To not-fool yourself is why science beats all other methods of discovering the physical world – but it’s so hard! That’s why peer-review is part of science – review by someone who sees your work as objective data and not your beloved baby.
This may seem like a contradiction.Astrobiologists are actively searching for alien life.It’s their job.And yet whenever new evidence of alien life is presented, astrobiologists are the first and most vocal skeptics about it.If your job is to search for alien life, why would you be so quick to doubt any evidence that alien life actually exists?
This goes back to the famous “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” line from Carl Sagan, or the whole proof beyond a reasonable doubt thing I kept saying during my recent A to Z series on the search for alien life. Astrobiologists very much do want to find alien life. They’re eager to find it. Perhaps a little too eager.
And thus, astrobiologists have to be careful. They have to be extra skeptical, because they have to be on guard against their own wishful thinking.
And really, this is not only true in the field of astrobiology; it’s true…
View original post 127 more words
I had this thought: There is life in the universe, thinking that Earth is somehow separate and unique is just that, ‘thinking”. Two fish in a pond”‘ Do you think there are other ponds and if so do you suppose there are fish in them?”
LikeLiked by 1 person
😉 and what we so firmly think, what seems so inevitable, must be proven
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for the reblog! And that’s a great point about peer review.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Happy to share your post. I couldn’t do any better myself, but glad the peer review comment added something 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person