Quote:
Originally Posted by PiracyPitbull
I disagree.
The only people it's not a mathematical certainty to would be:
1) Those that can't grasp for whatever reason that a percent of life in whatever form, in whatever environment and therefore potentially intelligent life to whatever degree are instances that are statistically in the trillions universally.
2) Those that can grasp the instances but also know it absolutely can not be currently proven in anyway shape or form, not where they would be prepared to hang their career hat on it and certainly not without being assaulted from every angle by those who can't comprehend that position unless a spaceship lands on the Whitehouse lawn of course.
The scale of the universe is inconvenient and humankind's best efforts considering the magnitude of the task can only be described as a primitive foray into the first few feet of a 93 billion light year diameter expanse. This bodes well for a negative argument, which is naturally ridiculous on a universal level. Or at best a positive argument where those on that side of the fence are only brave enough to admit to "possibilities" lest they wish to be ridiculed by small mindedness.
|
the people it's not a mathematical certainty to are astrobiologists, people who are academically trained in 2, if not 3 of the most challenging disciplines of science- astrophysics, biology and chemistry. PHD educated.
certainty in math requires rigorous proof. To assume simply because life evolved here + Drake's equation = life elsewhere is not based on any math or any certainty. it's all probability. pointed out earlier in this thread, other intelligent advanced life may simply not be there yet, or was there and is long gone. whichever way, we could very well be completely alone.