Why Is Only Earth Carrying Life?

[arthurchappell]

Why would God only put life on one of the planets at least in our solar system? Most worlds are undoubtedly just lumps or rock, ice and gas. Why would God not create other species and peoples for those? It seems a terribly wasted opportunity. Even if we find some life on more distant stars, it is clear that the bulk of the universe is devoid of life. Without God that is easy to grasp why, but with a God, it would seem that creation experimentation would be carried out elsewhere.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Why would God only put life on one of the planets at least in our solar system? Most worlds are undoubtedly just lumps or rock, ice and gas. Why would God not create other species and peoples for those? It seems a terribly wasted opportunity. Even if we find some life on more distant stars, it is clear that the bulk of the universe is devoid of life. Without God that is easy to grasp why, but with a God, it would seem that creation experimentation would be carried out elsewhere.

I suspect life is abundent. It probably only seems that way because we are stuck in the Goldilocks zone here. Other earth-like planets are so far away and the distance is so vast, making it hard to detect life in other areas designated as Goldilocks.

Even here in our own solar system, aside from mars , there is no real effort to find life specifically. Probably because such endeavors are still hideously expensive and difficult.

You could also surmise we are effectively in the "rural" area of the Galaxy.

 

[Kenny]

Why would God only put life on one of the planets at least in our solar system? Most worlds are undoubtedly just lumps or rock, ice and gas. Why would God not create other species and peoples for those? It seems a terribly wasted opportunity. Even if we find some life on more distant stars, it is clear that the bulk of the universe is devoid of life. Without God that is easy to grasp why, but with a God, it would seem that creation experimentation would be carried out elsewhere.

I think because He knew man would multiplied, He provided means as to where to multiply to.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

..., it is clear that the bulk of the universe is devoid of life.

And just how did this manufactured 'fact' become 'clear' to you?

 

[Mindmaster]

@arthurchappell - I tend to believe that origin of creation isn't something made by a god, but was precursor to that. However, that being said whatever that is isn't going to be able to be studied in the conventional sense because it never technically existed. (At least, in the way we'd use the term...) The logic behind that, of course, is who made the gods that made whatever. It's possible that even the gods do not know in this case.

 

[Salvador]

Why would God only put life on one of the planets at least in our solar system? Most worlds are undoubtedly just lumps or rock, ice and gas. Why would God not create other species and peoples for those? It seems a terribly wasted opportunity. Even if we find some life on more distant stars, it is clear that the bulk of the universe is devoid of life. Without God that is easy to grasp why, but with a God, it would seem that creation experimentation would be carried out elsewhere.

How do you know who put life on Earth? Extraterrestrial intelligence of natural/artificial origin could have been the one(ones) who seeded life on Earth.

 

[arthurchappell]

I suspect life is abundent. It probably only seems that way because we are stuck in the Goldilocks zone here. Other earth-like planets are so far away and the distance is so vast, making it hard to detect life in other areas designated as Goldilocks.

Even here in our own solar system, aside from mars , there is no real effort to find life specifically. Probably because such endeavors are still hideously expensive and difficult.

You could also surmise we are effectively in the "rural" area of the Galaxy.

Thanks, though we are searching for extraterrestial life. The SETI program seeks the heat signitures that might suggest other worlds have high tevhnology. From space we see the heat and light signitaures of our own cities. Until we can actually reach other worlds (even with un-manned craft) that is as close as we could get but so far we have found little, though worlds with water show hope. The question remains as to why any existing God would make so many lifeless worlds

 

[Twilight Hue]

Thanks, though we are searching for extraterrestial life. The SETI program seeks the heat signitures that might suggest other worlds have high tevhnology. From space we see the heat and light signitaures of our own cities. Until we can actually reach other worlds (even with un-manned craft) that is as close as we could get but so far we have found little, though worlds with water show hope. The question remains as to why any existing God would make so many lifeless worlds

God aside, there is a critical relationship with living and non-living matter. Maybe its worth looking at that.

 

[arthurchappell]

@arthurchappell - I tend to believe that origin of creation isn't something made by a god, but was precursor to that. However, that being said whatever that is isn't going to be able to be studied in the conventional sense because it never technically existed. (At least, in the way we'd use the term...) The logic behind that, of course, is who made the gods that made whatever. It's possible that even the gods do not know in this case.

That just pushes the first cause / prime mover theory back ad infinitum, God was created by God Z, who was created by God Y , etc

 

[arthurchappell]

We certainly need other planets to anchor the solar system. If aliens want to destroy Earth, they could avoid our defences by destroying Jupiter or Saturn. That would affect our orbit and position round our Sun and life would almost certainly perish on Earth too - we are anchored by the other planets around us but I still see no reason why a God wouldn't put some amusing critters on those too

 

[Mindmaster]

That just pushes the first cause / prime mover theory back ad infinitum, God was created by God Z, who was created by God Y , etc

Not really, just saying whatever the creator is it probably isn't recognizable in the conventional sense of a being of any sort. It probably isn't even a being at all. The why, of course, would always be beyond our purview in that case. Being, by the very nature of the word, implies a condition of manifestation. Whatever that creative force was isn't bound by such a rule - it can not exist and simultaneously create an existence. In essence, the only proof of it being a possibility is the matrix we all call reality. It would not be able to be viewed or explained simply due the inability for our sense to be aware of it.

Various gods would be secondary creations in this case, like us, so therefore not the 'prime mover'.

 

[Jumi]

Why would God only put life on one of the planets at least in our solar system? Most worlds are undoubtedly just lumps or rock, ice and gas. Why would God not create other species and peoples for those? It seems a terribly wasted opportunity.

