1 00:00:02,759 --> 00:00:06,880 Speaker 1: Life audio, Doctor Richards, think they're joining me. Yeah, great 2 00:00:06,880 --> 00:00:09,600 Speaker 1: to be with you, Doctor j. Richards, philosopher. He's a 3 00:00:09,640 --> 00:00:12,640 Speaker 1: senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, vice president at the 4 00:00:12,640 --> 00:00:15,120 Speaker 1: Heritage Foundation as well. He's part of the name Moly 5 00:00:15,200 --> 00:00:18,520 Speaker 1: That Story of Everything that examines the scientific evidence for 6 00:00:18,640 --> 00:00:21,560 Speaker 1: Designer behind the Universe, The Story of Everything Dot film 7 00:00:21,680 --> 00:00:24,640 Speaker 1: is the website. I really enjoyed this film, doctor Richards. 8 00:00:24,720 --> 00:00:26,480 Speaker 1: I think it's going to really impact a lot of people. 9 00:00:26,800 --> 00:00:29,400 Speaker 1: You know, for years, doctor Richards, many people believe science 10 00:00:29,440 --> 00:00:32,879 Speaker 1: would eventually explain God away. Do you think the scientific 11 00:00:32,880 --> 00:00:34,760 Speaker 1: evidence has moved in the opposite direction? 12 00:00:35,560 --> 00:00:37,440 Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, I think absolutely. I mean, this whole 13 00:00:37,479 --> 00:00:41,120 Speaker 2: myth about the warfare between science and religion, and science 14 00:00:41,120 --> 00:00:44,080 Speaker 2: and Christianity in particular, it was always a myth. I mean, 15 00:00:44,120 --> 00:00:46,919 Speaker 2: if you look at the actual founders of basically all 16 00:00:46,920 --> 00:00:50,280 Speaker 2: the sub disciplines of modern science, every one of them, 17 00:00:50,360 --> 00:00:53,000 Speaker 2: with almost no exceptions, was either a conventional or a 18 00:00:53,000 --> 00:00:56,880 Speaker 2: devout Christian, whether you're talking about Copernicus or Galileo which 19 00:00:56,880 --> 00:01:00,080 Speaker 2: everyone hears about, or Kepler or even Newton, maybe not 20 00:01:00,120 --> 00:01:03,280 Speaker 2: fully orthodox, but a very serious Christian and believer in God. 21 00:01:04,000 --> 00:01:07,680 Speaker 2: This idea that science and Christianity were somehow intrinsically at odds. 22 00:01:08,080 --> 00:01:11,400 Speaker 2: It doesn't match this history of science, and then in 23 00:01:11,440 --> 00:01:15,440 Speaker 2: the nineteenth century, this popular myth, this warfare emerged. That's 24 00:01:15,440 --> 00:01:17,679 Speaker 2: why most people if the only thing they know about 25 00:01:17,720 --> 00:01:19,800 Speaker 2: Galileo is it didn't get in trouble with the pope 26 00:01:19,880 --> 00:01:22,440 Speaker 2: or something, they don't start have the details. But there's 27 00:01:22,440 --> 00:01:25,800 Speaker 2: always been the question even if the institution of science 28 00:01:26,160 --> 00:01:28,480 Speaker 2: had been hostile to faith, and I think sometimes big 29 00:01:28,520 --> 00:01:31,280 Speaker 2: science in the twentieth century is it doesn't follow the 30 00:01:31,600 --> 00:01:36,720 Speaker 2: evidence that natural science uncovers point away from faith. And 31 00:01:36,720 --> 00:01:38,759 Speaker 2: that's really the point of the film is to say, look, 32 00:01:38,800 --> 00:01:42,679 Speaker 2: if we look at these key discoveries, certainly mostly from 33 00:01:42,720 --> 00:01:45,640 Speaker 2: the twentieth century, every one of them points away from 34 00:01:45,640 --> 00:01:49,600 Speaker 2: a materialistic idea of the universe and toward the purposeful 35 00:01:49,680 --> 00:01:52,520 Speaker 2: universe and theism that is the existence of God. 36 00:01:53,400 --> 00:01:55,200 Speaker 1: Tell me how you got involved in the film, because 37 00:01:55,800 --> 00:02:00,800 Speaker 1: it includes quite a few well known thinkers of our society, 38 00:02:00,960 --> 00:02:02,120 Speaker 1: And how did you get involved? 