Article briefly mentions Sagan’s response and then ignores it throughout the remainder of the article because…time has passed since it was posed? In general, t

Article briefly mentions Sagan’s response and then ignores it throughout the remainder of the article because…time has passed since it was posed? In general, the article seems to have an agenda of getting to the zoo hypothesis via process of elimination. But it fails to eliminate Sagan’s response, which is that simply not having detected signs of life isn’t sufficient evidence to rule out life whether it is intentionally hiding from us or not. I don’t know. In terms of getting to the bottom of things this article reads more like wish fulfillment for a science fiction trope. It gets close to a genuine exploration of the history of SETI, but poses too many fallacious arguments in its conclusion.