Quote:'There is only one advanced technological civilisation in this galaxy and there has only ever been one - and that's us. We are unique.

Presenter makes bold claim during BBC documentary. He says the spark of life on earth billions of years ago was a fluke
'We still struggle to understand what happened. It's incredibly unusual' 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...nique.html

I must admit, I was surprised to read this from Brian Cox...
What do you think? Can you get your mind around the concept that we are alone? And always have and always will be?

I can hear the theists saying: I told you we're special, you just don't listen...

Brian Cox likes to make provocative statements sometimes, but the way it is phrased sounds uncharacteristically stupid. I strongly suspect Daily Mail shitjournalism with this one, at least an out-of-context quote.

He's obviously never been to Minnesota.

But I want a fish translator.

I think his sample size is just a bit too small.

It's possible that he's right, but he's jumping to conclusions. His statement is easily fixed by adding 'that we know of'.

I can imagine us being alone quite easily, but I like the "dark forest" idea better. The universe might be full of life, but the basic rules are same, that is, resource is limited, and own survival takes priority, so if you are an advanced civilization, it is much better and safer for you to wipe out the competition before they do the same to you, and if you don't know the capabilities of the other civilization yet, you'd try to stay hidden till you are sure you are not the weakest. So maybe all intelligent civilizations are hiding from each other, and maybe those who tried to make themselves known got wiped out?

I think two things are rather likely:

1) There are other life forms in the universe, of sufficient complexity and size that we'd call them creatures, some of which are almost certainly intelligent.
2) We - that is, humans - will never meet them.

I base both of these conclusions on the enormous size of the universe.

Here's what Zach Weinersmith (SMBC) has to say about it (addendum: holy eff, it's more relevant than ever):

When ever this topic comes up, I always cite Fermi's Paradox . . . .

(January 25, 2017 at 12:07 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: When ever this topic comes up, I always cite Fermi's Paradox . . . .

...which has too many unknowns to be more than a collections of "maybes".