39 00:02:02,520 --> 00:02:04,840 Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly, there are quite a lot of well known thinkers. 40 00:02:04,880 --> 00:02:06,360 Speaker 2: And then I was in there. How did this happen? 41 00:02:06,400 --> 00:02:10,359 Speaker 2: I had the same question, seriously, though, it's because more 42 00:02:10,360 --> 00:02:13,320 Speaker 2: than anything, I wrote a book called The Privileged Planet 43 00:02:13,360 --> 00:02:16,160 Speaker 2: with the Stanmergherrara Gonzalees that had written a number of books, 44 00:02:16,440 --> 00:02:18,760 Speaker 2: and it will say, kind of in the intelligent design space, 45 00:02:19,080 --> 00:02:22,520 Speaker 2: either just kind of clearing away the bad philosophical assumptions 46 00:02:22,520 --> 00:02:24,720 Speaker 2: that keep us from looking at the evidence, or in 47 00:02:24,760 --> 00:02:26,600 Speaker 2: the case of the book, The Privileged Planet, was actually 48 00:02:26,960 --> 00:02:29,840 Speaker 2: discussing and developing an argument based on a new class 49 00:02:29,880 --> 00:02:33,120 Speaker 2: of evidence from the things that we're learning about the 50 00:02:33,480 --> 00:02:35,600 Speaker 2: things that need to go right in a planetary environment 51 00:02:35,639 --> 00:02:38,120 Speaker 2: in order to get a habitable universe. I had been 52 00:02:38,160 --> 00:02:41,440 Speaker 2: interested in this stuff, friends, honestly, since I was in 53 00:02:41,480 --> 00:02:43,959 Speaker 2: graduate school. Met a guy named William Densky who was 54 00:02:43,960 --> 00:02:45,880 Speaker 2: a kind of key player of the intelligent design movement, 55 00:02:45,880 --> 00:02:48,160 Speaker 2: and just sort of blessed enough to be there the 56 00:02:48,160 --> 00:02:51,320 Speaker 2: origins of this whole debate. And then I'm sort of 57 00:02:51,320 --> 00:02:56,240 Speaker 2: one of the movement philosophers, I suppose, and so Steve 58 00:02:56,320 --> 00:02:58,880 Speaker 2: Meyer and I Steve another sort of the person you 59 00:02:58,960 --> 00:03:01,880 Speaker 2: probably see more than anyone. The film ended up kind 60 00:03:01,919 --> 00:03:06,040 Speaker 2: of providing the argumentative glue that connected a lot of 61 00:03:06,040 --> 00:03:10,600 Speaker 2: the different types of evidence with features with practicing scientists 62 00:03:10,600 --> 00:03:13,040 Speaker 2: and so that you know, once the thing was cut 63 00:03:13,080 --> 00:03:15,080 Speaker 2: and finished, it turns out, you know, I ended up 64 00:03:15,080 --> 00:03:17,320 Speaker 2: playing a role of this sort of transition character and 65 00:03:18,280 --> 00:03:20,919 Speaker 2: making connections between these, say, the origin of the universe 66 00:03:20,919 --> 00:03:21,920 Speaker 2: and the origin of life. 67 00:03:22,080 --> 00:03:23,880 Speaker 1: I love the film because it doesn't have a narrator. 