A paradox is most commonly just a self refuting but otherwise logical and sound statement that seems to be true. So there are problems whether you 'accept' or '

A paradox is most commonly just a self refuting but otherwise logical and sound statement that seems to be true. So there are problems whether you 'accept' or 'deny' the statement. This statement is false. is a good example. It being false or true poses problems. Everything we know leads us to believe that there should be extraterrestrial civilizations everywhere. That's a paradox because again whether true or false, it poses problems. If false, then where is the mistake we have made? If true, then why do we see no evidence of such civilizations? Interstellar travel is nothing particularly special. The voyager probes, launched using 70s era tech that was not designed to last anywhere near this long, are making it to interstellar space with no problem and still happily transmitting on top of it. Those probes will end up eventually being trapped in the orbit of some other body, and orbit it. They're not just going to disintegrate. This means we've already left a calling card in interstellar space. And that card was sent from less than 20 years after we learned how to put anything into space. Think about how much more we will put into space, and interstellar space, over the next 100 years. Now imagine the next million years. And these timescales are all still just blinks of an eye on astronomic scale. The only issue is increasing acceleration. And there are already countless near tech 'roadmaps' to that. Laser propulsion, anti matter drives, fusion drives, etc. For instance we could do an entire manned Mars mission on a tiny fraction of a gram of anti matter reactant if we could start to control the lovely side effects like gamma ray radiation. And then when you start to imagine what we don't know... [1] - https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/home/antimatter_spaceship.html https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/home/antimatter_spaceship.h...