I have been grappling with the idea of humans finding and communicating with intelligent extraterrestrial (ET) life for some time now. In fact, I have published two books on the subject, ET Communication Code and Angel Communication Code. You can find a lot of related information and additional articles posted on my website, The ET Communication Group (ECG). Yup, I got it all figured out.
Based on all the research, contact seems inevitable. Lately, however, I have been asking myself what would happen if it never happened. What if we never find any “proof” for the existence of intelligent ET life out there? Arthur C. Clarke put it in the simplest terms.
“Two possibilities exist: Either we are alone in the Universe, or we are not. Both are equally terrifying”. Arthur C. Clarke.
Finding evidence of life beyond Earth has yielded strong clues and promising leads. However, it has not yet yielded what the contemporary scientific community considers irrefutable proof. This is an ongoing scientific debate.
But what if our search for ET life ultimately fails? What if we find nothing despite our best efforts and the vast resources dedicated to the pursuit? This scenario may seem unlikely, given the sheer expanse of the cosmos and the multitude of potentially habitable planets scattered throughout the galaxy. However, it is a possibility that we must consider.
There is more than sufficient evidence, in my opinion, to hypothesize that intelligent ET life exists. In addition, that various ET species have occupied Earth and influenced humanity. To me, the issue is about establishing communication, not whether intelligent ETs exist or not.
It all comes down to the difference between evidence and proof.
In all the material I have researched about the cosmos and ETs, I have found that the terms evidence and proof are often used interchangeably. However, it is essential to understand that there is a clear distinction between the two concepts. The way I understand it, evidence refers to the information presented to support a claim or hypothesis. This evidence can come in various forms, such as empirical data, expert opinions, statistics, or anecdotal accounts. It is used to build a case for or against a particular argument.
On the other hand, proof has a higher validation standard requiring conclusive and irrefutable evidence. Proof establishes the truth or validity of a statement beyond any reasonable doubt. In other words, proof is a level of certainty that leaves no room for skepticism or uncertainty.
Evidence is essential for generating hypotheses and forming theories, while proof is required to solidify those theories and establish them as accepted knowledge. In the scientific method, evidence is gathered through experiments and observations to support a hypothesis.
Once enough evidence is accumulated and the hypothesis is rigorously tested and verified, it can be considered proven. It is a process. Evidence leads to a hypothesis, which is tested via experimentation to get proof—the truth.
Failure to follow the scientific method is a foundational argument in both of my books regarding establishing ET communication. In my books, I present an experiment to test the hypothesis. It is my hope and dream that some entity with sufficient resources to execute the experiment takes on the challenge. My hypothesis and how I arrived at it are definitely outside the box thinking. That is the whole point. To think about it from a different perspective.
Evidence is the foundation upon which arguments are built, while proof is the final confirmation of their validity. It is necessary to support claims and theories, but proof must establish those claims as undeniable facts. Understanding the crucial difference between evidence and proof is essential for conducting credible research and advancing knowledge in any field.
If we never find ET life, intelligent or otherwise, it will raise profound questions about our place in the universe. On the one hand, it could reinforce the idea that life in the cosmos is scarce, making Earth and humanity even more special. On the other hand, it might mean that we’re simply looking in the wrong places or using the wrong methods. The latter is how I have approached the topic in my books.
Finding nothing or the “null result” will shift the focus to the more profound mysteries of existence. I recently wrote about The Concept of Oneness and a Connected Universe.
The biggest issue is the scientific assumption that all life in the universe requires the same things humans need to live. What if not all life in the cosmos is “biological” as we understand biology on Earth. They may be sniffing the wrong holes altogether.
Are we truly alone? Is intelligent life (as we know it) doomed to be fleeting? What does it mean for our long-term future? For many, this opens the door to discussions about the “after life”. There are many variations amongst humans on what that means.
Some scientists argue that a lack of discovery wouldn’t necessarily mean ET life doesn’t exist. It would mean it’s much harder to detect than we expected. Then again, depending on your spiritual beliefs, it may not be hard at all.
In any scenario, the search will continue shaping technological advances, space exploration, and our understanding of life’s origins. Even if we never find ETs, the quest might still transform human civilization in ways we can’t yet predict.
We have spent decades building advanced equipment to search for life on other planets and have come up empty-handed thus far. I found a recent study led by ETH Zurich researchers, including the corresponding author and SETI Institute affiliate, Dr. Daniel Angerhausen. “What if We Find Nothing? Bayesian Analysis of the Statistical Information of Null Results in Future Exoplanet Habitability and Biosignature Surveys” by Angerhausen et al. is published in The Astronomical Journal. They explored what we can learn about life in the universe, even if we never detect irrefutable “proof” of life or habitability.
