My Point About Quadrillions of Stars

[David Sklansky]

Every once in a while someone makes reference to a point that I and others make about why God would bother creating all those stars along with quasars, black holes. etc, most of which are so far away from us that we can't see them or be affected by them.

I just wanted to make sure that people understand that this point does little to make the existence of God less likely and I have never said otherwise. It only makes it less likely that God created the universe specifically for one species, during one tiny sliver of time during the universe's existence, on one specific planet, in one specific solar system, of one specific star in one specific galaxy.

It seems to me that most religions have made [censored] sapiens living on the third planet out of nine, of a very average star, in an average galaxy, during a two million year period, 14 billion years after the big bang, the main focus of God's attention. And if they don't, I think most have backed off of this stance very recently. In any case I don't use this argument to refute any religion that admits that God may be just as interested in aliens, self aware possibly man made, computers, a freakishly intelligent chimpanzee, and who knows what else, as he is with this one species.

[PairTheBoard]

Funny that [censored] sapiens gets censored but homosapiens is ok. I wonder what the software does with [censored]-sapiens.

PairTheBoard

[Piz0wn0reD!!!!!!]

[ QUOTE ]
Funny that [censored] sapiens gets censored but homosapiens is ok. I wonder what the software does with [censored]-sapiens.

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]

gay sapiens?

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
Funny that [censored] sapiens gets censored but homosapiens is ok. I wonder what the software does with [censored]-sapiens.

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]

Ho<font color="black">mo </font> Sapiens.

Mack

[tomdemaine]

invigorating discussion as ever guys /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[PairTheBoard]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Funny that [censored] sapiens gets censored but homosapiens is ok. I wonder what the software does with [censored]-sapiens.

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]

Ho<font color="black">mo </font> Sapiens.

Mack

[/ QUOTE ]

You can get b<font color="blue">a</font><font color="green">nn</font><font color="red">ed</font> for that kind of thing you know.

PairTheBoard

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Funny that [censored] sapiens gets censored but homosapiens is ok. I wonder what the software does with [censored]-sapiens.

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]

Ho<font color="black">mo </font> Sapiens.

Mack

[/ QUOTE ]

You can get b<font color="blue">a</font><font color="green">nn</font><font color="red">ed</font> for that kind of thing you know.

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]

I know, I thought it would be okay as it wasn't a profanity, depends who the mod is though I guess. lol

Regards Mack

[TheCaptain]

[ QUOTE ]
It seems to me that most religions have made [censored] sapiens ... the main focus of God's attention.

[/ QUOTE ]

True. The point of religion is to recast the world so it makes sense and our lives / actions have meaning. This has nothing to do with logic.

[Timer]

[ QUOTE ]
Every once in a while someone makes reference to a point that I and others make about why God would bother creating all those stars along with quasars, black holes. etc, most of which are so far away from us that we can't see them or be affected by them.

I just wanted to make sure that people understand that this point does little to make the existence of God less likely and I have never said otherwise. It only makes it less likely that God created the universe specifically for one species, during one tiny sliver of time during the universe's existence, on one specific planet, in one specific solar system, of one specific star in one specific galaxy.



[/ QUOTE ]

In my opinion, all the more reason to believe we are utterly alone in the universe. [Which of course we are.]

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
Every once in a while someone makes reference to a point that I and others make about why God would bother creating all those stars along with quasars, black holes. etc, most of which are so far away from us that we can't see them or be affected by them.

I just wanted to make sure that people understand that this point does little to make the existence of God less likely and I have never said otherwise. It only makes it less likely that God created the universe specifically for one species, during one tiny sliver of time during the universe's existence, on one specific planet, in one specific solar system, of one specific star in one specific galaxy.

It seems to me that most religions have made [censored] sapiens living on the third planet out of nine, of a very average star, in an average galaxy, during a two million year period, 14 billion years after the big bang, the main focus of God's attention. And if they don't, I think most have backed off of this stance very recently. In any case I don't use this argument to refute any religion that admits that God may be just as interested in aliens, self aware possibly man made, computers, a freakishly intelligent chimpanzee, and who knows what else, as he is with this one species.

[/ QUOTE ]

Although I haven't read "A Brief History of Time" I often ponder if the universe is nothing more than the machine that gives Earth it's distinct power.

For instance, all the planets stars etc. coexist just to keep life on Earth possible.

Me personally, I don't believe there is anything else out there in our universe, but I believe it is more likely that life exists in other dimensions and in those dimensions they have their own universe etc.

I think God could have well created other life but if it is the Judeo-Christian God it definately seems he wants to keep any other projects seperate from this one.

Or maybe this God is only God of this universe, and that in others there is another God, perhaps one per universe or dimension, but who is not concerned with us because we are not in his/her jurisdiction?

Or maybe it is only the one God that spans multiple universes and dimensions and any life that exist on them is his work.

Who knows?

[David Sklansky]

"Although I haven't read "A Brief History of Time" I often ponder if the universe is nothing more than the machine that gives Earth it's distinct power."

But an omnipotent God would have no need to do that.

[David Sklansky]

"For instance, all the planets stars etc. coexist just to keep life on Earth possible."

But that cannot be. How dare you have opinions about this stuff without knowing basic physics?

[Timer]

[ QUOTE ]
"Although I haven't read "A Brief History of Time" I often ponder if the universe is nothing more than the machine that gives Earth it's distinct power."

But an omnipotent God would have no need to do that.

[/ QUOTE ]

An omnipotent God would have no need to do anything.

i dont know how you dare to question god..

[spaminator101]

um since you obviously havent been around for long i suggest you not say things such as that on this forum( learned that for myself a few days ago)
all it will do is get you kicked around

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

But that cannot be. How dare you have opinions about this stuff without knowing basic physics?

