Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here UFOs | Paranormal | Area 51 People | Places | Random Top 100 | What's New Catalog | New Books Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Our Bookstore is OPEN Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1997 -> Jan -> Here

From: rfsignal@sprynet.com <Cathy Johnson>
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 18:29:51 -0800
Fwd Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 23:49:48 -0500
Subject: Re: UFOs and Counter-Intelligence

>Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 16:27:51 -0500
>From: Greg Sandow <GSANDOW@prodigy.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFOs and Counter-Intelligence
>References: <2.2.32.19970102182713.006f6020@mail.globalserve.net>

>I'm not sure what there is in Frank Drake's bio that should make anyone
>suspicious.

	What could possibly make any difference in his bio that would have an
effect upon an obviously great effort and intellect that went into the
formulation of something so undeniably simple as the equation?  Nothing of the
man's personal history should be infringed upon for public study.

>Should we be worried because he served in the Navy? Does that make him
>an intelligence operative?

	Whether or not he is an operative, has nothing to do with the formula
that he was so adept in creating.  The numbers are a science of themselves, not
affected by weather or politics.

>Am I missing something here?

	Yes, definitely.  You are missing that simple fact of being human.  You
are trying to reach a plateau of etheric impossibility when you try to defeat
simplistic mathematics by dragging any mathematician through a mud puddle.  The
formula devised by him was considered and found to be an acceptable expression
of possibilities concerning intelligences in the known universe.

>The bio is incomplete, in any case. Drake's currently at the University
>of California at Santa Cruz.

	Perhaps the esteemed man will bend an ear to some of your questions
about the matter.  Afterall, it seems he is still amoung the living.

>And about Drake's famous equation, which is supposed to show us how many
>intelligent civilizations there are in the universe....its main value, I
>think, is simply to put any number at all on something so unknown. Once
>you begin to put a number on something, it seems more scientifically
>legitimate.

>But as for the equation getting any results....well, here's Drake's own
>conclusion, after running the numbers (most of which he had to guess at,
>of course). I'm quoting from his book, which he tells how he presented
>his figures at a meeting:

        "We've reached a conclusion," I said. "Our best estimate is that
        there are somewhere between one thousand and one hundred
        million advanced exterrestrial civilizations in the Milky Way."

>Quite a margin for error, wouldn't you say?

	Just how easy is it for anyone to guess the possibilities that would
begin to show the probabilities of intelligent life in the universe?  At the
moment, we can only truthfully say that the equation cannot equal zero nor any
negative numbers.  Whether it is only one, two , or two billion races of
intelligent life in the universe, we can only be sure that the possibility of
finding other intelligences in the universe is also more than one.
	It doesn't matter whether the equation is an accurate expression of
mathematics or not.  It doesn't matter what the mathematician did during his
lifetime to have composed such a simplistic mathematical expression.  It only
matters that there is an accepted value in the presentation of the numbers to
express a possibility that otherwise would have remained as an unknown value in
our lives and sciences.  NO?

	Personally, I can only say that there are things out there that humanity
will not like for the most part.  Only a few and rare kinds of intelligences
could bear the whims of humanity for long.  And at that, those kinds of
intelligences are probably still considering whether or not humanity should be
defined as an intelligent species.  Think about it.  Think about it a lot!

Take care for now,
Cathy