As always, fascinating to read comments on an article like this. There really is a simple solution to the Fermi Paradox: If evolution never happened, the FP falls apart.
Evolution never happened. Ergo... Despite the fancy graphs and equations, this is really not about science.
I see Evolution as our modern secular religious myth, whose purpose is to try to answer the basic questions we all ask, viz, Who am I? Why am I here? Where am I going? We're all force-fed the mantra that we came from stardust. Oh, really? Anyone actually see that happen? Can it be tested and repeated in a laboratory?
If there's one thing I try to do, which I did myself, it's get people to QUESTION evolution. If you do, usually fanatics come out of the closet and attack you for being anti-science, a religious fanatic, and so on. Which of course, demonstrates to me the religious nature of evolution.
As one who became a non-evolutionist by simply questioning what my biology and science teachers and textbooks were telling me back in the 1970s, before I knew anything about what the "other side" believed, that is, just "going on the evidence," I encourage others to simply ask questions. Do the real science. Don't just accept things because some "expert" says it. Much of what we call "science" nowadays is speculation, imagination, and fantasy. It's not science. Creating scenarios that use words like "may be, might be, could be, possibly, we think, we believe," just because it suits your imagination is good science fiction, but put it to the test, ask where the actual evidence is; ask questions.
For instance, we hear all the time about water being necessary for life as we know it. Yup. But the presence of water permeates the universe, and is absolutely meaningless. A bunch of chemicals in a puddle of water won't turn themselves into living things. Just doesn't happen. Even if you add Evolution's miracle worker, TIME, to the equation, it just doesn't happen, and won't happen. All the "real science" indicates that the evolutionary scenario will break down before it even gets started.
Take it by faith.
After all, that's what much of evolutionary belief requires. Much of what we claim as "truth" about the distant past can neither be tested empirically, nor repeated, and changes almost weekly. What we call "evolution" usually is "adaptation," requiring genetic information and phenotypic structures to ALREADY be present, and tells us nothng about how they got there in the first place. Even Stephen Gould, one of evolution's high priests, admitted, for instance, that the lack of transitional species was the "trade secret" of paleontology, and had to invent the desperate concept of Punctuated Equilibrium to try to respond to it. And his admission is just the tip of the iceberg.
So, the Fermi Paradox might be good for a Star Trek episode, but it's not science.
Now, I know this'll raise some hackles, but I've said my piece here and care not to get into any arguments. Have been studying this topic over four decades now, from the perspectives of biology, astronomy, geology, history, sociology, religion, etc., and am more convinced of my postion than ever. Someone has to have a dissenting idea. We can't all, like blind sheep, or like the Aristotelians in Galileo's day, just accept the status quo unquestioningly. And unfortunately, often those who do ask questions suffer the consequences. So be it.
[Edited to add that those who know history are aware that Galileo was first attacked by his peers at the University of Padova [Padua if you wish], not the church. That came later because the church bought into the notion that the Earth was the center of the universe, which was the generally accepted tenet of the day. Now much of the church has bought into Evolution. No surprises there. Also, Galileo was attacked more because he was a threat to the church's power than for his cosmology. As usual, we don't normally get the full story when there's an agenda behind it.]