Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: MHGinTN

So what I am saying is that out of 100 billion trillion worlds what % have to have life for it to be “plentiful”?

We are 100 years away from going to the stars. Think about those that went to the stars a billion years ago, million years ago, thousand years ago.

People like Ross can’t accept the truth because of their egos.

BTW, what makes people think these advanced civilization even use radio waves that would reach us now. They could have passed by 100 years ago and gone undetected or are still a millions away from getting here.

John


33 posted on 03/24/2008 8:26:29 AM PDT by Diggity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: Diggity; betty boop; Alamo-Girl; hosepipe; Southack; SunkenCiv; AntiKev; Tennessee Nana; ...
Um, Dr Ross is an astrophysicist. Perhaps what you have not plugged into your calculus is the very narrow window of conditions (and timing is a major factor) necessary for higher life forms to develop on a planet with rudimentary life on it, and to go to the level of contemplative life (intelligent seekers) is even more astonishing.

It became popular to use statistics (the Drake equation), without applied science, and the notion that the odds are in favor of life popping up all over the universe was popularized. Applying science methods to 'false' the statistical vagaries leads to a very different set of conclusions.

Here's one factor --merely one of more than a hundred factors-- about the fundamental necessities for life to arise and reach multicellular expression and eventually intelligent life investigating the universe: that star which exploded half way across the universe likely ended whatever cycle was leading to life evolving on any planet in that galaxy where the star arose; but the galaxy where that star existed was not likely to have been a suitable galaxy for the rise of life conditions on any planet around any star in that galaxy because the 'star formation/generation/demise' process was too violent that many billions of years ago in any galaxy generating such massive, short-lived stars, and those conditions were the norm for the universe of that far back in time; it was those violent rapid star generator galaxies which eventually seeded the galaxies with sufficient heavier elements to sustain the processes for generating life.

Put that notion together with the distances galaxies were apart back when that galaxy generated that now exploded star, and you see that the violence of the universe 'back then' was such that life sustaining planets with 500 million year 'quiet periods' without massive gamma ray bombardments was not likely, not even predictable.

Please, before poo pooing the work of folks at reasons.org go and do some reading and listening. Dr. Ross has several books now available to help you along in this discovery process. I can tell you, the information was an eye opener for me.

34 posted on 03/24/2008 9:51:44 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

To: Diggity
Think about those that went to the stars a billion years ago, million years ago, thousand years ago.

They didn't. If they did then there would be evidence of their stellar and galatic level engineering visible even today. Once you get to a mature interstellar culture the species becomes impossible to erdicate. Some trace of it will ALWAYS survive.

Multiply that existence across deep time and something should have generated some kind of ultra-engineering visible at interstellar distances.

63 posted on 03/24/2008 12:39:31 PM PDT by Centurion2000 (su - | echo "All your " | chown -740 us ./base | kill -9 | cd / | rm -r | echo "belong to us")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson