I think we need to understand far, far more about how life originates before we can say how likely it is. Right now, we're not even able to say if the sole observed lineage arose from an abiogenesis or panspermia event on Earth. That's a very poor knowledge base to extract probabilities from.

It's funny, I've always seen it as highly arrogant to assert things that can't be supported by data.

That also fastidiously avoid trail/porch/handheld cameras. And quickly depose of their dead. And found a way to not leave eDNA (they are very smart).

The math says aliens probably exist? We're not even sure how the single observed lineage of life came about yet.

2/ But when Chan & Ridley have to confront the fact that the first known cluster of Covid-19 cases centered around a live animal market nowhere near the Wuhan Institute of Virology, they switch to "Well, this *other* lab is pretty close to that market... just sayin'"

1/ Chan and Ridley, or at least Chan, aren't conspiracy theorists but they do some sleazy non-scientific things in their book. For example, they spend a lot of time talking about the coronavirus work done at the Wuhan Institute of Virology..

The total blackout of the story came after Trump told his allies to stop talking about the "Epstein Files," which he claimed were "created" by the deep state, contradicting their past narrative.
www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/tru...

It's true, large portions of DC were straight wetlands before it was a city.

Also, Waterworld gets unfairly bashed a lot. There, I said it.