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