I've gotten carried away with the entire "Is SETI science" question mostly because I wanted to discover if Sagan is being as skeptical about just how scientific a SETI hypothesis is, considering how much time he devotes to debunking psuedoscience in this book.but I feel I'd like to change the subject since this chapter isn't about SETI or contacting alien civilisations.
So I am guilty as charged for changing the subject in this direction.
I'm thinking of getting one of Sagan's books that is entirely SETI related. I've already started reading Paul Davies ' The Eerie Silence"
Davies is on the chair of SETI: Post-Detection Science and Technology Taskgroup of the International Academy of Astronautics..
I think Davies was nominated by SETI to be the first person to speak on humanities behalf should back and forth contact with ET ever occur.
I think he's a great choice. Personally, he's my favorite science author. He is well-balanced, open minded, respectful, ultra humble, and razor sharp.
Davies makes clear that the methodology of SETI is unquestionably scientific, whereas our reasons (admittedly based on zero evidence and justifiable speculation) for searching for intelligence in the Cosmos may not be as sound as we'd like them to be.
Presenting in an open and honest manner what is highly doubtful when considering the existence of ET, the questions/thoughts presented by Davies are leaving me doubtful that SETI is based on a scientific hypothesis.
I needed a more robust treatment of this issue and have learned a lot just by reading the first couple of chapters:
-- the "Drake Equation" is not really an equation at all (my words, NOT Davies). Perhaps all its variables are pure guess work.
-- The "Planet of the Apes" Fallacy is something that's committed too often. Interbane was guilty of committing this fallacy recently.
-- science can not be considered something that automatically follows the rise of "intelligence"
-- although a couple of billion years seems like an enormous amount of time, when considering the rise of life AND intelligence, it's actually a rather small window because of the average life span of the supporting star.
So far it's a great read.
Sagan's presentation of SETI seems to be purely emotional.
Some scientists don't bear down skeptically on their own beliefs.
ET is very much like a religious belief for Sagan.
He's replaced one religion for another.
For example:
Sagan starts of a discussion about SETI by saying "We are a little lonely"
Sagan is undoubtedly speaking of an existential gap that can not be filled by fellow human beings. So Sagan is looking up to the sky in hopes that the gap can be filled by something not of this world.
We can speculate that is what religion does as well.