68 00:03:23,919 --> 00:03:27,280 Speaker 1: It just it's just it's very fast paced. It goes 69 00:03:27,320 --> 00:03:29,400 Speaker 1: in depth, but it's also accessible I think by the 70 00:03:29,400 --> 00:03:30,040 Speaker 1: average person. 71 00:03:31,160 --> 00:03:33,040 Speaker 2: Let me mention something because I'm glad you noticed that. 72 00:03:33,040 --> 00:03:35,880 Speaker 2: Most people don't realize that. But if you're producing a documentary, 73 00:03:36,480 --> 00:03:38,960 Speaker 2: that's a flex to be able to have a documentary 74 00:03:38,960 --> 00:03:42,360 Speaker 2: that has zero off camera narration and that the entire 75 00:03:42,400 --> 00:03:47,040 Speaker 2: script from the guests who are you know, interviewed extemporaneously. 76 00:03:47,520 --> 00:03:50,880 Speaker 2: And this is a fairly long future length ninety something 77 00:03:51,000 --> 00:03:53,800 Speaker 2: minutes long or one hundred minutes long. And so you're 78 00:03:53,800 --> 00:03:57,160 Speaker 2: exactly right, And you know, I handed to the producers 79 00:03:57,200 --> 00:03:59,440 Speaker 2: to be able to cobble together all of our interviews 80 00:03:59,480 --> 00:04:00,920 Speaker 2: in a way that let's coherent. 81 00:04:01,720 --> 00:04:04,720 Speaker 1: What is your goal for it then? For this film? Obviously, 82 00:04:04,880 --> 00:04:08,240 Speaker 1: this film is not a Christian apologetics film, right, it 83 00:04:08,320 --> 00:04:11,800 Speaker 1: is sort of an apologetics film for the existence of 84 00:04:12,800 --> 00:04:15,880 Speaker 1: an intelligent designer, what is your goal for the film? 85 00:04:16,000 --> 00:04:18,359 Speaker 2: It's really that I mean, and I'm on the record. 86 00:04:18,400 --> 00:04:20,000 Speaker 2: It looks me up on the internet, we'll see I'm 87 00:04:20,040 --> 00:04:22,720 Speaker 2: on the record as a critic of materialism and atheism. 88 00:04:23,000 --> 00:04:25,480 Speaker 2: But I also don't want to try to squeeze evidence 89 00:04:25,520 --> 00:04:27,480 Speaker 2: and say that it says more than it does. And 90 00:04:27,520 --> 00:04:29,880 Speaker 2: so as a Christian, I'm not going to tell anybody 91 00:04:29,880 --> 00:04:32,400 Speaker 2: they're going to discover that I see in Creed if 92 00:04:32,400 --> 00:04:35,680 Speaker 2: they study astronomy closely enough. On the other hand, many 93 00:04:35,720 --> 00:04:38,000 Speaker 2: of us the film think that if you look at 94 00:04:38,000 --> 00:04:41,360 Speaker 2: the evidence of nature objectively and openly and say, I 95 00:04:41,400 --> 00:04:43,080 Speaker 2: just want to follow the evidence where it leads, that 96 00:04:43,160 --> 00:04:47,360 Speaker 2: it points beyond the materialistic worldview. The universe points beyond 97 00:04:47,400 --> 00:04:51,279 Speaker 2: itself certainly gives solid evidence a purpose and design, and 98 00:04:51,320 --> 00:04:54,720 Speaker 2: I think with a few little philosophical assumptions you can 99 00:04:54,760 --> 00:04:57,160 Speaker 2: make a good argument for the existence of a creator 100 00:04:57,200 --> 00:04:59,880 Speaker 2: of God from the evidence of science. So that's sort 101 00:04:59,880 --> 00:05:02,560 Speaker 2: of as far as the film goes, because for many 102 00:05:02,560 --> 00:05:04,360 Speaker 2: of us that we think, well, that's about as far 103 00:05:04,440 --> 00:05:07,240 Speaker 2: as the general evidence from nature will get you. 104 00:05:08,200 --> 00:05:09,599 Speaker 1: Do you have a go to you argument for the 105 00:05:09,640 --> 00:05:12,599 Speaker 1: existence of God? If you're sitting by someone on a 106 00:05:12,640 --> 00:05:17,200 Speaker 1: plane and they discover what you do, yeah, and go ahead. 