Re: thoughts on the Drake Equation
- From: Guy Macon <http://www.GuyMacon.com/>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 20:24:13 +0000
Brian Tung wrote:
Guy Macon <http://www.GuyMacon.com/> wrote:
How do you figure? The most sucessful organisms are all quite stupid.
He means that intelligence is a strong predictor for success, not that
it's a strong prerequisite. (Think of it as a statistical version of
sufficient but not necessary.)
I understand what he meant. The problem is that intelligence is
not a strong predictor for success outside of certain specialized
ecological niches.
By any reasonable measure of "success" most intelligent animals do
rather poorly. Yes there are a lot of humans around, but the other
primates are very intelligent and are mostly endangered species.
Number of indiduals:
Humans: 6,000,000,000
SAR-11 bacteria 240,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
Longevity as a species:
Humans: 250,000 years.
Cyanobacteria: 6,000,000,000 years.
--
Guy Macon
<http://www.GuyMacon.com/>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: thoughts on the Drake Equation
- From: Odysseus
- Re: thoughts on the Drake Equation
- From: Chris L Peterson
- Re: thoughts on the Drake Equation
- From: Paul Schlyter
- Re: thoughts on the Drake Equation
- References:
- thoughts on the Drake Equation
- From: Brian Tung
- Re: thoughts on the Drake Equation
- From: Brian Tung
- Re: thoughts on the Drake Equation
- From: Chris L Peterson
- Re: thoughts on the Drake Equation
- From: Guy Macon
- Re: thoughts on the Drake Equation
- From: Brian Tung
- thoughts on the Drake Equation
- Prev by Date: Re: thoughts on the Drake Equation
- Next by Date: Re: thoughts on the Drake Equation
- Previous by thread: Re: thoughts on the Drake Equation
- Next by thread: Re: thoughts on the Drake Equation
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|