• afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Right so you aren’t telling me stuff I don’t know here. Sorry to be blunt. I been dealing with atheist-theist arguments about the Fine tuning problem for years at this point. I know about survivor bias, I know about the misassignment of probability.

    I gave you actual numbers. Based on what we know life like us should have predated us by billions of years. We have the first few terms of the equation solved. Number of stars, number of planets, number of liquid water zone planets, and we have a dataset that gives a hint at the odds of life starting. As I also pointed out any kinda barrier you throw up (passed sentient stage) gets crushed by the amount of time we are discussing.

    So something is very wrong. Maybe planet formation happened much later than we think (no evidence for this), maybe the two star systems identified with Goldilocks zone planets were black swan events (given the data size of over 5,000 very unlikely), maybe life just about never gets going.

    I am leaning towards the life formation stage being hard based on the data we are not seeing from Europa.

    • hoodatninja@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s fine, I feel you. I’m not sure I’m onboard with your takeaway but ultimately we’re just approaching this and coming away with different takes. Have a good one!