107 00:05:17,320 --> 00:05:19,479 Speaker 2: It's a great question because first I trying to say, okay, 108 00:05:19,520 --> 00:05:21,039 Speaker 2: is this going to go well or not? Or do 109 00:05:21,080 --> 00:05:23,599 Speaker 2: I need to change the subject? Right? But I mean 110 00:05:23,640 --> 00:05:26,120 Speaker 2: in some ways depends on where they are. So for 111 00:05:26,200 --> 00:05:28,720 Speaker 2: some people, if if they're sort of a scientific question, 112 00:05:28,760 --> 00:05:31,880 Speaker 2: and I say, look, the most fundamental question that anybody 113 00:05:31,920 --> 00:05:35,000 Speaker 2: could ask is what is the fundamental reality? What is 114 00:05:35,040 --> 00:05:39,320 Speaker 2: that thing that explains everything else that exists. It can't 115 00:05:39,320 --> 00:05:42,160 Speaker 2: be something that came into existence sometime in the past, 116 00:05:42,279 --> 00:05:45,320 Speaker 2: because then it didn' always exist. And so let's you 117 00:05:45,360 --> 00:05:47,760 Speaker 2: just want that thing to have created itself from nothing 118 00:05:48,040 --> 00:05:51,360 Speaker 2: not existing. If something comes into existence in the past, 119 00:05:51,680 --> 00:05:54,800 Speaker 2: something else muster brought it into existence. So the fundamental thing, 120 00:05:55,360 --> 00:05:58,000 Speaker 2: it's got to be something that has always existed that, 121 00:05:58,040 --> 00:06:01,760 Speaker 2: as philosophers say, exist necessarily. Well, in the nineteenth century, 122 00:06:01,880 --> 00:06:05,120 Speaker 2: many people skeptics and atheists, materialists, they could say, well, 123 00:06:05,600 --> 00:06:07,760 Speaker 2: I just assumed that the universe has always existed, so 124 00:06:07,800 --> 00:06:10,680 Speaker 2: it doesn't need an explanation for itself. In the twentieth 125 00:06:10,720 --> 00:06:13,800 Speaker 2: century we discovered that's not true. That the evidence has 126 00:06:14,000 --> 00:06:16,640 Speaker 2: the universe has an age. All the evidence we have 127 00:06:16,800 --> 00:06:19,480 Speaker 2: is that the universe came into existence in the finite path, 128 00:06:19,640 --> 00:06:22,560 Speaker 2: and it had these very special characteristics even from the 129 00:06:22,680 --> 00:06:25,200 Speaker 2: very beginning, to allow it to develop in the way 130 00:06:25,240 --> 00:06:27,760 Speaker 2: that we have. And so if you're just comparing the 131 00:06:27,839 --> 00:06:31,480 Speaker 2: kind of materialistic story with the question of whether God exists, well, 132 00:06:31,839 --> 00:06:34,240 Speaker 2: the materialistic stories from out of the running and so 133 00:06:34,400 --> 00:06:37,839 Speaker 2: right off the bat at least you'd say theism the 134 00:06:37,839 --> 00:06:41,760 Speaker 2: existence of a transcendent creator has a leg up. Now, 135 00:06:41,760 --> 00:06:44,320 Speaker 2: if they're not really interested in the scientific questions, you 136 00:06:44,400 --> 00:06:46,960 Speaker 2: want to go to question, I say, okay, look, you 137 00:06:47,120 --> 00:06:49,799 Speaker 2: know as well as anyone that it is wrong, always 138 00:06:49,839 --> 