We touched on the Fermi Paradox on the last couple editions of FastForward Radio, and if all goes well we'll probably talk about it again this week. A quick reminder for those who can't keep their paradoxes (paradoces?) straight:

The Fermi paradox is the apparent contradiction between high estimates of the probability of the existence of extraterrestrial civilizations and the lack of evidence for, or contact with, such civilizations.

On the latest FFR, Michael Darling opined that we can't possibly make estimates as to the likelihood of extraterrestrial civilizations because our sample size of planets that support civilizations is so small. One, to be precise. Michael is not alone in thinking that we can't make realistic assessments of the likelihood of extraterrestrial civilizations. Another guy named Michael has made the case that the Drake Equation is nothing more than an exercise in idle speculation with some numbers thrown in to serve as window dressing.

Personally, I can live with idle speculation, although I prefer ideal speculation, which is what I accidentally typed when I started writing this sentence. "Ideal speculation," a term I just invented accidentally, refers to a process of drawing out the best possible best-case scenario. It is a Speculist staple.

I digress.

Anyway, whether we can reasonably assess the probability of ETs, we can definitely speculate as to whether they are there and, if not, why not.

My contribution to our most recent Fermi debate was to suggest that we aren't likely to find extraterrestrial civilizations at the same approximate level of development as the one we occupy. Fortunately, this argument pretty much holds up even if the overall likelihood of ET civilizations is unknown or unknowable. However likely (or unlikely) they are, they are less likely to be at our stage than to be at some other stage.

All of which leads us back to the 1.5 gigayear gap. Personally, I think anyone with a one and a half billion year head start over us is likely to have evolved itself out of existence(form our standpoint.) I don't think they would look much like Starbuck (unfortunately), not even a really, really advanced model of Starbuck. With that kind of time to play with, they would probably have become bored with this galaxy and possibly with this universe. So maybe they moved on to their own newly created universe. Or maybe they uploaded themselves into machines which have now been miniaturized down to femto space. or maybe it's something much more mundane than that. Maybe they've just gone to live in the cores of stars (or galaxies).

In any case, we shouldn't be surprised at not finding beings a billion and a half years more advanced than we are. It's likely that they aren't there. And even if they are there, ts likely that they are in a "there" to which one can't get from "here."

At least not yet.

ADDENDUM: None of which is to suggest that Starbuck is a Cylon. I haven't even watched the season premiere of BattsGac from last week, where I understand that question was answered definitively. Smart money says she's not, but no spoilers here. I have no idea.

Still, for sticklers who want to see an actual Cylon, how's this:

Just because I love you, readers. Just because I love you.