I wanna stick around long enough to see the reactions on the liberal's
faces when they figure out the government they helped their globalist handlers create is about to devour them too.
That should be well worth the extra risk in my book. :smilewinkgrin:
The statement is the OP is an example of runaway scientific pseudo-claims. There is simply no way of knowing this for sure. The estimate is so broad (17,000,000,000) that it cannot be taken seriously. One of the challenges of our era is that scientists have assumed a priestly status where they are the unchallengeable authorities on whatever they say. Nietzsche warned about this.
Regardless if there are in fact this number. Two truths remain:
1. Just because there is a planet doesn't mean it (a) still exists or (b) sustains/is capable of sustaining life.
2. The closest planets that might contain life are so far away that they are unreachable. Frankly I am unconvinced that interstellar travel will ever be possible (definitely not within the grasp of the next four generations.) If we left today, using existing technology it would be 3500 years before we reached the closest possible planet that might contain life.
We need to be careful of scientism. It is a dangerous exploitation of proper inquiry.
Skepticism is good. It's the basis for the scientific philosophy of learning.
Skepticism can also be the basis of ignorant persecution - Psalm 104:5 (Galileo)
The work being done by organisations like CERN into the nature of matter and mass, may result in technology which resolves the distant travel problem. But you could be right about the time needed to develop the technology
I find it facinating that astronomical and computing technology has advanced to the point that researchers can even make such estimates.
Exciting times, and of course - watch this 'space'.