Using advanced statistical modeling, the research team sought to explore how many exoplanets scientists should observe and understand before declaring that life beyond Earth is either ordinary or nonexistent. It is a difficult read, but if you can stay with it, it is very insightful.
“Even a single positive detection would change everything—but until then, we need to make sure we’re learning as much as possible from what we don’t find,” said Angerhausen.
Sometimes, even not finding something in scientific experimentation can yield important insights. Thomas Edison once said, “I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work.“
Scientists searching for life on exoplanets often focus on finding specific features. They look for signs of water or gases like oxygen and methane. These are things that indicate biological activity. But what happens if scientists don’t find any of these features? Can we still learn something meaningful about how everyday life might be in the universe?
The Angerhausen study showed that if scientists examine 40–80 planets and find no signs of life, they can confidently conclude that fewer than 10–20% of similar planets harbor life. However, this depends heavily on how certain we are about each observation. Such a finding would enable scientists to put a meaningful upper limit on the prevalence of life in the universe, which hasn’t been possible to date.
Further, if even only 10% of planets in the Milky Way alone have some form of life, that could still be 10 billion planets or more. The sheer numbers are mind-boggling, at least to me.
“This kind of result would be a turning point,” said lead author Angerhausen. “Even if we don’t find life, we’ll finally be able to quantify how rare, or common, planets with detectable biosignatures might be.”
Their findings directly impact upcoming missions like NASA’s Habitable Worlds Observatory (HWO) and the European-led Large Interferometer for Exoplanets (LIFE). These missions will study dozens of Earth-like planets by examining their atmospheres for signs of water, oxygen, and even more complex biosignatures.
According to the study, the number of planets observed will be large enough to draw significant conclusions about the prevalence of habitability and life in our galactic neighborhood. However, the study also points out that even with advanced instruments, these surveys must carefully account for uncertainties and biases.
“It’s not just about how many planets we observe; it’s about how confident we can be in seeing or not seeing what we are searching for,” said Angerhausen. “If we’re not careful and are overconfident in our abilities to identify life, even a large survey could lead to misleading results.”
The study emphasizes that framing the right questions is crucial for meaningful results. Broadly asking, “How many planets have life?” is probably not the right question. It might be better to ask more specific and measurable questions like “Which fraction of rocky planets in the conservative habitable zone show clear signs of water vapor, methane, and oxygen?”
You might be asking why any of these things matter. I know I did.
Even if future surveys don’t find evidence of ET life, they will still provide valuable insights into the universe’s rare or common habitable conditions. If we consider uncertainties and ask the right questions, scientists can turn null results into powerful tools for understanding our place in the cosmos.
ET life may exist in forms vastly different from anything we have encountered on Earth. Maybe it is not carbon based as we are. Life may exist in environments that are inhospitable to us or in forms that are difficult to detect using our current methods. The universe is vast and diverse, and the possibilities for life are virtually endless.
One of the most immediate consequences of finding nothing in our search for ETs would be reevaluating our methods and approaches. Scientists and researchers need to reassess their search strategies, refine their techniques, and explore new avenues of investigation.
While a null result forces us to reevaluate our assumptions and approaches, it does not definitively rule out the existence of ET life. The search for ET life is an ongoing and complex endeavor, and our understanding of the cosmos constantly evolves. Only time will tell what discoveries await us as we continue to explore the mysteries of the universe.
I hope I am alive when contact is made to establish ET communication. I also hope they are friendly.
Sources:
- Trochim, William M. K. The Research Methods Knowledge Base. Atomic Dog Publishing, 2000.
- Angerhausen et al. What if We Find Nothing? Bayesian Analysis of the Statistical Information of Null Results in Future Exoplanet Habitability and Biosignature Surveys. The Astronomical Journal. April 2025
- Schwartz, Richard D. (2017). “The Search for ET Life: A Brief History.” Astronomy Magazine. Retrieved from https://astronomy.com/news/2017/05/the-search-for-ET-life
- Loeb, Avi (2020). “ET: The First Sign of Intelligent Life Beyond Earth”. Mariner Books.
- Vakoch, Douglas A. (ed.) (2018). “Astrobiology, History, and Society: Life Beyond Earth and the Impact of Discovery”. Springer.
- Davies, Paul (2011). “The Eerie Silence: Renewing Our Search for Alien Intelligence”. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.