X-Message-Number: 19744
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2002 10:48:21 -0400
From: Thomas Donaldson <>
Subject: CryoNet #19732 - #19740

Hi everyone!

I don't always think well of George Smith's postings, but I will say
that I agree completely with his one in the 10th August Cryonet.
    
No, the validity of ANY means for predicting future probability is
false. If you want to think about the probability of extraterrestrial
civilizations, less than 50 years after the "Drake equation" came
out we've discovered lots of sunlike stars with Jupiter sized planets
close to their sun, or even where the Earth is here. And indications
are that the Galaxy may have only a restricted zone in which complex
life could evolve: too few metals in the outer parts, too many 
supernovas and big stars in the closer parts to the center. (One
author now suspects ... from astronomical evidence ... that stars
with much more metal than the Sun are likely to form such Jupiters).
This basically eliminates any worth to Drakes equation: after all,
if one of the probabilities can be so badly wrong, which others
are also? We're have to wait and see, maybe even go out there
and look. The Drake equation is useless, basically a way to make
our feelings look like rational calculations.

And the same may be said of any calculations on the probability of
revival from cryonic suspension.

		Best wishes and long long life for all,

			Thomas Donaldson

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=19744