Subject:
|
Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 19 Jan 2001 19:48:47 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1535 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tom Stangl writes:
> Jon Kozan wrote:
>
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes:
> > (snip)
> > > I find given the scale of the
> > > universe, it seems mathematically likely that there is extra-terrestrial
> > > life. Evidence is suggesting that planets are fairly common. The right
> > > mix
> > > of time, elements, stablity, heat and light are required, but again, given
> > > the scale, it seems earth-like conditions are likely to be reproduced on a
> > > significant number of places.
> >
> > Sorry Bruce, but I must differ - you must be speaking as a layman there.
> > While planets seem to exists in ever-increasing numbers - that we can see
> > evidence of, there is no evidence of life elsewhere. Not that I'm saying it
> > won't be eventually found, but the odds aren't with it.
> >
> > In fact the odds are so _not_ with it (about 1 in 10 with 50, give or take
> > 10,
> > zeros chance) that we could never have come into being without some other
> > force/being/etc behind it.
>
>
> Even if the odds WERE 1:10^50, the sheer # of stars in the universe give it an
> EXTREMELY good chance of happening elsewhere. MANY elsewhere's, actually.
>
> And thinking that God created a universe of BILLIONS (Trillions, quadrillions,
> etc) of stars just to give us a pretty sky to look at, again, is rather
> arrogant.
I think you're well-intentioned - but on the mathematics game -- you're sorely
mis-informed.
I'll take your billions and even trillions of stars against my 10^50 any day.
You see, you're talking 10^12 vs 10^50 -it's soooo far off it's laughable.
hoho,
-Jon
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
| (...) You likewise seem fairly well-intentioned, and I agree that 10^50 is more stars than I can hold in my hand at once. However, the Drake equation (I remembered its name at last!) addresses the likelihood of life, and it often (depending on the (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
| 1 - I dispute your 1:10^50 2 - I don't have the # of stars in the universe handy (NOONE does), but it is multi-magnitudes beyond trillions. Not to mention the possibility of multiple planets around a large # of those stars is becoming more evident (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
| (...) Even if the odds WERE 1:10^50, the sheer # of stars in the universe give it an EXTREMELY good chance of happening elsewhere. MANY elsewhere's, actually. And thinking that God created a universe of BILLIONS (Trillions, quadrillions, etc) of (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
298 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
