[Slick]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

quote:

---

But anyway any assortment of volcanic gases and industrial cleaners could become atmospheres. There are plenty of deep sea vent dwellers that live on sulfides. Chlorine planets could be inhabited by sentient colonies of extreme halophiles.

Yes, and those are not very complex organisms. More complex organisms thriving in such environments is much harder to rationalize.

Slick, what was the point of stating that? My point was that you seem to be placing a lot of value in what Drake said, even though he probably wasn't all that correct.

---

It would be pretty presumptious of me comment on the correctness of the Drake equation, so I won't. It is what is taught in universities and is the entire basis for SETI. But everyone is entitled to their opinion.

As for the complex vs. non-complex... I am no biologist, but I don't understand why there seems to be a distinction between the two here. Either a process can sustain life or it can't. These are biochemical processes that occur at or below the cellular level. As proof, there are examples of O2 breathers on earth from the cellular level to the largest creatures that ever lived. I would think that if a process can support life for the little guys, it can support it for the big guys. Again, everyone is entitled to their opinion. I have never heard of an astronomer or astrophysicist looking for life on planets with cleaners as atmosphere, but he would have every right to do so. No offense intended, but I will be backing out of this discussion. I should have never posted in this thread in the first place. It just isn't fun or interesting to me anymore. Thanks.

Slick.