Why are these people so self loathing that they always assume we are not the most advanced lifeform of our type in the universe?
—
There are trillions of galaxies each with over 300 million stars, each of those with at least one planet. How many planets are there?
If only .001% of those planets have advanced civilizations, how many planet is that?
If .001% of those planets have some form of transportation that allows them to cross stellar distances nearly instantaneously, how many planets is that?
Where do puny Earth people get all their hubris from?
That would be a big number but far fewer stars are suitable for enabling life as we know it. Stars fall into one of seven basic types; O,B,A,F,G,K and M. Additional types exist but the bulk fall into OBAFGKM.
Our sun is a type G star which makes up only about 7 percent of all stars.
So, for starters, we should take the numbers you cited and multiply by .07 to narrow the cosmic field down to stars of the same spectral type as our sun.
However, class G stars come in 12 basic variants, our sun being a type G2V.
My point here is that the number of type G or even type G2V stars in the universe is large, but not nearly as large as the absolute total numbers commonly cited.
However, we need to further sort based on the location of a type G star within a galaxy. We have to do this sorting because there is believed to be a galactic-habitable zone.
Most stars in a galaxy do not fall within the habitable zone of the galaxy. Therefore, another big reduction is needed.
Of the type G stars within the habitable zones of galaxies, what percentage have exoplanets? No one knows. To be on the "conservative side" we should assign a number less than 100 percent and thereby reduce the candidate field further.
Of the type G stars within the habitable zones of galaxies, how many have exoplanets of suitable composition orbiting within the star's habitable zone further reduces the field.
So the number gets even smaller and there are additional filtering criteria such as solar systems with gas giants in the outer bands acting as gravitational vacuum cleaners sucking up cosmic debris and thereby protecting the smaller stars within the inner habitable zone. Afterall, it would be hard to form an advanced civilization if your planet was being pummeled by large meteors, comets and other asteroid sized objects.
We must further sort based on planetary composition. If a planet doesn't have an iron core like earth does, it won't have a magnetic field to protect it from cosmic radiation which is in part why Venus and Mars are sterile wastelands.
On and on we can go with the filtering and the number of likely candidates gets smaller and smaller.
If only .001% of those planets have advanced civilizations, how many planet is that?
A thousand times fewer. However, .001 of the total you cited is an incorrect assumption for reasons I just cited and there are many more reasons.
If .001% of those planets have some form of transportation that allows them to cross stellar distances nearly instantaneously, how many planets is that? Where do puny Earth people get all their hubris from?
You are basing your beliefs on absolute total numbers trumpeted by the assorted Carl Sagans who are in position know what they are saying is false.