Replies

-- Is he saying there is no life other than earth in the entire universe? --

Yep. Although he makes a technical error by saying life is "outside the probability distribution" (technically, no possible series of random events has zero probability - that we are here is at least evidence, if not proof, that intelligent life is possible), I think his reasoning is correct. The probability of even simple life is so low that calling it "impossible as a random event" is not unreasonable. So many improbable things have to line-up, including a relatively non-hostile environment, that the probability of life anywhere else is close to zero, even considering the known vastness of the universe.

"...So many improbable things have to line-up, including a relatively non-hostile environment, that the probability of life anywhere else is close to zero, even considering the known vastness of the universe..."

I believe that to be a rather arrogant position, as if you know all the conditions prevalent in our Galaxy, or all the known Galaxies observed.

Just consider "simple" water. What does it take to make it? Two Hydrogen Atoms and one Oxygen Atom you might say. Well, where did the Oxygen come from, if the Universe started off as a smear of mostly Hydrogen and some Helium?

A fairly "ridiculous" chain of nuclear reactions have to take place to produce the Oxygen atoms from the raw material of Hydrogen. How is the matter organized from the simple Hydrogen atom to the more complex Oxygen atom? Does someone have to supervise the order of the reactions to get Oxygen? Nope. Just GRAVITY and TIME, left to "run unattended" will result in Hydrogen clumps forming stars, which through the process of repeated birth, death and recycling, will produce the Oxygen atoms needed to form simple water.

My point? There exist many examples of self assembly and spontaneous order in the natural world. I cannot in all honesty look at a Hubble Deep Field image with countless Galaxies in view, each with Billions of Stars, and even begin to think I know everything about the conditions everywhere in the Universe.

He did not need to make the jump to other places. He makes a compelling case that is improbable that life happened by random chance on this planet. He then tries to bolster that argument by pointing to other places where there is no life. I’m not sure what that is called in Latin but it is a logical fallacy.

To make his case he would need to find other places like Earth that are without life.