Formerly known as The Journal For the Study of Fairies and Unicorns.

The problem with the so-called Drake Equation isn't the results that come fromit, but the fact that we don't know the numbers to plug into the front end. The number that get used are always a reflection of the prejudices of the person using the equation.

For example, his value for f-sub-c is flawed. He cites multiple occurance of agriculture to support the contention that "civilizations" are common.Yet none of those so-called civilizations were ever capable of being detected at any astronomical distance, or detecting other civilizations. The Inca weren't even detectable at a range of a few hundred miles until Pizarro encountered and conquered them. Once could make the argument that we (Western Civ.) barely qualify, so the current evidence is that f-sub-c is practically zero. Not his "large".

And it's downhill from there. This from a guy who "teaches a seminar on Scientific Thinking and Speculation". Garbage In, Gospel Out.

Fermi nailed it: "So, where are they." The null hypothesis must be zero, and nothing that has happened during the last 60 years has moved that meter.

All we know about the Drake equation is that its value is greater than or equal to one. Everything else is mere speculation, since we have no empirical evidence.

Posted by: jd watson at October 20, 2005 4:44 AM

I've always been suspect of the notion that alien civilizations must be more advanced. Well, if they visit yeah, but is it so difficult that we might be ahead of everyone else?

RC:

Of course we'd be at the pinnacle of creation....

jd:

You think.

RC: Of course we could be, but then there goes all of the romance out of the story of alien visitors, and space-battle fleets, and all the fun and enjoyable stuff of science fiction.

Methinks these gentlemen are still little boys with their atom blaster pistols, preparing for that rocket ship ride to the Gamma Quadrant to battle the evil Quadroos for control of the galaxy.

In regards to Fermi... Perhaps the reason we haven't heard from anybody else is because smart species don't draw attention to themselves. As Charles Pellegrino says in his novel "The Killing Star":

1. Any species will place its own survival before that of a different species.

2. Any species that has made it to the top on its planet of origin will be intelligent, alert, aggressive, and ruthless when necessary.

3. They will assume that the first two rules apply to us.

So therefore if you find another species you _must_ destroy them because if they find you instead they might do it to you. Do unto others before they do unto you.

Oh and building an anti-matter rocket? Not too big of a deal. Its making the anti-matter which is the killer! However just covering Mercury with solar panels to generate the power needed should do the trick.

Yes, but how likely is it that alien civilizations get past a nuclear age without wiping themselves out or a Western European-like decline in population. Do aliens believe in God?

rps:

Sure, they're hiding, the way the Conquistadores hid from the Indians....

Mikey:
Damn straight! To paraphrase Arthur Clarke, all creative human activity is a form of play. I'm mentoring a group of over a dozen teenagers who are building and launching model rockets and their enthusiasm and enjoyment is tremendous. Spaceships are fun, and if there's a Martian princess waiting at the end of the trip, so much the better.

OJ's made some recent posts about myths and their importance (Mythmatch, etc.). Science fiction is the mythology of engineers. And in the process of pursuing their dreams, they've already changed the world past imagining.

OJ:
I'm not sure if Astrobiology is humor or hubris.

With respect to the Drake equation:
All models are wrong, some models are useful. In itself, the Drake equation is useless, but it did lead to some fruitful ideas on how to search for intelligence using radio telescopes. Quite a few radio astronomy discoveries are indirectly due to the effect of Drake's model. For example, the first detected quasars were tagged "LGM" for Little Green Men and were suspected to be lighthouses of the spaceways. If SETI is successful, Drake's equation will be considered brilliant. If not, it's just another useless model.

Frank Drake himself has said on numerous occasions that the Equation is only a handy way to organize our ignorance. Since the Equation, devoted his professional lifetime to finding out, one way or another, and rigorously applying the scientific method to weeding out the spurious and uncorroborated data (so far, all of it). If he and his successors get to the point (maybe in 100 years) that the lack of evidence really starts to look like the evidence of lack, they may just have to quit. If they "fail" to find anything, then they've established a vital baseline for subsequent science to use in assessing the reality of humans in the galaxy. Smart guys, spitting spitwads from the sidelines who were "right all along", on the other hand, would have contributed exactly jack.