Our unique planet makes a strong case for purposeful creation. Earth has a confluence of life-permitting habitability factors that defy statistical probability and which point to the work of an all-powerful intelligent designer. The fact that no exoplanet of the thousands discovered so far is even remotely close to Earth-like reveals that our planet is extraordinary and unique.
VIDEO & AUDIO LINKS
VIDEO PRESENTATION: EPISODE 10, OUR UNIQUE PLANET
AUDIO PODCAST: EPISODE 10, OUR UNIQUE PLANET
…………………………….
TRANSCRIPT
Welcome to Episode 10 of Evidence For Belief, a series which examines the evidence for the existence of God. In this episode, we are going to examine the uniqueness of our planet Earth as evidence of intelligent design.
Recently, I watched the first episode of a scientific documentary series on cosmology called “The Great Acceleration” and was shocked at the bald-faced lies that were presented to prop up an atheistic view of the universe. At one point, the narrator, Dr. Shalin Naik, said, “Planets like our own are everywhere.”
Shortly after, Dr. Brad Tucker, an astrophysicist at the Australian National University, boldly proclaimed, “We are not unique. Kepler [a space telescope launched in 2009] told us that there are 20 billion planets like Earth in our galaxy alone.” Yes, that’s right folks: according to this video series, there are 20 billion Earth-like planets in our galaxy!
Before I explain why atheistic scientists are so keen to paint Earth as unremarkable and common, let me firstly reveal how shocking and blatant this exaggeration is, by pointing you to the facts. Because the FACT is that scientists have not yet discovered a SINGLE planet that is even REMOTELY similar to Earth.
At the time of writing, December 2024, scientists have discovered a total of about 4,500 exoplanets (planets orbiting other stars) and NONE of those are confirmed Earth-like planets capable of sustaining life. That is ZERO Earth-like planets. Now I don’t claim to be a mathematician, but even I know that ZERO is a LONG way from 20 billion!
You can easily verify this information on a plethora of scientific websites. For example, NASA has a website called “Exoplanet Catalogue” and there is another website called “Open Exoplanet Catalogue”. These and many other websites list each confirmed exoplanet and provide data concerning the planet’s mass, radius, distance from its star and any other characteristics that have been discovered such as possible atmospheric gases, temperature range, etc.
The problem is that because of the vast distances from Earth of these exoplanets, very few of these planets can actually be viewed by even our strongest space telescopes; Hubble and Kepler. Almost all of these planets have simply been inferred by observing tiny eccentric perturbations in the movement of their relevant stars caused by the gravitational effect of a probable planet in orbit. Scientists observe the faintest wobble in a star’s trajectory and deduce the existence of a planet, estimating its probable mass and distance from the star. 97% of all exoplanets discovered so far have been detected via this method and are too distant to be viewed at all. They have been deduced, not seen.
So the image I showed you a few moments ago, indicating 4,500 exoplanets, is an imaginative representation of these probable planets, not a composite of actual photographs!
A handful of exoplanets, however, are close enough to be viewed with our telescopes. But even in these cases, using the most powerful magnification available to us, they are merely tiny points of light, reflecting their star’s brilliance.
The planet itself cannot be seen in any detail. In the case of these few planets, spectral analysis of the light being reflected by the planet enables scientists to estimate the kind of gases that might be in their atmosphere, if they have one at all. And so far, NO planets with a breathable, Earth-like atmosphere have been discovered.
Furthermore, the vast majority of exoplanets are located in an orbit OUTSIDE the habitable zone of their star. They either orbit too near their star (and are thus too hot) or too far (and are too cold) from the star to be life-permitting. Most exoplanets are also far too massive to sustain life as we know it.
Of the 4,500 currently known exoplanets, only 20 are planets that orbit within their star’s habitable zone. Even in these cases, almost all of them are either too massive or too small to support human life, and none of them have a verifiable breathable atmosphere, liquid water or any of the other essential characteristics necessary for life.
