Most Scientists Believe in Alien Life Despite the Universe’s Silence
The scientific community has spoken more clearly than ever before about the search for life beyond Earth. In a recent publication in Nature Astronomy, researchers revealed a consensus on one of the most important questions in modern science: Is it worth searching for extraterrestrial life?
Between February and June 2024, the study’s authors sent surveys to both astrobiologists—experts in extraterrestrial life—and scientists from other fields, including biologists and physicists. In total, 521 astrobiologists and 534 scientists from related disciplines participated, providing the most comprehensive picture to date of scientific opinion on this topic.
Survey Results: Strong Belief in Extraterrestrial Life
The survey results speak for themselves: 86.6% of astrobiologists believe there is a high probability that at least simple forms of life exist somewhere in the universe, while only 2% completely reject this possibility. Respondents could also choose a neutral answer if they felt the other options were not relevant, but only 12% did so.
Among scientists from other fields, the results were even more optimistic—88.4% agreed that primitive alien life could exist somewhere in distant worlds.
Views on Complex and Intelligent Life
When it came to more complex forms of life, confidence levels dropped but remained impressive. A total of 67.4% of all respondents supported the idea that complex organisms exist elsewhere, and 58.2% considered intelligent life possible.
Even regarding intelligent civilizations, only 10.2% of astrobiologists disagreed with the idea. The rest either supported the hypothesis or chose not to give a definite answer. This distribution is especially notable given the traditional scientific skepticism, where consensus is usually reached only with direct evidence. In this case, however, a wealth of indirect evidence and theoretical reasoning tipped the scales. Recent research has shown that conditions suitable for life are much more common than previously thought.
Potential Habitats in Our Solar System
Even within our own solar system, there are several promising locations. Beneath the thick ice of Jupiter’s and Saturn’s moons—Europa and Enceladus—lie deep oceans of liquid water. On Mars, zones suitable for microbial life may exist just a few kilometers below the surface, where the soil protects them from radiation. Billions of years ago, Mars was dramatically different from today’s desert; large rivers flowed across its surface, feeding into vast lakes. If organic compounds could form in such conditions, it’s likely that similar processes have occurred on countless planets in other star systems.
Life on Earth as Evidence
The very fact that life arose on Earth is a strong argument for its emergence elsewhere. Although the mechanism by which non-living matter becomes living is not fully understood, scientists see no reason to believe that unique conditions are required. Even if the probability of spontaneous organic formation is extremely low, it is certainly not zero.
Mathematical Odds Favor Life
Mathematical calculations also inspire optimism. With over 100 billion galaxies and an estimated 100 billion billion planets and moons with potentially suitable conditions, even a minuscule probability of life arising (one in a billion billion) makes its existence statistically likely. The study’s authors believe this is why both optimists and pessimists tended to choose “agree” or “strongly agree,” except for the most extreme skeptics.
Consensus Reaches 97% When Neutral Answers Excluded
When analyzing the results, the researchers proposed an alternative approach: if the 60 neutral responses are excluded as a sign of scientific caution, then among the remaining 461 participants, the level of agreement reaches 97.8%.
Why Scientists Choose Neutrality
In science, neutrality is often seen as the safest path. As early as 1975, geophysicist Edward Bullard noted that researchers tend to express uncertainty rather than make definitive statements on complex issues. Choosing a neutral answer may also indicate a reluctance to delve deeply into the problem—a kind of “path of least resistance.”