look what this idiotic "scientist" (if ever he was one) said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7351428.stm

look what this idiotic "scientist" (if ever he was one) said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7351428.stm

. . .though he's NOT ruling that factor out completely - which is a 'matter of fact' regarding OUR reason's for being here - Contributing to the Search for the ETI

---

BOINC Wiki . . .

Science Status Page . . .

Odd. That kinda sounds like a scientists arguing in favor of Creationism....

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome

Odd. That kinda sounds like a scientists arguing in favor of Creationism....

Huh? How exactly did you come to that conclusion??


And what exactly is "idiotic" about what Andrew Watson is saying?? Everything he said seems completely reasonable.

meh,just a killjoy egghead

---

Scorpions - Wind Of Change

meh,just a killjoy egghead

lol agreed lol

I think you guys are misinterpreting what he said;

"The view that evolution involves a predictable progression, such that the emergence of intelligence is inevitable, is today generally considered to be overly anthropocentric.

"Any directionality to evolution; and, in general, the kind of outcome seen on Earth may be vanishingly unlikely.

"On the other hand, the rapid establishment of life on Earth after its formation may indicate that simple microbial life is relatively common."

All of that is 100% reasonable.

He thinks the chance of intelligence evolving within the lifespan of a habitable planet is 0.01%, I actually think it's much MUCH lower than that; I guessed 0.0001% (1 in 1 million) in my Drake Equation thread
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=46028
...and I still came up with 252 transmitting civilizations in the Milky Way galaxy alone.

0.01%, those are decent odds in a galaxy of 200-600 billion stars.

I like those odds...They don't seem unreasonable to me...It was never going to be an easy search.

---

PROUD TO BE TFFE!

A day is a rotation of the Earth. As far as creationism is concerned, maybe the first days spanned 4.5 billion years. Maybe when God created the Earth He made it spin just once in a billion years. Maybe there could be some reconciliation between creationism and evolution. Just an idea.

---

Maybe there could be some reconciliation between creationism and evolution. Just an idea.

That's not the same as "Creationism".

There are plenty of scientists working in fields closely tied to evolution, like biology and genetics, who are faithful Christians and fully accept the Bible as the word of God while seeing no disparity between the Bible and evolution. Perhaps they rationalize the "days" of creation the same way; that's for each person to reconcile their faith with the findings of science in whatever way satisfies their soul.

That's not the same as modern "Creationism".


And anyway this article has NOTHING to do with Creationism...I have no idea how that topic even got into this thread...

Daddio has his opinion on the matter at hand.

The article seems very credible to me. And Dr Watson's research seems to comply with any search that mankind has carried out so far, including SETI@home. It seems that he is not knocking the idea of other intelligent life, he's just trying to put a more realistic figure on it.

If there is intelligent life out there transmitting radio signals, then we should be able to detect it today. There is no waiting game. The only waiting game we are playing is waiting for electronic technology to advance to a stage where we can detect these weak transmissions that are dispersing in space the further they travel.

I also think the science community here on earth are in general agreement that its better to not broadcast where you live in space because you don't know if other intelligence is hostile or not. So if we are staying quite, then other intelligent life will be doing the same thing!

John.

{EDIT} Hi Bill :)

---

The article seems very credible to me. And Dr Watson's research seems to comply with any search that mankind has carried out so far, including SETI@home. It seems that he is not knocking the idea of other intelligent life, he's just trying to put a more realistic figure on it.

If there is intelligent life out there transmitting radio signals, then we should be able to detect it today. There is no waiting game. The only waiting game we are playing is waiting for electronic technology to advance to a stage where we can detect these weak transmissions that are dispersing in space the further they travel.

I also think the science community here on earth are in general agreement that its better to not broadcast where you live in space because you don't know if other intelligence is hostile or not. So if we are staying quite, then other intelligent life will be doing the same thing!

John.

{EDIT} Hi Bill :)

Yes, My son.