The Planetary Habitability Laboratory is an impressive looking website run by the University of Puerto Rico in conjunction with data from NASA. It keeps an up-to-date list of potentially habitable planets. Currently they list ten exoplanets that “may” be the right distance from their sun.
The only one remotely similar in size to Earth is Proxima Centauri B. It is approximately twice the size and mass of Earth, has an estimated mean temperature of -39 degrees Celsius, is tidally locked to its sun (one side permanently facing the sun and the other side of the planet permanently facing away), and it is orbiting a red dwarf star which is the wrong kind of star at a distance that would bombard the planet with extreme radiation. With all that in mind, Wikipedia’s entry for Proxima Centauri B, states:
What an extraordinary statement! “Its habitability has not been established”? Really? I would say its lack of habitability has been firmly established. And yet this is the best offering that science can dish up as an example of an Earth-like planet.
Cosmologists have a long list of characteristics deemed to be essential if a planet is to be life-permitting. These are referred to as life-permitting habitability factors and all of them have to be in place in order to support biological life:
– Orbiting within the star’s habitable zone
– Liquid water
– Magnetic shield (to protect from harmful radiation)
– Temperature range between 0 and 100 Celsius
– Breathable atmosphere
– Moving tectonic plates
– Liquid core
– Rocky planet (not a gas planet)
– Rotates (is not tidally locked with one face permanently facing its sun)
– Axial tilt for seasons
– Elliptical orbit for seasons
– Large moon for tidal circulation of nutrients and temperature control
– Episodic volcanism and out-gassing
– Life-permitting surface pressure
– Life-permitting rotation rate
– Orbiting the right kind of star (as many star types would be deadly to life)
– The presence of carbon-based photochemistry
– The right distance from the galactic core (too close would be deadly because of radiation)
I’ll stop there, because as I said scientists currently propose about 30 essential factors that are necessary for a planet to be habitable and life-permitting. Each of these criteria are essential; without any one of these, the development and support of biological life would not be possible.
So far, of the approximately 4,500 exoplanets currently discovered or at least deduced, NONE of them come even close to meeting all this criteria. For example, we have not yet discovered a single planet with liquid surface water. And we have not yet discovered a single planet with a breathable atmosphere. Not one!
The exoplanets we have discovered so far are either too massive with gravity that would compress us to a messy puddle of sludge or too tiny to have an atmosphere. They are either frigid wastelands or raging infernos, too close to their sun or too distant. At best they are lifeless lumps of rock or swirling gas giants with poisonous atmospheres and crushing gravities.
This is a vastly different picture to the bare-faced lies of some scientists that earth-like planets are everywhere in our galaxy!
So, how do scientists like Dr Brad Tucker get away with claiming that “there are 20 billion planets like Earth in our galaxy alone”? The answer is that the “20 billion” figure is an estimate of the existence of ANY kind of planet, based on observable evidence.
Cosmologists estimate that up to 90% of stars in our galaxy have at least one planet. Given that our Milky Way Galaxy has about 200 billion stars, scientists therefore extrapolate that our galaxy possibly contains about 180 billion planets. Scientists then make a wild guess that about a quarter of these may be orbiting the right kind of star at the right distance, thus arriving at the figure of roughly 20 to 25 billion. But that figure is not based on ANY solid evidence, it’s purely based on theoretical percentages pulled out of thin air!
For example, an article on the National Radio Astronomy Observatory website in 2014 made the optimistic claim:
“Using the Kepler telescope, it is estimated that 22% of Sun-like stars contain Earth-sized planets orbiting their stars in their habitable zone. This results in an estimate of about 20 billion Earth-like planets in our galaxy.”
The mention of the Kepler telescope gives the appearance of hard science based upon observable evidence, but notice the words “estimated” and “estimate”. The fact is that all the ACTUAL evidence that we’ve observed to date, completely contradicts these estimates. As we’ve already seen, NONE of the exoplanets so far discovered is even remotely like Earth, as far as we have been able to tell.
