Goose-bozo status? Approaching FULL

this.

The Drake equation gets cut off at the knees by the anthropic principle.

>we can measure the radioactivity coming from other planets

what the fuck are you even on about, no we cant, thats not how it is done at all. please at least TRY to educate yourself about exoplanet astronomy before you preach on the matter

>predicted
>scientific realism
>empirical ''''''''''''''''proof''''''''''''''

so many spooks in a tiny brain like yours.

What in the name of holy fuck are you on about?

Yeah we do. Both the energy reading and radioactive decay signals tell us the compound on the other planets. Just saying "no" doesn't make it any different.

>energy reading and radioactive decay signals

What the fuck is an energy reading? As far as I know astronomers infer the compounds in a planets atmosphere by watching it's transit and seeing how the spectrum of light is changed.

>first he's going off about the matrix

He's obviously red-pilled as fuck. Ya'll don't even know anything about the musk-trix so shut your fat gob

>one thousand popsci sucking your dick on the Internet
He thinks he's a science God

No he's very modest really. But some of his ideas are a bit Stephen Hawking-ish.

>Virgin nerds think they know better than a multi-billionaire tech god

No, WE DONT. Radioactive decay results in very short lived subatomic particles. How the fuck are you going to detect that with a telescope, dipshit?

You have no idea what you are talking about and it shows.

>bachelor of science grad thinks he knows better than entire scientific community
Shit son how far down your throat does he have his dick

dude. exoplanet atmospheric analysis is done by absorption spectroscopy as the planet intersects the host star as seen from earth. it has nothing to do with radioactive decay, and as well it is associated with significant uncertainty.

We use isotope filters to detect incoming particles which tells us the chemical structure of the planet. We've been doing that for the last 30 years for fucks sake and thats how we know if a remote planet contains hydrogen, carbon, methane, etc...

> doesn't know radiation is a form of electrmagnetic waves just outside of our visible spectrum
wow...

>incoming particles
>isotope filters
>isotopes escape their planet, then their solar system, then travel millions of lightyears to be detected on earth

lol serious?
first off, electromagnetic RADIATION is electromagnetic waves, and all EM radiation is included, including the visible spectrum.

second of all, radioactive DECAY results in three kinds of radiative products: alpha and beta particles, which are fucking charged PARTICLES and are not going to escape gravity and make it all the way to earth, and x-rays, which although characteristic in energy for a given decay, will be overlapped and completely drowned out by cosmic background xray signals, so they cannot be used to identify the planet.

As it is, we cant even fucking see the planet, so any direct spectroscopic method is out the door. The resolution of our telescopes is simply too limited and rules it out. We have to go with indirect methods, by looking at the change in the solar spectroscopic signal, and then _assuming_ that it is because of a planetary transit and then _assuming_ that no other factors play any significance (such as more than one planet, or gas/dust clouds in between the star and earth, etc).

why has elon said so much weird shit lately? has he started taking something?

>atmospheric components undergo radioactive decay in any measurable quantity

guess what percentage of carbon or nitrogen or oxygen atoms are radioactive?

No, he is just drumming up popular support as this guy mentioned

You mean spectroscopy right?

i trole u :^) I mean't spectroscopy but I couldn't explain it so I just bullshitted until someone corrected me. But thanks for enlighting me.

No, captain. I am getting an anomalous "energy reading", perhaps created by some kind of being of pure..energy.. Most fascinating.

>i dont know so i will just shit post until i get called out
>asking directly is too hard for me even tho it takes a fraction of the time

brilliant strategy, sherlock

believe me nobody wants to help. Everytime I asked it I've been told to fuck off and google it. Conflict draws more responses.

Because that is how science works. It is similar to "Phylogenetics," where you assume something is like something else based on evidence you already have in another area.

Like how we assume there's gravity on the Moon in 1902 yet no one had ever been there.

well, thats true
but still I got some laughs

>I've been told to fuck off and google it
yet you didn't, and shitposted instead
whadda maroon

some want to help, you just pay attention to the shitposting instead

Memes bro

Given the number of galaxies, it's certainly possible, even if you only have one or two in a galaxy at any given time.

...Probably the least crazy thing he's said though.

in 100 years will he be seen as a genius or a loony?

A bit of both - he named a company after Tesla, so that's clearly an influence.

Stay jellymad poorfag

So why dont you just fucking google it?

hoo boy. I see the shitelonsays.com website won't be running out of material anytime soon. Sometimes I wonder if this is an investment strategy? He opens his mouth to say one of these ridiculous things, his stocks drop, his buddies sell short.

>people still think that ETCs exist/have existed despite the sieve of fermi

>using statistics to 'prove' something

Elon Musk was reading rocket science books as a kid, and teaching his computer programming teacher shit because the teacher wasnt smart enough to making video games at age 12. And he made Paypal. He's right, stay brainlets

>existed
Reading comprehension.

youtube.com/watch?v=sNhhvQGsMEc

youtube.com/watch?v=1fQkVqno-uI

this, you may be able to find probability but nothing absolute

Not necessarily in support of the original statement, but, you just described a fact of life about every single direction science can possibly go, so I have no idea what the fuck you're thinking.

Veeky Forums memes

I don't understanding what you are saying.

He's going from Neil DeGrasse-Tyson tier of shit-you-have-no-clue-you're-talking-about to fucking Ray Kurzweil levels of retardation fast

I just want him to spew more mindless "AI is bad for you, guiz!" rhetoric so that when actually good chatbots start coming out everyone will be too scared to buy them, it'll end up as a mostly niche thing, then the age of true cyberpunk can begin

>you may be able to find probability but nothing absolute
This statement applies to everything you could possible study, therefore, it is a stupidass argument.

there is a difference between data and projected data

>so that when actually good chatbots start coming out everyone will be too scared to buy them
What the fuck is it like inside your head? Chatbots will be garbage for at least two more decades, and paid chatbots are completely fucking unprecedented. Sure, someone will try it, but I seriously doubt they'll have success.

And that is a good argument. There is a reason I started my first response with "I don't necessarily agree ..."

>Chatbots will be garbage for at least two more decades

Yes please give me more completely random dates!
PLEEEASE cum on my face!!

fair enough

He's just using Trump tactics at this point. To be relevant in 2016, you need to say ridiculous things to boost publicity.