00:06:52,320 Speaker 2: in everywhere to torture a small child for the fun 139 00:06:52,360 --> 00:06:54,560 Speaker 2: of it. You know that that is What kind of 140 00:06:54,560 --> 00:06:56,680 Speaker 2: claim is that? Is that a claim from chemistry? Is 141 00:06:56,680 --> 00:06:59,680 Speaker 2: that something you discover by looking at a microscope? No, 142 00:06:59,720 --> 00:07:02,800 Speaker 2: it's a moral truth. In fact, you know that more 143 00:07:02,839 --> 00:07:05,640 Speaker 2: firmly and more certainly than you know anything. Now, in 144 00:07:05,680 --> 00:07:09,120 Speaker 2: what kind of universe do moral truths make sense? In 145 00:07:09,120 --> 00:07:11,559 Speaker 2: other words, I'm not trying to say therefore God, I'm saying, 146 00:07:11,800 --> 00:07:13,840 Speaker 2: if there are moral truths that you know, and if 147 00:07:13,880 --> 00:07:16,360 Speaker 2: you look within yourself, you know that you know in 148 00:07:16,400 --> 00:07:18,720 Speaker 2: which picture of the universe does that make sense. One 149 00:07:18,720 --> 00:07:22,320 Speaker 2: in which there is a personal, transcendent, holy good God 150 00:07:23,000 --> 00:07:25,880 Speaker 2: or a picture in which there's nothing but just atoms 151 00:07:25,880 --> 00:07:28,560 Speaker 2: colliding with atoms, in which case that moral truths that 152 00:07:28,680 --> 00:07:30,920 Speaker 2: just seems weird. It doesn't seem like it fits nicely 153 00:07:30,960 --> 00:07:33,680 Speaker 2: in a materialistic universe. That's not a proof. But again, 154 00:07:34,200 --> 00:07:36,800 Speaker 2: if you just sort of compare the real, live alternatates 155 00:07:36,840 --> 00:07:39,400 Speaker 2: people have in their minds, I think there's this countless 156 00:07:39,400 --> 00:07:52,400 Speaker 2: piece of evidence that point in the direction of theism. 157 00:07:52,600 --> 00:07:54,400 Speaker 1: Do you think a lot of these arguments that we're using, 158 00:07:54,720 --> 00:07:57,280 Speaker 1: not only as Christians today but also that are using 159 00:07:57,320 --> 00:07:59,960 Speaker 1: this movie, do you think these are arguments that acquiet 160 00:08:00,080 --> 00:08:02,440 Speaker 1: and other great things that the past had and we're 161 00:08:02,480 --> 00:08:05,720 Speaker 1: just now building all those And it seems like the 162 00:08:05,720 --> 00:08:08,600 Speaker 1: more science we discover, the more we realize that it 163 00:08:08,640 --> 00:08:09,520 Speaker 1: all points to God. 164 00:08:10,000 --> 00:08:12,320 Speaker 2: Yeah. I mean, of course there's the perennial, so called 165 00:08:12,320 --> 00:08:16,440 Speaker 2: teleological argument for God's existence. It's one of Thomas Aquinas's 166 00:08:16,440 --> 00:08:19,720 Speaker 2: five ways. Of course, he didn't argue for it from 167 00:08:19,760 --> 00:08:22,920 Speaker 2: the existence of the bacteria flagellum or the DNA or 168 00:08:23,200 --> 00:08:25,920 Speaker 2: you know, the red shift of the galaxies or something, 169 00:08:26,040 --> 00:08:28,720 Speaker 2: but didn't have access to the evidence, but the basic idea. 170 00:08:29,280 --> 00:08:32,400 Speaker 2: As really the sort of classical Christian thinkers, they tended 171 00:08:32,440 --> 00:08:35,960 Speaker 2: to talk about design in terms of what we'll say indirectedness, Like, 172 00:08:35,960 --> 00:08:38,520 Speaker 2: in other words, things move as if they have