God Vs. Science

We can't really say much about how good the view is from here when we have no idea how good the view is from other places Pvtnum.

Which is why we need to hurry up and see things from the POV of other planets and systems so we can know for sure how good we have it.

Barkey: Well, we'd have a nicer view in the outer rim of the galaxy, yes, but the galactic habitable zone lies mid-way from core to outer edge - you need novas and supernovas to produce heavier elements and you need enough iron floating around so that you can have an iron core terrestrial planet so that you can have a magnetic field so that the sun doesn't strip off the atmposphere so that you can have liquid water so that life can form so that that life can peer upwards and ponder their existence and the meaning of life.

It's... a hell of a lot of factors to account for. (and for me, anyway, it's pretty neat to think about.)

We're also in a region that is mostly free from dust clouds and nova remnants, as we're between spiral arms. If we were in a more crowded stellar environment, we'd have to deal with a brighter night sky and reduced clarity into space beyond the galaxy.

Or something like that. Living in the central core of a galaxy would be idiocy. Much too busy in the core.

edited 30th Jun '11 11:29:36 AM by pvtnum11

Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.

You're not thinking in galactic terms. Think "thousands of lightyears and hundreds of millions of years. Or watch Monty Python's Galaxy Song.

Plus, Sol has been in arms before, and will be again. Nothing special about that.

The conditions you listed seem to be vital for life as we know it. There might be other ways to be alive.

The Quiet One. No OTT. No unfunny. No squick. No crusades. Harmless and clean.

Sure, you could get bacteria on something less than ideal, but intelligent life? If it was common, I'd imagine we would've found them, or they would've found us, unless they're too far out for either to detect.

Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.

"So pray that there's intelligent life, somewhere out in space, cause there's bugger all down here on earth".

Jokes aside, the ways of evolution are many and unpredictable. Latest research postulates human brain development was the result of a runaway evolutionary phenomenon, much like the peacock's tail. Except they weren't competing for who had the sharpest tool in the shed (that didn't give much reproductive edge) but who was the most Magnificent Bastard: that was who got to be the boss, and who got to land the chicks.

The Quiet One. No OTT. No unfunny. No squick. No crusades. Harmless and clean.

You never know man, what about a creature that requires no sunlight and breathes methane and eats rocks? YOU NEVER KNOW MAN.

You need an atmosphere, a magnetic field, a source of heat and energy and the presence of liquid water to have life. It's not that far-fetched.

Chemosynthesis is nowhere near as energetic as metabolizing glucose or photosynthesis. I doubt chemosynthetic aliens can progress much further than bacteria.

edited 30th Jun '11 12:45:07 PM by SavageHeathen

You exist because we allow it and you will end because we demand it.

I know Man. Swell guy. We used to breakdance together. But then he got served. Haven't seen him since.

But, yeah, there's maybe lots of ways to develop spiral races besides our own. Or maybe there's only ours, and we're alone. I'm not sure that's a bad thing.

The Quiet One. No OTT. No unfunny. No squick. No crusades. Harmless and clean.

Right now, it's bad. Like, very bad. If we go extinct and there's no other spacefaring intelligent species in the universe, all our achievements would become meaningless, without nobody to remember them, and there's no guarantee we'll ever spread out.

Once humanity gets off this planet and starts colonizing space on its own terms, being alone would be a godsend. The Universe is plenty hostile as it is: Not having to worry about potentially hostile sentient competitors might be a real plus.

You exist because we allow it and you will end because we demand it.

No, you need those things to have life as we know it.

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

Just one point about the rarity of life and the vastness of the universe. If life-sustaining conditions were rare enough such that you would only have a single planet in a galaxy giving rise to sentient life (and for all intents and purposes that would probably mean we would never meet any aliens in our entire species' existence even if we achieve FTL somehow), there would be more than 10,000 sentient races in the entire universe.

edited 30th Jun '11 2:14:22 PM by nightwyrm_zero

^ Which is neat to think about, even if we'll never meet them. The possibilities - are they like us or so wildly different? How did they grapple with a "God vs Science" debate? It's fun to ponder that stuff, yes?

Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.

As far as this one knows, the argument against it is that it's not the planed that is so well-suited for us, but we are suited to fit the planet. If conditions were different, we'd evolved differently. There would be some blops of sentient slime which would ask the same question, and marvel how well sulphurous atmosphere suits them.

If one pours some water in a cup, could water be awed by how well the shape of the cup fits it? No, for it is the water that took the shape of cup.

If we disagree, that much, at least, we have in common

Anthropic Principle?

The Quiet One. No OTT. No unfunny. No squick. No crusades. Harmless and clean.

Close, especially this

If we disagree, that much, at least, we have in common