So perhaps you are not convinced the Earth is God’s unique habitat for humanity. Perhaps you still believe that there could be hundreds or maybe even thousands of duplicates out there somewhere. Well, there are ways that we can test that hypothesis. For example, if there are no other stars like our Sun, then that would lend credence to the notion that there is no other stellar system like ours that contains a life-supporting planet.

It so happens that astronomers proposed this very idea several decades ago, and some of them have devoted a significant portion of their careers investigating this question. Fifty years have passed during which scientists have rigorously searched our Milky Way Galaxy in search of our Sun’s twin…to no avail. Hundreds of thousands of candidates have been interviewed, but there have been only three finalists, all of whom failed. These stars came close to our Sun in a number of categories, but fell short in crucial areas (such as luminosity, metallicity, lithium balance, and age), being dubbed as “quasi solar twins,” but still inadequate for sustaining a life-supporting planetary system.

There also is the issue of planets called gas giants. For any solar system to support advanced life, it must have just the right number and kind of giant gaseous planets to protect the life-sustaining planet from comet, asteroid, and meteor collisions from afar. Early in Earth’s history, such bombardments were necessary in order to shape our planet into just the right fit for advanced life to flourish. However, continued vulnerability to such abuse would render advanced life impossible, and no single gas giant is sufficient to provide the needed protection. A team of such planets is necessary.

Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune constitute the team of body guards that stand in the way of the certain cosmic assault and battery that earth would otherwise experience. Such planets cannot be either too large or too small and must have just the right mass to absorb or deflect incoming asteroids or comets. Such is the case with our planetary protectors. So far, researchers have discovered 304 planetary systems besides ours in our galaxy. 303 of these systems contain at least one gas giant. However, unlike ours, the size, mass, constitution, and array of these planets prohibit the existence of life sustaining planets within any of their planetary systems. There is one Jupiter twin out there, but it has no partners and is twenty percent closer to its star than our Jupiter is to the Sun, making life impossible in its system as well.   

Finally, we must consider the nature of our Milky Way Galaxy itself. Only six percent of all galaxies have maintained a spiral structure for billions of years, allowing for the appropriate supply of heavy metals needed for advanced life. The Milky Way is one of these. Furthermore, a spiral galaxy must offer a life-sustaining planet a “habitable zone” at a radial distance from the center of the galaxy where adequate heavy elements exist and at a position where radiation levels are not dangerous and stars are not too dense.

In addition, the planet must be in a zone where it will not frequently cross the galaxy’s spiral arms and which is virtually free of spiral “spurs” and “feathers.” All of this is true about the position of Earth within the Milky Way. As astronomer Hugh Ross asserts, “There are … more than a hundred highly improbable galactic characteristics that must be present for advanced life to be possible” (More Than a Theory, 130). Aside from the Milky Way, no other galaxy comes close.

A bonus feature of our galaxy is the galactic cluster in which it is found. Most such clusters contain thousands of tightly packed giant and super-giant galaxies. Our Local Group, on the other hand, consists of only forty total galaxies, two of which are medium sized and the rest of which are dwarfs. In addition, these galaxies are spread far apart. As a result, there is little turbulence among galaxies that would disturb the perfect symmetry of the Milky Way’s spiral arms. Also, being one of the two medium sized galaxies in the Local Group, the Milky Way periodically absorbs one of the dwarfs in order to maintain its spiral structure, the only type of galactic structure that is capable of sustaining advanced life.

When one begins to add up all of the things that had to go right in order for human life to exist, and when one begins to realize that our advancing technology and corresponding abilities to peer into space make us increasingly aware of the lack of any other place in the universe where such life could be sustained, one cannot help but wonder if in fact Earth really is God’s unique habitat for humanity.

Blessings,

Arnie Gentile

                                       Visit the Christian Apologetics Bookshop. 

                                  

                      

 

 

 

     

 

        

How unique is planet Earth? Perhaps you have heard that we shouldn’t believe the hype. Earth is nothing special. It is just an insignificant speck among billions of other insignificant specks occupying a mammoth universe that just happens to be here by chance. Since earth is nothing special, neither are we. We are just animals who evolved from other animals that are nothing really special either. We happen to be the lucky ones who wound up at the top of the food chain on a planet that coincidentally supports intelligent life. We live; we die, and the cycle continues until it all goes up in smoke. No meaning, no purpose, nothing special. << MORE >>

The enthronement of naturalistic science began during the Enlightenment era (1650-1800) when Niccolo Machiavelli argued that we must stop seeking wisdom from the ancients and come to recognize that they were wrong. We should forget about what life ought to be about and concentrate on how it is. Instead of exhorting men to virtue, we should emancipate them within their vulgarity. << MORE >>

n his now classic article entitled "Famine, Affluence, and Morality," influential atheist, ethicist, and animal activist Peter Singer challenges affluent western societies to “ante up” and relieve the global suffering caused by poverty and famine. To do so is not merely charitable; it is morally obligatory. It is unjustifiable that affluent nations and the affluent people who occupy them enjoy wealth beyond their needs while others are starving in distant lands. << MORE >>

Although physics may have been the first science in a practical sense, for Aristotle, it was not the highest science. Aristotle reserved this honor for metaphysics, or what he called theology, which is the study of being as being. Even so, Aristotle’s method would not allow one to engage in idle mystical speculation. He insisted that one could only know of that which is beyond our immediate awareness by studying that which is immediate, that is, the physical world.<< MORE >>

“All men by nature desire to know,” asserted Aristotle in the opening line of his Metaphysics. This being the case, what is knowledge and how does one pursue it? When one is hungry to know, what is it for which he truly longs? It may be true of other animals that sensation and experience are sufficient, but not so with man. Humans have a rational faculty that compels them to seek understanding, not just experience. Of what, therefore, must a healthy intellectual diet consist if this hunger is to be satisfied? What are the basic nutrients?<< MORE >>

Plato offered some famous illustrations and allegories in an attempt to defend and explicate his theory of the perfect Forms and the path to knowing them. But by far his most popular illustration of the process of attaining true knowledge is contained in his allegory of the cave. In his dialogue entitled Republic, Plato tells a story of men shackled in a cave such that they must face the back wall. Behind them and slightly above them is a pit of fire behind a short wall. Beneath the wall on a road before it, and hidden behind a partition, are puppeteers who carry statues of men and beasts that rise above the partition and short wall in front of the fire and cast shadows on the back wall of the cave. The men believe these shadows and images constitute the real world.<< MORE >>

Why study ancient philosophers? As Church Father Tertullian famously queried many centuries ago, "What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?" Since we have the completed Scriptures and the revelation of Jesus Christ, what need is there any longer to study those pagan Greeks who speculated so long ago about the nature of reality?<< MORE >>

Francis Schaeffer, in his classic work How Should We Then Live, and Allan Bloom, in his classic The Closing of the American Mind, established themselves as two of the most seminal thinkers of the late Twentieth Century. Both of them saw the coming demise of western culture, but each viewed this demise through a different lens. Were these views mutually exclusive?<< MORE >>

The Chalcedonian Definition declared that the human and divine natures of Christ were not to be confounded or confused but equally asserted that there was but one person existent in these two natures. The union was hypostatic in that it was metaphysically substantial and not just a loose conjunction of two complete and separate hypostases which could be considered distinct persons.<< MORE >>