Yes. That is what I’m saying. In this case it’s been fueled by a sort of pseudo science pioneered by Frank Drake. He formulated the, now famous, Drake equation. Essentially, when coupled with the enormous estimate of the number of star systems and planets in the universe, a sort of magic probability factor pops out to suggests that, given the huge numbers involved there “must” be hundreds or thousands of worlds with intelligent life out there. This conclusion is supported by Carl Sagan and many other reputable scientists… The problem is that it’s difficult for scientists outside their discipline (and non scientists) to look at theories like this and make an objective assessment, so when someone like Drake or Sagan endorse a particular idea, it tends to become accepted without question.
Gimme a break. Science works on money. Evidence is just one of those details that the people with the money insist on seeing. Evidence is easy to manufacture or "interpret out "of the data at hand. There are countless scientific endevors that operate on little or no evidence. Many of them rely on the same sort of “probability trick” of using huge numbers and incalculable equations as justification.
Am I being overly cynical??? Of course, but only because I think you were being overly naive.
Ahh. but this example only amplifies my point. How long would you search for your particle if your theory suggests that only one of them is likely to exist in each cubic parsec of space and the particle only has a lifetime of a few seconds? For some problems, the duration of the search SHOULD be zero.
No. That’s not how science works. You only rethink your theories when you have direct, testable evidence to the contrary. In the mean time, you may adjust some of the variable assumptions in the Drake equation to explain why it’s taking so long…
I hate to quote Micheal Crichton, since I’ve been pulled up on it before, but was there any truth to the meeting described in his book Sphere, in which a conference of top astrophysicists couldn’t decypher the pulsar map, before they were told what it was?
Been a long time since I read Sphere, but my very hazy recollection was that it was not the pulsar map, but the Arecibo message, which is considerably more cryptic . . . and I have no clue whether he was relating an actual event, or if the story was entirely fictional.
In case anyone wonders what we’re going on about, here’s the Pioneer plaque with the pulsar map, and the Voyager Golden Record. I see that the Voyagers didn’t have the nudie engravings, just images encoded on the Record itself, so scratch “Voyager” in my previous post, and put in “Pioneer,” if you please.
<nitpick>
Submarines don’t transmit ELF signals. They only receive them. The U.S. uses two transmitting antennas, one in Wisconsin and the other in Michigan. The transmitters are miles long.
</nitpick>
Here’s some of what Carl Sagan had to say about extraterrestrial intelligence in Pale Blue Dot, one of his last books:
Do you actually have anything you could cite, by Sagan or Drake or some other reputable scientist, proclaiming a belief in the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence as an article of faith? Or does being a cynic mean getting to make assertions without having to bother with actual evidence?