Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction
Calculating the probability is something entirely different and would require a larger data set than two to be considered reliable... especially when inferring something as complex as this.
|
That depends, it's complex, but is there reason to think that the situation is different elsewhere?
We do have a larger data set, we know the size of the universe and we know the properties of other galaxies and how it compares to our own, and the properties of other regions of our own galaxy and how that compares to our own region.
I appreciate your point from a philosophical point of view; we can't say there
is an earth like planet out there somewhere until we actually find one, but it would be surprising if there weren't given what we know so far. If we are the only one there would likely be additional things that are known that would account for the seeming defiance of things like the cosmological principle.
We lack the hard data of all the planets in the universe, but we can make a prediction based on other known things.
If I find a hoof print in my yard, it could be a horse, a zebra, or a unicorn, and I can reasonably guess what it probably is. There is no certainty, but I don't really need it if I'm willing to change my mind when new info comes to light.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction
I can appreciate that there are "probably" countless Earth-like planets, but that just isn't good enough. If I said that there was "probably" global warming based on a couple of quick observations, I don't think many would argue that it wasn't exactly a scientific opinion.
|
The information going into the probably is far more than a couple of quick observations in the case of earth like planets.