Which God and what type of opportunity?

Even if we find some life on more distant stars, it is clear that the bulk of the universe is devoid of life. Without God that is easy to grasp why, but with a God, it would seem that creation experimentation would be carried out elsewhere.

I don't think it depends on God or gods existing how easy that is to grasp, but personal preference.

 

[whirlingmerc]

b

Why would God only put life on one of the planets at least in our solar system? Most worlds are undoubtedly just lumps or rock, ice and gas. Why would God not create other species and peoples for those? It seems a terribly wasted opportunity. Even if we find some life on more distant stars, it is clear that the bulk of the universe is devoid of life. Without God that is easy to grasp why, but with a God, it would seem that creation experimentation would be carried out elsewhere.

Because the universe is not about us, it's about God.
John Piper said "the universe is like a peanut God carries around in His pocket" it is for the glory of God

The Point of Creation

In all the exoplanets seen there are only about 2 outside of earth in the running as possible life supporting (and that might be overly generous and speculative)

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Why would God only put life on one of the planets at least in our solar system? Most worlds are undoubtedly just lumps or rock, ice and gas. Why would God not create other species and peoples for those? It seems a terribly wasted opportunity. Even if we find some life on more distant stars, it is clear that the bulk of the universe is devoid of life. Without God that is easy to grasp why, but with a God, it would seem that creation experimentation would be carried out elsewhere.

My question would be how do you know what god did or didnt do? Its good to ask questions about gods motives but what is it based on, whats in a sacred scripture or?

I ask because depending on your answer would tell us what you are basing your conclusions on. It wouldnt make sense that we are the only ones in the universe. I think we are thinking too high of ourselves. As for god having to do with it, what source would give you the idea whether god is involved with the universe and people outside our own cultural understanding and creation of god for purpose of origin and destination.

 

[Salvador]

Thanks, though we are searching for extraterrestial life. The SETI program seeks the heat signitures that might suggest other worlds have high tevhnology. From space we see the heat and light signitaures of our own cities. Until we can actually reach other worlds (even with un-manned craft) that is as close as we could get but so far we have found little, though worlds with water show hope. The question remains as to why any existing God would make so many lifeless worlds

True, most highly evolved biological life forms can't subsist beyond the biosphere of a terrestrial planet/spacecraft. Although, extremophiles can subsist in far more harsh environments than more highly evolved life forms. They may even exist presently in the upper atmosphere of Venus, within comets, asteroids, on Mars, Europa, Titan, and Enceladus.
Anyways, the answer to your question is simple. There is no omniscience/omnipotent deity concerned with how much of the universe is habitable for highly evolved apes such as ourselves.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

Why would God only put life on one of the planets at least in our solar system? Most worlds are undoubtedly just lumps or rock, ice and gas. Why would God not create other species and peoples for those? It seems a terribly wasted opportunity. Even if we find some life on more distant stars, it is clear that the bulk of the universe is devoid of life. Without God that is easy to grasp why, but with a God, it would seem that creation experimentation would be carried out elsewhere.

You don't have any idea whether the bulk of the universe is devoid of life or not. You haven't observed it, and your sample size is unbelievably small.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

I think because He knew man would multiplied, He provided means as to where to multiply to.

Are you kidding? It's doubtful humans will even make it to the nearest star other than the sun, let alone any of the other 100,000,000,000 stars in the galaxies or any of the 100,000,000,000 other galaxies in the universe. There is no reason "God" would create a universe so vast just for humans.

 

[arthurchappell]

Not really, just saying whatever the creator is it probably isn't recognizable in the conventional sense of a being of any sort. It probably isn't even a being at all. The why, of course, would always be beyond our purview in that case. Being, by the very nature of the word, implies a condition of manifestation. Whatever that creative force was isn't bound by such a rule - it can not exist and simultaneously create an existence. In essence, the only proof of it being a possibility is the matrix we all call reality. It would not be able to be viewed or explained simply due the inability for our sense to be aware of it.

Various gods would be secondary creations in this case, like us, so therefore not the 'prime mover'.

Now this moves into a beyond our ken / God(s) work in mysterious ways stance - it may be that the universe never reveals all its secrets to science, but much of the response here is simply stretching imagination to extreme what if territory. What if we are all made of custard? No, says B, we are all butterflies, c says .... atheists would agree God isn't a being at all, It turns the debate into one of those conversations with a child who just says why? to every reply until the educator and replier gets fed up and shuts down the conversation.

 

[Kenny]

Are you kidding? It's doubtful humans will even make it to the nearest star other than the sun, let alone any of the other 100,000,000,000 stars in the galaxies or any of the 100,000,000,000 other galaxies in the universe. There is no reason "God" would create a universe so vast just for humans.

I disagree... The moon was an imagination 1000 years ago. Airplane flying was a dream 150 years ago. Space was a dream 90 years ago. Landing on the moon was a thought just 75 years ago. Nano-technology started just 40 years ago. Exponentially, knowledge is increasing.

Lasers as weapons by 2023..

I think God did see beyond our today and thus there a billions of galaxies with billions of stars in each galaxy and it is growing.

But, since we are talking about the future, you can't prove me wrong and I can't prove you wrong either. We are in a position opinions

 

[Salvador]

b



In all the exoplanets seen there are only about 2 outside of earth in the running as possible life supporting (and that might be overly generous and speculative)

1. Please define "life". 2. How do you know there are only 2 exoplanets where this "life" could potentially subsist?