im not sure who you're quoting but i don't think that is Fermi.
the point of the paradox is not merely wondering how likely alien life is. rather, it starts with the simple fact that no evidence for alien life has been observed, ever, anywhere. why?
well, there's all kinds of potential explanations, maybe its far away, maybe its not advanced anywhere else, etc. we don't know the answer of course, but given the vastness of space one might expect to at least see some evidence of alien life, if not alien life directly, somewhere. that we do not suggests something fundamentally bigger is going on (ie the speed of light is legit)
The very name of the Fermi paradox suggests that we ought to be surprised that we haven't seen evidence of alien life. Instead, what I'm trying to say is that we don't even have enough evidence to be able to assert that we should expect to see alien life in the first place.
ok, thanks for the clarification. so if fermi and you are looking up at all the stars in the night sky and he says to you, "where is everyone??" you would say, "what do you mean? why would there be anyone out there?"
i don't think most people would have that intuition but it's fair.
drake's equation is a fun way to try to answer fermi. it seems you would assign n_e or f_1 a value close to 0
the point of the paradox is not merely wondering how likely alien life is. rather, it starts with the simple fact that no evidence for alien life has been observed, ever, anywhere. why?
well, there's all kinds of potential explanations, maybe its far away, maybe its not advanced anywhere else, etc. we don't know the answer of course, but given the vastness of space one might expect to at least see some evidence of alien life, if not alien life directly, somewhere. that we do not suggests something fundamentally bigger is going on (ie the speed of light is legit)