By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
highwaystar101 said:
Rath said:
bannedagain said:
Rath said:

The Drake equation is complete rubbish. Every single part of it is an assumption.



Yes it is but if you use it in a pessimisistic way you still come with lots of intelligent life. The point is that there should be life out there no matter how low the the numbers are in the equation. 

It's a guess.

I wish people would look a religion the same way they judge science.  Oh yea, there would be none left to talk about.

Unless you pick one of the variables as zero, in which case you end up with zero.

I totally agree that because of the vast size of the universe life probably exists elsewhere. It's just that the Drake equation itself is complete rubbish. It's trying to make something that isn't scientific look scientific, which annoys me.

I think the Drake equation itself isn't rubbish, but the estimations people make by using it are.

I don't think the Drake equation should be thought of as trying to answer something yet, and any estimation should be disregarded because it is too premature.

I do however think that the Drake equation is a useful tool that has allowed us to develop a series of questions concerning the requirements for intelligent life, and to be honest that is what it was meant to be. Each variable in the Drake equation has spawned dozens of questions about what factors are at play when considering that variable. It is a useful tool that supports enquiry about life beyond our planet.


Good way to answer it.