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

Re: Star suburb' is des res for aliens

Expand Messages
  • Todd S. Greene
    ... [snip] ... Hi, David, you inveterate misrepresenter, you! Unlike you - who denies, for example, that the SN1987A explosion ever really happened (since it
    Message 1 of 2 , Jan 8, 2004
      --- In Maury_and_Baty, David Willis wrote (post #3035):
      >>> 'Star suburb' is des res for aliens
      >>> Tim Radford, science editor
      >>> Friday January 2, 2004
      >>> The Guardian
      >> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1114837,00.html
      > David Willis here,
      > Yes, as this scientist can see, there is indeed a "sobering"
      > implication from the fact that there SHOULD be sounds from other
      > civs out there, but there are not. He can see the implication that
      > Todd and Robert have clenched their eyes tightly shut from seeing.

      Hi, David, you inveterate misrepresenter, you!

      Unlike you - who denies, for example, that the SN1987A explosion ever
      really happened (since it took place about 168,000 years ago) even
      though we witnessed the stellar explosion - I haven't clenched my
      eyes shut from seeing what there is to see!

      > I guess what is meant by "The bad news is that they are on average
      > a billion years older than the sun" is that means that there has
      > been plenty of time for advanced civilizations to have gotten a
      > jump on OUR civ so as to have allowed us to expect to have heard
      > from them already, but still there is no a peep from them. They
      > identify a region of our galaxy which is 25,000 ly from the
      > center (our galaxy is about 100,000 ly across) where they say
      > there are plenty of stars that are likely to have planets capable
      > of supporting life...they say about 10% of ALL the stars in the
      > galaxy do. That's 10% of 100 BILLION stars!

      Of course, this wouldn't be the first time that an overestimate of
      this kind has been made.

      > The fact that we cannot hear any sounds from other civs cannot be
      > rationally explained by the idea (proferred by someone on this
      > list, maybe Todd) that we just happen to be the first...since our
      > sun is (supposedly) a relative newcomer, so many other stars have
      > been around longer with many other life-supportable planets. If
      > ANY of those 10% of stars in this zone which are a billion years
      > ahead of ours had developed ETI civs, we should have heard from
      > them by now, if they had started using radio more than 50,000
      > years ago. Our solar system is about 75,000 ly from the other edge
      > of the galaxy, so that ring of the most likely stars is right in
      > our neighborhood on this side of the galaxy and no more than
      > 50,000 ly from us on the other side of the center of the galaxy.
      > There should be PLENTY of places from whence we could be hearing
      > radio signals...IF atheistic abiogenesis and evolution is true.
      > But it is not.

      Hmmm... Life existed on our planet for billions of years before any
      species came along that was capable of making advanced technology,
      and this itself was due to a number of historical contingencies. And
      in astronomical observation of our galaxy we have actually observed 0
      (zero) Earth-like planets (we don't even have the technology to do
      any kind of survey as this). Maybe we are the first technology-
      producing life form in our galaxy. Maybe not. Who knows?

      At least you didn't try to misrepresent the Drake Equation in this
      post, as has been your habit previously.

      It's kind of fun watching you build sandcastle arguments in the air
      of ignorance!

      Todd Greene
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.