"R" == Rich  <someone@somewhere.com> writes:

R> In infinite wisdom Louis Scheffer answered:

Rich <someone@somewhere.com> writes:

Will SETI succeed?  This is a very open question - we just don't
know enough to judge our chances.

R> If you don't think the answer is yes, what's in it for you? Or do
R> you have a monetary stake in the array's construction, regardless
R> of whether it finds anything?

So the only things worth doing are the ones to which you know the
answer already?

Weren't you the one who posted the scientific method?  The one in
which one makes predictions and then tests them.  Doesn't that imply
that you don't know the answer a priori?

There seems to be lots of planets - do many (or any) of them
develop life?  Does the life become intelligent?  Is it
technological and wants to communicate?  All of these are hard
questions, and the eventual answer seems impossible to predict at
this point.

R> And yet the entire exercise is predicated upon assuming that all
R> are true.

No.  I don't know why this is such a hard point to grasp.  There may
be ET life.  There may not.  We have no way of knowing without looking.

Are SETI searches worth the small amount we spend on them?
Absolutely, this is one of those high risk, high payoff gambles.

R> High payoff? How so?

Do you think of everything in terms of money?  "Payoff" here is used
in a broader sense.  One of the reasons many scientists are scientists
is not because of the monetary rewards.  I have friends who have moved
from astronomy to other careers and obtained much higher salaries as a
result.  I like the reward of being (or trying to be) the first to
find something that nobody else has seen.

-- 
Lt. Lazio, HTML police   | e-mail: jlazio@patriot.net
No means no, stop rape.  | http://patriot.net/%7Ejlazio/
sci.astro FAQ at http://sciastro.astronomy.net/sci.astro.html