Significantly, it is only in popular media and documentaries produced for mass consumption where this kind of blatant exaggeration is foisted upon the general public; and it is never backed up by a single example from observable evidence.
Contrary to these hugely optimistic and imaginative speculations, there are some scientists who are more grounded and committed to studying the actual evidence. Probability estimates have been made to ascertain the likelihood of all 30 habitability factors that are necessary for life coming together in the same planet by pure chance, and it turns out that there aren’t enough estimated planets in the entire universe for an Earth-like planet to have evolved by chance.
For example, a recent study by astrophysicist, Dr. Erik Zackrisson from Uppsala University, Sweden, used computer modelling to simulate the universe’s evolution following a supposed Big Bang, and the modelling estimated that the probability of an Earth-like planet with all of these habitability factors in place evolving by pure chance is 1 in 700 quintillion.
This is essentially zero in statistical terms. His landmark study was published in “The Astrophysical Journal” and it completely destroyed the exaggerated claims of atheistic scientists who claim that Earth-like planets are everywhere.
So, why are atheists and evolutionists so keen to claim that Earth is not unique? The reason is that if they can show that planets like Earth can evolve purely by chance and in great numbers via chance processes, then the necessity for a supernatural Creator is done away with. Effectively, atheistic scientists are saying to the general public, “Nothing to see here, folks! There’s nothing special about the Earth. Mother nature is throwing up planets like ours all over the place. There is no God who has created a special home for us.”
Increasingly, however, their deliberately misleading claims are being refuted by the evidence of hard science.
The Earth is unique. It is a shining jewel in the vast bleakness of the universe. It is a miraculous place; a safe haven in the harshness of our beautiful but deadly universe. The Earth stands alone as a work of wonder with a statistically impossible confluence of habitability factors that absolutely screams out that there is an intelligent, all-powerful Creator.
It’s frustrating that atheistic scientists repeatedly get away with making their outrageous claims via popular media. And, sadly, the vast majority of viewers just lap it up as one more piece of evidence confirming their belief that we are all just the product of brute chance. But the truth is that the more we discover about the universe, the more we realise how special and miraculously unique our planet really is.
In 2015, science writer John Horgan wrote an article in “Scientific American”:
“The more scientists investigate our universe, the more improbable our existence seems. If you define a miracle as an infinitely improbable event, then our existence, you might say, is a miracle. Scientists try in vain to hand-wave our improbability away … My own intuitions keep me from ruling out the possibility of supernatural creation.”[1]
Sir Isaac Newton (1643 – 1727), who formulated the laws of motion and universal gravitation, was convinced that the universe’s obvious intelligent design and the Earth’s unique place within it was proof of God’s existence. He stated:
“This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent Being. This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all; and on account of his dominion he is wont to be called “Lord God” or “Universal Ruler”. The Supreme God is a Being eternal, infinite, and absolutely perfect.”[2]
Dr Arno Penzias, the winner of the Nobel prize for science for his discovery of Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, wrote the following:
“Astronomy leads us to a unique event. A universe which was created out of nothing; one with the very delicate balance needed to provide exactly the right conditions required to permit life and one which has an underlying, one might say supernatural, plan.”
I think he is absolutely right. There is something supernatural, something quite miraculous about our unique and wonderfully designed planet and this astonishing universe in which it sits.
“For since the creation of the world, God’s invisible qualities – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made.” (Romans 1:20)
For more information, you can check out my books which are available on my website, smartfaith.net, where you can also subscribe to my weekly blog.
………………………………..
FOOTNOTES:
[1] https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/can-faith-and-science-coexist
[2] Isaac Newton, Principia, Book III; cited in; Newton’s Philosophy of Nature: Selections from his writings, p. 42, ed. H.S. Thayer, Hafner Library of Classics, NY, 1953.