I, A.DIM, think ETi is plentiful in the universe.

Until there is more than a single example of Life, anyone reading my posts should understand that these are simply opinions.

If I come across as matter of fact, please refer back to this thread for clarity.

Much obliged!

__________________
"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

I understand the sentiment, and in a way your frustration, but I disagree. IMO, placing a CYP post and continuing to be ambiguous in your ETI statements is no substitute for clarity while posting. Simply seperate speculation from fact, and ATM from mainstream, and I don't see the problem. I don't see this post/thread as a valid cover for continued posting in the same style. It needs to be differentiated per post, in every post. I think Moose sums it up nicely:

"The problem, A.DIM, is your sloppy use of language. You can't say "It is certain that" and claim that's an opinion. It's an assertion of fact. Assertions of fact carry certain evidentiary responsibilities. Responsibilities you're not meeting (and in many cases, cannot possibly meet).

So yes, you should say "I think" and "IMO" where you're indicating a personal preference, opinion, interpretation, etc. When stating fact, you should provide evidence. You should say what you mean as clearly as you can. Language is important, A.DIM. Communication skills on a written medium such as the Internet are everything."

__________________
"I have this theory that the Apollo missions were faked when NASA found out that general relativity was wrong because the Earth was expanding due to the Sun's iron core being influenced by magnetic waves from the electric universe after being perturbed by Planet X and thereby causing global warming. Where should I start a thread about this?" ~ ToSeek

"Those are the people that wonder how a thermos knows whether to keep something hot or keep something cold." ~ NeoWatcher

So I should've said, "According to those scientists involved in the search for ET who think it will be found in the next 20-30yrs, I will most certainly be alive when it is." ??


Sorry Serentiude, but I disagree that when discussing ET one should qualify each statement with IMO or I think.

Of course we don't know at this point.

If we did, there'd be no debate!

__________________
"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

I see nothing wrong with that. "These scientists [link] believe they will find ET withing 20-30 years. I will most certainly be alive to see that, according to their prediciton."

What is wrong with that statement?

I'm sorry you disagree. But when one presents a chronic problem of presenting opinion as fact, and presenting pseudo-science such as Ancient Astronauts, etc... into discussions, I think it is a wise policy to follow. It simply saves you alot of trouble in the long run, methinks. Feel free to disagree, though. This is by no means a warning or ruling of any kind - it is merely opinion. Follow it or not at your want. I merely state it because I think it would save you trouble in the long run.

And I know less than most, likely. These debates are great, and you add a certain amount of spice. I merely think more careful wording on your part likely would save trouble down the road. Follow my advice or not at your discretion, though. As stated above, this is merely opinion only

__________________
"I have this theory that the Apollo missions were faked when NASA found out that general relativity was wrong because the Earth was expanding due to the Sun's iron core being influenced by magnetic waves from the electric universe after being perturbed by Planet X and thereby causing global warming. Where should I start a thread about this?" ~ ToSeek

"Those are the people that wonder how a thermos knows whether to keep something hot or keep something cold." ~ NeoWatcher

This is a similarly sloppy claim, specifically the words "most certainly". It isn't. It's within a normal human lifespan, and it's fair to say it's within your life expectancy, but there's no such thing as certainty (and certainly not "most certainly") you'll live to be a part of it. It may sound pedantic, but one of my first bosses explained: "God forbid," (he was devoutly religious) "you might get hit by a bus tomorrow. We crosstrain and document everything, just in case."

More recently, I've used the same explanation (almost, but not quite verbatim) with some of my newer coworkers when I was the sole prog on site.

Sloppy language means sloppy ideas.

Learn to hedge your bets. The point of science, when properly done, is that when we finally commit to an assertion, after all of the appropriate work's been done (no slacking), we can (finally) be certain it's the truth. If you're parrotting anything from anyone, you're doing it wrong.

__________________

New! It combines the power of science with the gentleness of your mother's best intentions!
A new miracle technique, we apply homeopathic methods to achieve scientific efficaciousness
for dilutions WAY beyond Avogadro's Limit. It's New! It's Fresh!
It's Placebo^[tm] Brand Power Drink! *[Use as directed. May increase kidney function.]

Ah, so "most certainly" should be removed as a phrase in stating an opinion as well?
I've never professed to be doing science in expressing myself on the topic of ET.
But try Grinspoon's Lonely Planets and tell me again how wrong my parroting of his ideas is, ok?

