The immensity of the universe (The nature of a \'Creator\')

by David Turell , Thursday, September 17, 2015, 19:13 (3142 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: I carefully balanced my first post between the apparent impersonality of the immense universe and the apparent design of the living cell. You gaze wide-eyed at the latter, demanding an explanation for life's complexities, focusing all your powers of reasoning to draw your conclusion, and castigating those who refuse to acknowledge the rationality of your arguments. And then you close your eyes to the former, not interested in finding an explanation for the vastness and the endless comings and goings (it's simply “of no issue”)-Since you are forcing the issue, I will repeat the comments I have made before about the universe and what its makeup might mean. We don't know what it came from but cause and effect strongly suggest it is energy, since the universe is at its simplest forms of energy. I have said that perhaps it has to be this big in order to create the special galaxy which is the Milky Way, one of the largest galaxies known. The galaxy must be big, so the Earth can be in the safer outer reaches away from the Black Hole and the severe radiation activity nearer to the center. (We are 2/3rds out on the second spiral arm. To have life (which I believe is the purpose of the universe) it requires a special planet just like the Earth with all the metals and minerals we find here. That requires a sun that has those metals, and it turns out that such stars are rare when analyzed in a post I just entered today. I've said that God uses evolution in construction of the universe and it is obvious in how science has shown it developed.-Our sun will explode in 5 billion years. So humans on this planet are limited to somewhat less than that time. Since the universe is so large and evolving, another Milky Way with an Earth could develop and God's next experiment in humans could begin. In fact it might already be developing. We can only know our circumstances.-There, I've ruminated on the giant size of the universe. I see purpose where you struggle with it. As Paul Davies points out, the appearance of sentient beings who can study the universe and understand its workings, is a highly significant event. And I would add high unlikely due to chance.-> 
> dhw: Although I am responding to you personally, this should not be taken as a personal criticism. What you are doing is what most people do in various contexts, myself included, and I finished my post with a general observation: “The human ability to keep the eyes closed is perhaps as remarkable a talent as the ability to keep them open.” It might be interesting to know why you chose to leave that out.-I do not see it as personal criticism, but your attempt to make an observation about how humans react. I didn't respond because what I wrote above in on the record already. I've not closed my eyes to the dilemma of why the universe is like it is, but have chosen to concentrate on the appearance of life, which I think is easier to analyze from the point of view of teleology. 'How' is what you seem to concentrate on, not 'why' as I do. I think that is our difference.