Is the distance between a planet and its star critical?

Has the earth been placed in just the right place in our solar system? This clip is from our series, “The Scientific Evidence That Proves God Created.” It answers the question:

Video 2

This clip is from our series, “The Scientific Evidence That Proves God Created.” It answers the question: Is the distance between a planet and its star critical?

What are the Anthropic Principles

This clip is from our series, “The Scientific Evidence That Proves God Created.” It answers the question: What are the Anthropic Principles that scientists are finding in our universe?

Video 3

Video 4

Video 5

This clip is from our series, “The Scientific Evidence That Proves God Created.” It answers the question:
Do we have chaos in the universe or exquisite design?

Video 6

This clip is from our series, “The Scientific Evidence That Proves God Created.” It answers the question: When atheists see the evidence that shows God has fine tuned the universe does it cause them to believe in God?

Advertisements

About defendtheword

To contact us please send e-mail to defend.theword@ntlworld.com
This entry was posted in Apologetics, Atheism, Bible, Christ, Christian, Christianity, Church, Church History, Discernment, Evangelism, Evolution, Faith, God, Jesus, News, Photography, Prayer, Prophecy, Religion, Theology, Videos. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Is the distance between a planet and its star critical?

  1. harry says:

    If we find life only on Earth

    OOOOO aren’t we special. God has designed this system just for us.

    Focus on us being special and the rarity of life ignore the endless universe that doesn’t support life.

    If we find life everywhere, oooh God designed the universe so it was ripe for life.

    Pretend humans were never special and insist god designed whole universe to support life.

    Thats not evidence. It is an undefeatable circular argument.

    ‘The stars are to congested at the centre to support life’

    SAYS WHO?!

    All these videos do is assert things which can not be supported by any kind of evidence. Stars are to congested at the centre of the galaxy to support life because I said they are.

    They keep saying we got so lucky by being in the exact right place. IF we are the only planet with life, just THINK about how many planets got unlucky. We got 7 others just in our freaking solar system who failed to role 3 6’s times 200.

    If you enough planets rolling the dice. 1 of them is bound to get 200 all 6’s.

  2. I knew you like to gamble when it fits your requirements but fact is that, this kind of logic is not conducive to logic but guessing game. Fact is that fine-tuning can be deduced from the information we have and there is nothing you or I can do about it.

  3. Harry says:

    ”I knew you like to gamble when it fits your requirements but fact is that, this kind of logic is not conducive to logic but guessing game. Fact is that fine-tuning can be deduced from the information we have and there is nothing you or I can do about it.”

    WHAT?!

    You just can’t answer a point can you.

    The only thing I coukd make sense of is

    ”Fact is that fine-tuning can be deduced from the information we have ”

    Which is absolute nonsense.

    what information that we have points to fine tuning???! Your are in an utter dreamland.

    Once again, its just self important declerations ‘oooh yes we have this information and it points to fine tuning’

    WHAT INFORMATION
    WHAT STUDIES
    WHAT EVIDENCE

    OR ARE YOU JUST SAYING IT?!

  4. You really should listen better and not engage unless you understand the subject otherwise it makes it very uncomfortable for me to continue to show your ignorance. Note that ignorance is not simply lack of knowledge but lack of interest in knowledge.

    I have posted significant amount of post and videos to which you participated again and again and you would now want me to recite them again for you? Note that people are not blind or stupid that they can see exactly what you are trying to do. And guess what I too could play that game and in my case I would be correct as at no point did you successfully challenge or offer alternative.

    Fact remains if you bother to read any of the books by any of the author’s that I have mentioned on this blog you would be better prepared to answer your own misunderstandings. And if you read my comment slowly you would have immediately understood what I was saying to you. And I think that this is your major issue. You are so egger to give the answer without considering what the question was.

  5. Harry says:

    Harry: yes defend, I don’t read and I cant think.

    Why is it then that pretty much every other rational person who comes here knows it is all a load of trollop.

    I don’t think I have ever seen ANYONE post in defence of your position on evolution who makes sense. I remember a couple but they were really were rambling.

    You simply thank them for their input and don’t say anything else because you don’t understand them either. I remember pointing that out a while ago.

    You challenge me on any lack of understanding, but when someone on your side does you sweep it under the rug.

    Like I keep saying to Defend. You don’t make any real points. You never have, you just say you do. The reason I have become so mind numbingly repetitve is because I will keep pointing out to you that you never make any concrete points.

    Defend the Word: First of all, even your reply is based on much regression and same “explanations” which are as I said before regurgitated data picked from the “acceptable” sources to you.

    On the point of not making point you will note that many of my replies have bullet points identifying each issue and addressing them directly. Apart from making the original issues laughable and ridiculing the claimant I have endeavoured to point out inconsistencies and post many video files addressing issues that you simply don’t like.

    I can do no more than that, and I will refuse to engage in ridicule and bullying. Not because I can’t but because my goal has always been to talk logically and examine the evidence. So whilst you may prefer Dr Dawkins and his confident assertions and his patronising stile here you will find reason and encouragement to examine staff you may have been sold as facts.

    But note that the way science works is not by pleasing people but by stating their findings. And this “data” supports the idea of God. Case closed, you may not like it but you must accept the proposition for what it is. I.e. well defined arguments that are ignored and avoided by pretending that they mean nothing. That could work for someone who is likeminded person to you, but to my mind I think we should better use more analytical approach.

Comments are closed.