Quote:
Originally Posted by 3rdvogon
There is nothing anthropocentric about saying that a species simply has not advanced sufficiently to indulge in interstellar travel - either they have achieved the necessary level of technology or they have not. If not then they are not going to be around here any time soon.
As for saying they have not "budgeted" for it whilst I may be using a human fiscal expression that is simply a "shorthand" way of stating the obvious that interstellar travel will require the allocation of resources (probably considerable resources) regardless of the type of species and whatever passes for culture among them. Starships don't come for free, regardless of whether you are humanoid, insectoid, hive intelligence or any other type of multi-cellular lifeform. Therefore it is quite possible that any such species may well choose to use those resources for other purposes (purposes that we humans might find difficult to comprehend) than sending some of its biological components on a journey of many light years. There is nothing anthropocentric about that either, just that for any complex organism considering insterstellar colonisation "there is no free lunch".
|
Fine, though this still doesn't change the fact that your starting assumption- "You cannot apply the Fermi Paradox as proof that there are lots of spacefaring species but they just decide to avoid contact with us." - was wrong.
Did I apply it as "proof" of anything or was I asking someone else's opinion as to whether or not it too constituted an "assumption with little basis?"
__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill
|