Search for universe’s secrets too important to be left to crackpots

TUESDAY, MAY 17, 2016
Search for universe’s secrets too important to be left to crackpots

Re: “Nasa misinforms - there is life on other planets”, Letters, May 16.

Thomas Turk anthropomorphises the debate on the existence or otherwise of exoplanetary beings by stating that “human life evolved on 42 million planets”. 
“Human” life? It’s rather arrogant of Turk to suggest that life forms out there, if there are any, will be like us. And why so many planets? Has someone counted them? This is, of course, assuming that all of these 42 million “original” planets orbit their stars within the so-called Goldilocks Zone (not too near, not too far for life to evolve). The physics of this specious claim defies belief. 
It’s simply not true that there are 7.5 trillion planets harbouring life in the Milky Way galaxy. The odds against this happening in such astounding numbers in one galaxy alone are so astronomically high as to preclude serious consideration, irrespective of planet numbers. 
There is no established, verifiable evidence to support such a sweeping argument anyway, certainly not from an obscure Swiss “expert” named Billy Meier who explains that all his “research and findings” taken from alien visitors on the subject are in German, and, not surprisingly, yet to be translated. Why not communicate in the world’s global scientific language, English? Why haven’t they visited anyone else? Work it out. 
These “beings” allegedly live in the Taurus constellation (unverifiable) and take seven hours to travel 500 light-years (it’s actually 440 light-years away); how? What form of propulsion do they use, and where is the supporting evidence? 
It’s precisely this type of half-baked pseudo-science that detracts from sober investigations searching for the truth about the universe and our place in it. Let’s not take the contemporary mystery away from one of the most fundamental questions that sentient beings can ponder. Unsupported, nonsensical pontificating for the ostensible purpose of self-aggrandisement serves no one but Meier and his seemingly confused advocates.
F Faulkner
Bangkok