RE: Alien Life Deemed impossible.
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2015 8:29 am
Oh, just one thing about the so-called WOW signal:It has often be argued that the signal has never repeated, which is true, but totally irrelevant and this argument is also fallacious.If we ever receive a type-2 signal it would already be by the means of incredible fortune involved. It's then important to record and document it well so that further analisis can take place. Has this been done with the WOW and has it been analized? The statements from SETI or the involved astronomers are all not crystal clear about this, so people on the street didn't get a satisfying answer IMO. Go on the Seti home page and type in wow in the search, you will find plain nothing. Google it on the net and you will find a lot of UFO stuff, but nothing interesting and to-the-point.It's totally stupid to consider that the same type-2 signal would ever come to us twice (a type-1 signal is different obviously!), so who has put this naive idea in the world, I don't know, but he must have been drunken...The shorter a signal is, the most probable it's a type-2, especially if it doesn't repeat. So a signal not repeating has of course information value, but to say "it must repeat in order for us to be considered" that's trash. References:For example, the very first google result ("wow signal analyzed") tells a lot but says nothing, also it adheres to the fallacy explained above: http://news.discovery.com/space/alien-life-exoplanets/the-wow-signal-130524.htm[/url] Or take this one:http://www.setileague.org/articles/calibwow.htm[/url] interesting, but the author doesn't give any meaningful conclusion in simple words, so it's rather worthless (at least for our purpose). This one is hilarious:Don't read all this and waste your time, instead just scroll down to the "Conclusion". Should I say more?http://www.bigear.org/Wow30th/wow30th.htm[/url] The Wikipedia article:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wow!_signal[/url] contains interesting data about the signal but no conclusion to what it means in simple words. Someone seeking to find wether this signal is useful or even evidence for ET won't find a yes or no answer. By carefully going through the article, the answer is no (still assuming it's referenced and complete), but few people will have the patience and a lot of folks would rather advance 'spectacular' theories in the absence of such answer, biasing the overall value and creating a myth. All such articles and their waterfall of words aren't to give any explanations to people who aren't familiar with the scientific work, that is the majority of people. XenonS