It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by hermantinkly
basically anyone who thinks diffirently from you should just be ignored?
hawking is giving his musings on the fermi paradox. Its an excercise in logical thought. If you dont like thinking critically or logically the subject may not be for you.
Instead of just bashing why dont you come up with reasons why intelligent life is common in our galaxy. Or why the earth hasnt been colonized in the last 500 million years, why we have found no powerfull "beacon" signals or why arnt we swarmed with alien probes.
Intelligent people make counter arguements they dont just bury their heads in the sand.
Originally posted by tezzajw
Originally posted by kcfusion
Not Really Page. To compare it to your analogy, the chances of pulling 5 straight flushes in consecutive hands INCREASES the more hands you play. So comparing it to the Universe you would have to play bazillions of hands, meaning that you'll probably at least make your 5 straight flushes consecutively many many times!
Not really. You're falling for a phenomenon known as the 'Gambler's Fallacy'. Look it up, many people have gone broke believing it.
Think of it in simple terms where a gambler is waiting for a long string of reds to appear on a roulette wheel. Convinced that a black will soon occur, the gambler begins betting on black, increasing his bets to cover his losses, until a black occurs. The longest run of one colour that I saw on a roulette wheel was 27 reds in a row. It made a few people betting black very unhappy when they started betting after the tenth red or so. Fun to watch.
Cards do not have a memory. Each trial is independent of the trial before it. The chances of obtaining five straight flushes in a row, will be the same for any set of five hands dealt, regardless of what has already transpired.
In any case, comparing known theoretical probability models, such as dealing cards, is not an appropriate comparison to 'guessing' how much intelligent life there could be in the Universe.
[edit on 11-7-2009 by tezzajw]
Originally posted by yeti101
unfortunately we only have 1 data point for life in the universe. However 1 data point is better than none. To ignore it is just burying your head in the sand.
Originally posted by yeti101
I would be delighted if the data from earth were diffirent. If it was and it showed tech intelligence is common i would be saying something very diffirent and so would you. You would be on the earth evidence like a fat man on smarties. Your "i dont know answer" would be right out the window even when you still only have 1 data point.
Originally posted by yeti101
I'm sure he would agree that is the case. But it would be a very boring conversation if evrybody just said that wouldnt it? Your only angry becuase his position isnt one you want to hear. If he said ETI is common you'd be nodding in agreement.
Originally posted by yeti101
people take on the fermi paradox all the time. Your saying we shouldnt even talk about it becuase of insufficient data?
Not really. You're falling for a phenomenon known as the 'Gambler's Fallacy'. Look it up, many people have gone broke believing it.
The infinite monkey theorem states that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will almost surely type a given text, such as the complete works of William Shakespeare.