In sci.space.policy Joseph Lazio <jlazio@adams.patriot.net> wrote:

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

R> In infinite wisdom Louis Scheffer answered:

Rich <someone@somewhere.com> writes:

How can you research something when you got zero examples to
research?

Answer: You can't.

So far so good.  So now we have two hypotheses: no examples exist,
or they exist and we have not found them yet.

R> If we've not found them yet, no examples exist. Saying that no
R> examples exist is not a statement about the existence of the sample
R> category.

Re-read what Lou wrote.  If you do not detect something, that either
means that it doesn't exist *or* that you have not yet found it.

Consider a silly example.  Do cows exist?  If I look out my window,
into my suburban neighborhood, I see no cows.  Therefore, cows do not
exist.

And anti-SETI-ists don't understand that if you repeat it you get a 
number that tells you about the probability of seeing a cow while looking
out in that neighborhood. And while they start from the premise that 
seti as such is useless (and then get utterly confused as to what methodolgy
is bets in showing such) knowing a lot about your neighbouring 1000 (and more
as time goes by) stars is a good and healthy thing.

-- 
	Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++