Re: There is no such thing as a Fermi Paradox

JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:

  jillery wrote:
 

The cited article identifies what it means by "The Fermi paradox":

 
Not relevant. Regardless of what they mean, there isn't a paradox.
 

The cited article also gives a definition of "paradox":
************************************
a selfcontradictory statement, or a seemingly logical
argument that leads to a contradiction, and the
contradiction suggests that something is wrong.
************************************

 
And this is an issue for you?
 

However, the cited article fails to specify the logical basis behind
Fermi's iconic question.

 
Irrelevant. It's not a paradox.
 

So, assuming interstellar travel was feasible, and assuming no
impediment to exponential expansion, an interstellar civilization
should occupy the entire Milky Way.

 
That's what is known as "An assumption." You can tell by your twice
using the word "Assuming."
 
Speaking rhetorically. You've already exposed the fact that you
wouldn't know an assumption if it were humping your leg.

So you are stil entirely wrong.
'Fermi's paradox won't go away by renaming it to 'Fermi's question',
or perhaps to ''Other people's assumption,

Can't you get it through your head that this a real question,
and that it isn't a matter of just juggling words?

Jan