> Glenn wrote, on 2008/04/20 00:37:
>

>> Someone should tell Shostak about this, so he can revise his eta for
>> finding ET.

>
> Time to plug your ears and start singing "La la la...", Glenn - this
> isn't going to turn out the way you hope. That 0.01%% isn't the rarity
> equaling impossibility that creationists hope for the chances of evolution.
>

>>http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080416110124.htm

>

>> "His model, published in the journal Astrobiology, suggests an upper
>> limit for the probability of each step occurring is 10 per cent or
>> less, so the chances of intelligent life emerging is low – lessthan
>> 0.01 per cent over four billion years."

>
> So then in a galaxy of approximately 300 000 000...

> The closest star to the Sun is Proxima Centauri.
> It is a red dwarf, and even though it is the closest
> star to the Sun that there is, it is still too dim to
> be seen with the naked eye.
>
> It is not entirely certain whether red dwarfs can
> be excluded as having life bearing planets or not.
> However, they are a major part of the equation.
> If you exclude them, you have probably excluded
> more than 90%% of all stars.

>
>The Sun is not a typical star. By far, the most
>numerous type of star out there is the M class
>red dwarf. Only a small percentage of stars are
>as bright as the Sun is.