A friendly question for evolutionists? Have you ever of the..................................................

Question

Hello, all! I hope that you are all doing well this afternoon. I was wondering if you have ever heard of the Anthropic Principle? For those of you that have not let me give you a definition. The Anthropic principle states that the universe actually appears to have been created specifically for the existence of life on earth. Consider the following examples:
1. If the earth was located slightly farther away from the sun, it would freeze like Mars. If it was only slightly closer it would burn up like Venus.
2. If the earth did not revolve regularly on its axis, half the planet would be in darkness without vegetation, the other half would be an uninhabitable desert.
3. If the earth was only a small percentage smaller, the reduced gravity would be incapable of holding the atmosphere that is essential for breathing.
4. If the atmosphere were not exactly 78% nitrogen and 22% oxygen and other gases, breathing would be impossible.
Now keep in mind that this is not all of the

examples, but it gives you an idea of the anthropic principle. What do you think?

Answer 1

It takes a very small minded person to think that the universe was created just for us. I'm not saying YOU'RE small minded, but that principle certainly is.

Answer 2

I'm afraid it's not convincing. I'll run short on space to answer all of those points. But a couple of quick ones; The zone of habitability around a star is fairly deep. I've heard people make the claim that if the Earth were a mere half-mile closer to the Sun, we would burn up. It's hard not to laugh. They'll never understand how silly something like that is. Anyway, the Earth could be considerably closer to or further from the Sun, and things would still be allright. Now consider a large sample of steller systems; some would have planets within the zone, others wouldn't. Nothing too surprising about that.

And our atmosphere is composed the way it is now precisely because of the action of life.

I do appreciate the fact, though, that you are not hurling your question at us in a hostile way. Thanks.

Answer 3

I think it is an extremely egocentric view.

Perhaps you might try thinking of it another way - life as it is on earth, evolved the way it did because there were conditions here which favored that evolution.

If conditions were different, many different things would have happened, the most likely of which is that life would not have evolved and we wouldn't be worrying about it.

Also contemplate that the exact conditions which exist on Earth also exist on countless other planets throughout the universe. There was an equal probability of life evolving on those planets as on Earth. If it did evolve elsewhere, it probably went a lot differently because there are so many variables involved.

I'll aslo point out a factual error in your question - composition of the Earth's atmosphere is partly a result of the life which evolved on it. Plants are probably responsible for free oxygen in the atmosphere, as over time, oxygen would tend to form chemical reactions with other elements. The animals and plants also alter the CO2 content. Some plants in symbiosis with microbes, remove elemental nitrogen from air and fix it in the soil as nitrates. These changes alter the thickness of the atmosphere and affect the amount of radiation hitting the surface and affecting the life forms there. There are a lot of interconnected events going on.

Answer 4

I think there could be multiple planets out there that have the same characteristics as earth, and may in fact hold life. I don't think the universe was created to have life specifically and exclusively on earth. If that was the case, why not just cut the rest of the universe out and not bother with it?

Answer 5

"homespun wisdom" would say "you put the cart before the horse"

It's bothersome because SOMEONE who knew better, disseminated a lie. They are culpable.


The "Anthropic Principle" contains within it a certain element of tragedy. It offers a thesis of deceptive crediblilty from a "rational" point of view.

My opinion is that it ecourages delusion ... hence tragedy, since delusion almost always leads to suffering.

It puts "kinks" into people's thinkning processes. SUpporting false views places a burden on any person.

Liberate yourself. (tell the truth, not the party-line)

Answer 6

You are looking at the situation backwards. Life developed to survive in the given conditions, not the other way around (i.e. an environment made especially for current life). Out of all the planets in the universe, one of them was bound to have some kind of environment favorable to life. Granted, not all of them have even the basics necessary for life, but many of them might. That environment doesn't have to be just like earth.

Life evolved to survive the conditions on earth. Other forms of life elsewhere in the universe might not be able to survive in these conditions.

Answer 7

If one assumes that the earth was created specifically for the existence of life, your examples are valid. But, there is another side to the coin. That being that live evolved on earth because it is has the necessary characteristics for the evolution of life. To say that the earth was create for life is like saying that the game of baseball was created specifically for the existence of baseball bats.

Answer 8

Your theory has it backwards. As stated in the original answer, the earth is the effect, not the cause. Organisms respirate this combination of atmosphere because it is what's available. It falls short when considering the atmosphere of the cavernous regions of the ocean which are still teeming with life.

Answer 9

That's a tautology.

The Earth looks perfect for life on it because the life on Earth has evolved for Earth. But, life can exist in the center of a volcano -- what makes you think it can't exist on a warmer planet? It exists in Antarctica -- what makes you think it can't exist on a colder planet.

But more importantly, we've found a whole bunch of black holes in the universe. The universe makes them constantly -- more and more. So far, we haven't confirmed the existence of any other planets like ours.

So if anything, the universe was designed for making black holes. And the universe is a pretty big place.

Answer 10

Nice thoughts, but I disagree where they're going. It's an illusion.

I believe in an infinite universe. That means the chances of things being exactly as they are, including the circumstances perfect for our sort of life, is a sure thing. It couldn't be any other way.

Life adapted to these happy circumstances just as they are, so we are perfect for it. So frankly it's the other way around.