In infinite wisdom Sander Vesik answered:

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

What's an "anti-SETI-ist"?  Who's an "anti-SETI-ist"?
Where's an "anti-SETI-ist"? And where's Waldo?

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.

So what is the probability of seeing a cow in that neighborhood?

What is the probability of seeing ET in that neighborhood?

And how can one derive probabilties from a sample size of zero (or one
if you count the earth)? This is what I want to know.

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.

This kind of knowledge will be generated by the astronomical community
however, not by SETI.

As for the value of such information, it will generally be of value only
to the astronomical community, and perhaps SETI.

Like the number of stars in the sky, there are too many things to be
known and too little time to learn em all. You must pick and choose
what you spend your time learning or doing. Most of the world is
too busy trying to get food to worry about the stars, and very few
are gainfully employed looking at the stars. By and large they are
the ones with the sources of said information. Cosmology has always
been an interest of mine, but I'd be exaggerating to say that I've
kept up. Since the birth of our son, I'm doing good to get a night's
sleep, although this will change.

But by and large, knowledge of the nearest stars will be useless to
most of humanity, who have more pressing concerns with survival.
On the off chance they end up on Jeapordy, it might pay off. :-)

Rich