(July 24, 2011 at 8:32 am)Rhythm Wrote: Anyone who wants to use the "goldilocks zone" as an argument for god would have to explain why god created three planets in this zone (just in our solar system), and then never saw fit to mention it to us (we may also want to know why the others, Mars and Venus are lifeless). There is no fine tuning argument, because there is no fine tuning. The "goldilocks zone" is approx 35 million miles wide for a star such as our own. It may be larger. Other stars have different habitable zones than our own. Why would a creator god require any of this by the way? Could have willed us into existence on a completely uninhabitable planet.
Who's to say there's no other kind of life that can inhabit planets outside the HZ? Everywhere not in the HZ is only uninhabitable to life that requires liquid water. Okay, we haven't seen any life that doesn't, but restricting ourselves to one kind of life seems silly. God could have made us out of completely different stuff and dumped us on Pluto. Hell, he's God, why does he even have to obey the laws of physics? He could make us out of something completely inappropriate like arsenic or lead or mercury, then adjusted chemistry to fit.
The Goldilocks zone argument is indeed a steaming pile of bullshit, I just think you didn't take it far enough. On a scale of one to the Goldilocks zone argument, a standard bullshit statement like "I never tell the truth" or "This statement is false" or "Water is dry" or "God exists" would be zero.