I suspect that we will soon learn that there doesn't appear to be "habitable" planets within 10 light years and maybe at far greater distances. If every alien civilization is not advertising their existence via a beacon then we would have to learn of them from broadcasts or radar or the like. This may not be feasible even within 10- 100 light years, now or ever.

So I may soon be at the conclusion that if everyone is silent; then, we will never know of another galactic civilization, and SETI makes little sense.

I believe we and others, if they exist, will establish a beacon--once we realize we are at least 100 light years from anyone, we will lose our fear of invasion with hostile intent.

How about some comments.

---

The article seems very credible to me. And Dr Watson's research seems to comply with any search that mankind has carried out so far, including SETI@home. It seems that he is not knocking the idea of other intelligent life, he's just trying to put a more realistic figure on it.

If there is intelligent life out there transmitting radio signals, then we should be able to detect it today. There is no waiting game. The only waiting game we are playing is waiting for electronic technology to advance to a stage where we can detect these weak transmissions that are dispersing in space the further they travel.

I also think the science community here on earth are in general agreement that its better to not broadcast where you live in space because you don't know if other intelligence is hostile or not. So if we are staying quite, then other intelligent life will be doing the same thing!

John.

{EDIT} Hi Bill :)

Yes, My son.

I suspect that we will soon learn that there doesn't appear to be "habitable" planets within 10 light years and maybe at far greater distances. If every alien civilization is not advertising their existence via a beacon then we would have to learn of them from broadcasts or radar or the like. This may not be feasible even within 10- 100 light years, now or ever.

So I may soon be at the conclusion that if everyone is silent; then, we will never know of another galactic civilization, and SETI makes little sense.

I believe we and others, if they exist, will establish a beacon--once we realize we are at least 100 light years from anyone, we will lose our fear of invasion with hostile intent.

How about some comments.

I don't know Bill. I'm of the view that we need to stay quiet, at least until we have found one other intelligent civilisation and we know they are not hostile.

I continue running SETI@home, not because i think it currently has a formula for successful detection, but because i think it will learn from experience and progress into something that will succeed in detecting life.

---

Daddio has his opinion on the matter at hand.

---

Account frozen...

This book is a must-read for anyone interested in this subject.

Its premise is that life may be more common than expected in the universe (based on the varieties and habitats of extremophilic organisms on Earth) but that complex and especially intelligent life is very rare.

I read it when it was published (and even worked it into my profile). It's well-presented and compelling, but, as I also note in my profile, one discovery can overturn a thousand hypotheses. So I've come back to SETI@Home to keep up the search after receiving the recent e-mail indicating a shortage of volunteers.

(Note that one of the scientists that the authors consulted is an ID proponent but there's nothing but science in this book. The acknowledgment doesn't appear in the Google preview.)

I don't think that there's anything idiotic about suggesting that complex life may be rare. We have only one example of life anywhere, so it's an open question.

---

Opinions are like A$$*#@%S, Everybody has one and most of them STINK. 8-P

---

I Desire Peace and Justice, Jim Scott (Mod-Ret.)

this article has NOTHING to do with Creationism...I have no idea how that topic even got into this thread...

Odd as this may sound, our resident reaper is to blame... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

this article has NOTHING to do with Creationism...I have no idea how that topic even got into this thread...

Odd as this may sound, our resident reaper is to blame... ;)

Oh please....

Perhaps " Creationism " wasn't the proper word to use. It sounds like more of " Intelligent Design ".

Saying that things had to be a certain way, and that it's unlikely that it happened elsewhere...sure sounds like an argument for intelligent design to me.

---

Air Cold, the blade stops;
from silent stone,
Death is preordained

Calm Chaos Forums : Everyone Welcome

Saying that things had to be a certain way, and that it's unlikely that it happened elsewhere...sure sounds like an argument for intelligent design to me.

Not at all. Saying that intelligent life is impossible without some sort of outside assistance or that Earth was somehow deliberately engineered for us would be, but I don't see that's been even implied.

---