Given a whole bunch of assumptions, none of which have been proven. Thirty years ago, we thought interstellar travel would be relatively easy to accomplish. Bussard ramjets, Orion nuclear pulse propulsion, etc. Most of these ideas have turned out to be completely impractical. What we do know is that it takes an immense amount of energy to move between stars at anything remotely close to light speed, and if you’re not going a significant fraction of lightspeed, it’s going to take centuries. This is an enormous undertaking we as a species aren’t even close to being able to make.
Spreading to multiple star systems, in terms of establishing self-supporting colonies of the species, is something we can only guess at how to accomplish. We still don’t know how many habitable planets there are, or how far apart they are. If there is only one habitable planet for a species on average every 1000 light-years, establishing colonies would be an extremely daunting task.
Not at all. It seems increasingly likely that life is quite common in the universe, but we still don’t have a clue what it takes for intelligent life to evolve. Consider that after four billion years of evolution, only one species on this planet evolved to the point of being able to send radio waves into space. And all it would have taken would have been for one good asteroid strike in the last million years or so, or a major change in solar output, or the solar system passing through a dense cloud of gas, and our evolutionary chain could have been wiped out. We survived by the tiniest of threads.
You can count down the ways in which the Earth might be very special indeed for the formation of intelligent life:
-
We have a stable sun
-
We are in an arm of the galaxy that is far enough away from the center that radiation is low enough for us to survive and matter density low enough that the sun and planets would be undisturbed for long periods of time.
-
We have a Jupiter-sized planet in just the right place to sweep out cosmic debris.
-
We have a large moon to create tides, and a tilt to our axis to give us seasons.
-
We managed to go four billion years without a single ecosystem destroying collision.
-
Our sun stayed stable enough for those billions of years to not fry or freeze life on the planet.
-
We avoided runaway greenhouses or other potential ecological disasters.
-
The dinosaurs were wiped out by a large impact, allowing mammals to thrive.
And the list goes on. We still have the vaguest of notions of just how fragile our planet is, and just how unlikely the chain of events were that got us to this point. That’s because we only have a single data point. That’s why SETI is so important.
This is a real possibility as well. Think of the flap over the new Large Hadron Collider and black holes. That concern was overwrought, but as we experiment with increasingly powerful energies and manipulate matter in increasingly sophisticated manner, perhaps we begin to walk a minefield of poorly understood forces just waiting for us to do exactly the wrong thing.
The universe has been around a long time, but we needed a few generations of stars to come and go to create the heavy elements we need for complex life. So we’re not that far from the theoretical start of the possibility of life, I’d think. I also think we have to consider this possibility - especially in conjunction with the notion that intelligent life may be quite rare. Let’s say a universe by this time should on average have 100 intelligent species - if so, it’s not that wildly unlikely that we’re the first.
I think this is the weakest argument of all. It’s more science fiction than anything else.
My gut feeling is that it’s a combination of all of the above except #4: Intelligent life is reasonably rare, it’s extremely difficult to move out of your solar system, it’s hard to maintain a technological culture long enough to create the technology needed to range out into the universe, and even if you do, it would take a very, very long time to spread out to the point where your species is essentially everywhere.