Goldylocks zone planet: very few must exist (Introduction)

by dhw, Thursday, March 09, 2017, 11:50 (2608 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: As an agnostic, I find the design argument (the enormous complexity of even the most basic forms of life) extremely compelling. However, the possible exclusivity of the Earth is far from compelling. Why would your God create billions and billions of solar systems that come and go, all for the sake of one tiny planet? What a waste of energy! (At least life elsewhere might remove that objection). The sheer immensity - perhaps even infinity - of the universe creates doubts: which is harder to believe in – a mind which incredibly has no origin and can encompass infinity, or an incredibly lucky combination in an infinity of combinations? I use “incredibly” in its most literal sense, because that is the agnostic’s dilemma. I cannot believe in either explanation. And so I am wrong one way or the other! Ah, but which way?

DAVID: Once again you are using your human judgment to consider God's work. Humans judged the human retina and laughed at its strange backwards, upside down arrangement, but human research shows it is the best retina extant for precise vision. Now you comment fits that example:
"Why would your God create billions and billions of solar systems that come and go, all for the sake of one tiny planet? What a waste of energy!"
How do you KNOW it is a waste of energy. Our solar system requires a special kind of sun, not a common style star, as one example of Hugh Ross's comments, presented yesterday, about our special Earth. It is YOUR human judgment that gets in your way.

Of course I don't "KNOW" anything, and nor do you, but what other judgement can either of us use? Please explain, then, how you think a solar system that died billions of years ago, billions of light years away from our own, might have been vital for the the production of human beings. If you can’t do so, then you should be able to understand why I am sceptical.