__________________
"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

Nothing.

But in the past I've been accused of "data mining" or "cherry picking" or "appealing to authority" when providing links that support my ideas.
Links and cites have done nothing to quell the "skepticism" I've encountered here when discussing the topic.

__________________
"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

By "those scientists" are you referring to Seth Shostak? Here's an article on Shostak's idea:

http://space.newscientist.com/channe...biology/dn6189

As a counterpoint it is noted:

Paul Shuch, executive director of the SETI League, a separate organisation in New Jersey, says Shostak's prediction ignores one important factor. "It is altogether reasonable to project the development of human technology, based upon past trends and planned investments," he says.

"But predicting the date, the decade or even the century of contact is another matter because the 'other end' of the communications link is completely out of our hands. It would be nice to think we know something about the existence, distribution, technology and motivation of our potential communications partners in space, but in fact, we don't."

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Well, A.Dim, when I read something you link to after reading your comments or conclusions about it, I often wonder if I'm actually reading the same article. If the article says "It is possible that . . .," "it is speculated that . . ." and so forth, those qualifiers rarely seem to make it to your comments. If the article contains counterpoints to your preferred position, those also tend to be absent. Very often, the qualifications of the article's writer are very much in doubt, or the writer argues for things that are very much in the realm of pseudoscience.

This tends to foster a certain amout of skepticism.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

You see, the trouble is, A.DIM, I honestly don't think you are using the words "think" and "opinion" correctly.

I mean, how can you possibly think that ETi is plentiful in the universe? You can hope it, you can assume it (say, for the purposes of discussion), you can imagine it (say, for the purposes of writing a science fiction novel). But to say you think it means one of two things: you have some supporting evidence, or you are deluded.

It's the same with opinion. Suppose a pregnant woman whom I hardly know is due to give birth soon. Leaving aside complications, she is going to have a girl or a boy.

Now, can I have an opinion on whether it will be a girl or a boy? Of course not! It would be meaningless. Whereas if you said, "Well, in my opinion it will be a boy," then I would assume you are basing this opinion on something. For example, you might be the doctor who examined her, or the ultrasound scan operator, or she might have confided in you that she found out.

However, if it turned out that you didn't know her any better than I do, I would say, "So who do you think you are, giving an opinion like that? Why do you think you're in a better position to give an opinion than I am?"

I base what I think about ETi on the same accepted assumptions as SETI scientists themselves, just as Shostak states in the article linked to by VanRijn.

__________________
"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

My thoughts exactly. Boy, A.DIM...Van Rijn sure has got you "pegged".

And what about Shostak's response to this?

Why did you leave that off your quote?

He's simply using the accepted assumptions used by SETI scientists and astrobiologists themselves.

And yet here I am "wrong" for essentially doing the same...

__________________
"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

Although I very much respect Seth Shostack and the work he does, I think he is "going out on a limb" making predictions without any actual supportive evidence.

What he is doing is speculating, and there is nothing "wrong" with that as long as everyone agrees that it is only speculation.

That's where you seem to be having a problem...separating speculation, and opinion from established fact.

Well, the point in this thread, RAF was to make it clear that nothing I say on this topic, no matter how "factual" it comes across, my words are simply opinions and conjecture.

We don't know, can't know, based on a single example.
I've conceded this, more than a few times.
I've not had a problem saying so.
It is others who repeatedly ignore such statements by me and insist that what I say sounds factual; namely, youself.

__________________
"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

Can you not take responsibility for your own behavior???

sheesh...

I have already tried to answer this one. It is at least partly due to your misuse of key words and phrases.

For example, take this sentence:

"There is a real possibility that ETi is plentiful throughout the universe."

I think everybody would agree that there's nothing wrong with that sentence, and it probably sums up the feelings of Shostack and co.

Now take this sentence:

"I think ETi is plentiful throughout the universe."

In terms of content it is superficially similar to the first sentence. But that "I think" gets my hackles up.

I'm not sure I can explain it any more clearly than that. But, A.DIM, you seem to think you are being persecuted, and to me, it seems obvious why. I am honestly trying to help you here.

How many times shall I reitereate that mine are only opinions on the ETH?

How many times will you reply to my posts knowing my stance but still suggesting "this sounds factual?"

Are you the "skeptical police" protecting innocent readers from being swayed by what can only be considered opinion?

Sheeesh.

__________________
"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