. I hope that your explanation of this is clearer to David
        than mine has apparently been.

        Thank you,
        Todd S. Greene
        http://www.creationism.cc/
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.