Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote in

Idjits arguing, I just love usenet science.

It has very little to do with 'proof'. Educate yourself idhts.

http://www.av8n.com/physics/

Proof is mathematical, science is demonstrative.

Technically, of course, you are correct, but in a debate context the words
"proof" and "prove" do not carry the same meaning as a mathematical
context.

It has to do with 'evidence' and the totality of scientific evidence
clearly indicates that ET is far more probable, nearly infinitely more
probable, than NO ET.

It appears that it is human intelligence on the Planet Earth that
seems to be in such short supply.

It's a known fact that 50% of the population of the United States is of
below average intelligence? g

The evidential basis lies with the claim, not the claimant.

I understand what you are saying, and in fact I agree. However, I still
stand by my contention that to say it is "obvious" is inaccurate, as the
currently demonstrable evidence does not support the existence of ET (i.e.,
they are probably out there, but we haven't seen any yet).