[/ QUOTE ]

Care to elaborate? While I'm not saying that I agree, I think that there are a few physicists who might make anthropic principle arguments that say pretty much "Yep, the universe is the way it is because otherwise we wouldn't be here." I can also imagine that, say, the formation of the solar system might have proceeded very differently had there not been considerable matter elsewhere in the universe to perturb it, though I don't know how likely that is.

EDIT: to clarify, looking back at the statement you were replying to, it is silly to say that we need stars 1000 light years away to sustain life right now. I'm talking about the possibility that humans would not have existed in the first place had they not been there, which is obviously pretty different.

[NotReady]

I think you've shifted on this a bit, but in any case at least you've clarified that you don't now have the position I thought you did. Bravo.

As to aliens, etc., I take no position. There may be no other life forms or millions. However many there are, God is a just and loving God to all.

[Lestat]

[ QUOTE ]
"For instance, all the planets stars etc. coexist just to keep life on Earth possible."

But that cannot be. How dare you have opinions about this stuff without knowing basic physics?

[/ QUOTE ]

But what about the butterfly theory? What does physics have to say about that? Has it been disproven and if not, why couldn't something that happens 4 million light years away have an effect on the planet earth?

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
"For instance, all the planets stars etc. coexist just to keep life on Earth possible."

But that cannot be. How dare you have opinions about this stuff without knowing basic physics?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not that I have an opinion per se, but please enlighten me as to why my question above is incorrect.

[goofball]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"For instance, all the planets stars etc. coexist just to keep life on Earth possible."

But that cannot be. How dare you have opinions about this stuff without knowing basic physics?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not that I have an opinion per se, but please enlighten me as to why my question above is incorrect.

[/ QUOTE ]

Things exist in the universe that are farther away from earth than the speed of light could have travelled in the age of the universe. Nothing travels faster than light including information for obvious reasons. The rest should be clear.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"For instance, all the planets stars etc. coexist just to keep life on Earth possible."

But that cannot be. How dare you have opinions about this stuff without knowing basic physics?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not that I have an opinion per se, but please enlighten me as to why my question above is incorrect.

[/ QUOTE ]

Things exist in the universe that are farther away from earth than the speed of light could have travelled in the age of the universe. Nothing travels faster than light including information for obvious reasons. The rest should be clear.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is what you thought I was saying David?

[David Sklansky]

That was my point. Yes.

[David Sklansky]

"I think you've shifted on this a bit, but in any case at least you've clarified that you don't now have the position I thought you did. Bravo.

As to aliens, etc., I take no position. There may be no other life forms or millions. However many there are, God is a just and loving God to all."

I haven't shifted my position. As to your second paragraph, I think you've shifted on this a bit, but in any case at least you've clarified that you don't now have the position I thought you did. Bravo.

Sure you haven't switched position, but is it good?

[PairTheBoard]

[ QUOTE ]
"I think you've shifted on this a bit, but in any case at least you've clarified that you don't now have the position I thought you did. Bravo.

As to aliens, etc., I take no position. There may be no other life forms or millions. However many there are, God is a just and loving God to all."

I haven't shifted my position. As to your second paragraph, I think you've shifted on this a bit, but in any case at least you've clarified that you don't now have the position I thought you did. Bravo.

[/ QUOTE ]

David's and NotReady's positions are so far apart that regardless of how much they shift, the age of the universe is not long enough for photons of light to pass between them.

PairTheBoard

[David Sklansky]

You are farther from Not Ready than I am.

[PairTheBoard]

[ QUOTE ]
You are farther from Not Ready than I am.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's because Your baloney does not Quite reach all the way from top to bottom.

PairTheBoard

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
That was my point. Yes.

[/ QUOTE ]

To clarify, I mean't that I wonder if the Universe is all connected so as life on Earth is only possible if other things exist which in turn rely on other things, etc etc.

Here's a news story which is sort of what I think about:

[ QUOTE ]

Meteors 'may have jump-started life'

Meteor strikes may have led to the extinction of some life on Earth, but a new study says they may have also contributed to the creation of life.

Geologists researching the crater left when the Haughton meteor slammed into what is now Canada's Arctic 23 million years ago found the impact created hydrothermal springs in the cracked rock and other conditions that would have made it easier for microbes to survive and evolve.

According to some theories, the impact of a meteor hitting the Earth may have caused the extinction of the dinosaurs.

Researchers say the impact sparked huge fires and a gigantic dust cloud.

"Most people put impacts with mass extinction... what we're trying to say is that following the impact, the impact sites are actually more favourable than the surrounding terrain," Gordon Osinski, of the Canadian Space Agency, said.

Researchers also found that in addition to hydrothermal springs, meteor impacts would have allowed microbes easier access to minerals in a protected environment.

Mr Osinski says that the heaviest meteor bombardment of Earth happened about 3.8 billion years ago, around the same time that life on the planet is believed to have started.

The researchers reported their study at a joint meeting of the Geological Society of America and the Geological Association of Canada.

The Haughton crater on Devon Island in Canada's Nunavut Territory is often used by researchers looking at methods to aid the search for life on Mars.

- Reuters


[/ QUOTE ]

So what if by direct contact life can be created/destroyed, and by indirect contact it can be sustained? What if one thing relies on another elsewhere for survival unbeknown to it?

I guess this is sort of like "Chaos Theory"/Butterfly Effect, but I don't know.

Also, I think it was a little strong to say 'how dare I have an opinion' over this without knowing the basics of physics. I assume that was a payback remark pseudo-mirroring the times I said you should read the Bible for yourself rather than rely on second hand information. (although I don't ever remember having such a blunt tone, if I did I apologize)

Cheers,
SDM

PS - in my original post I should have used the word 'wonder' rather than 'ponder'.