a 173 00:08:38,520 --> 00:08:42,280 Speaker 2: purpose towards some particular end in the universe, including things 174 00:08:42,320 --> 00:08:46,160 Speaker 2: that we know aren't intentional. So of course we have intentions, right, 175 00:08:46,200 --> 00:08:48,479 Speaker 2: and we sort of have purposes. But even a bacterium 176 00:08:48,960 --> 00:08:51,280 Speaker 2: or a plant which will move in the place that 177 00:08:51,320 --> 00:08:54,000 Speaker 2: it needs to to get food, and say Thomas says, 178 00:08:54,400 --> 00:08:57,360 Speaker 2: insofar as those things move as if they were intelligent, 179 00:08:57,440 --> 00:09:00,679 Speaker 2: even though themselves are not, intelligence, that points to fundamental 180 00:09:00,720 --> 00:09:04,960 Speaker 2: intelligence that could order all things, and that is the 181 00:09:05,160 --> 00:09:08,960 Speaker 2: thing by which everyone refers to as God. In the 182 00:09:09,040 --> 00:09:11,960 Speaker 2: sort of modern context, people tend to make these design 183 00:09:12,040 --> 00:09:14,760 Speaker 2: arguments in terms of kind of the arrangements of parts 184 00:09:14,800 --> 00:09:18,040 Speaker 2: and systems which need to go together in order to 185 00:09:18,640 --> 00:09:20,760 Speaker 2: perform a function, whether you're talking about a watch, or 186 00:09:20,800 --> 00:09:24,480 Speaker 2: you're talking about the eye or the bacterial flagellum. Things 187 00:09:24,480 --> 00:09:27,960 Speaker 2: that don't work for they don't fulfill their purpose until 188 00:09:28,000 --> 00:09:31,120 Speaker 2: all the parts are put together at the beginning. Well, 189 00:09:31,120 --> 00:09:33,240 Speaker 2: that's the kind of thing that intelligent agents do that 190 00:09:33,320 --> 00:09:35,920 Speaker 2: is not the kind of thing that say that Darwinian 191 00:09:35,920 --> 00:09:38,840 Speaker 2: mechanism can do, which has to always just select for 192 00:09:39,240 --> 00:09:42,360 Speaker 2: one little survival advantage at a time. And so, yes, 193 00:09:42,400 --> 00:09:45,360 Speaker 2: the design arguments as old as Western civilization, you can 194 00:09:45,400 --> 00:09:48,400 Speaker 2: see it in Plato. But new design arguments sort of 195 00:09:48,440 --> 00:09:50,640 Speaker 2: focus on these new classes of evidence and tend to 196 00:09:50,679 --> 00:09:53,440 Speaker 2: point out things that maybe wouldn't have occurred to someone, 197 00:09:53,559 --> 00:09:55,120 Speaker 2: say in the first or the twelfth century. 198 00:09:56,360 --> 00:09:57,760 Speaker 1: Let me see one more question. No, I don't want 199 00:09:57,760 --> 00:09:59,280 Speaker 1: to teuse your curveball, and if you don't answer this, 200 00:09:59,320 --> 00:10:01,480 Speaker 1: that's fine, philosopher. And you also have a lot of 201 00:10:01,679 --> 00:10:05,079 Speaker 1: interest in science, and there's a currently debate about if 202 00:10:05,080 --> 00:10:08,240 Speaker 1: we're the only intelligent life in the universe, right, do 203 00:10:08,280 --> 00:10:11,199 Speaker 1: you have any thoughts on that in terms of whether 204 00:10:11,960 --> 00:10:16,400 Speaker 1: there is and whether within Christian fault there could be. 205 00:10:17,120 --> 00:10:20,280 Speaker 2: Yeah, I think the latter question is actually fairly easy. 206 00:10:20,280 --> 00:10:24,560 Speaker 2: I think Christians could absolutely accommodate life or intelligent life 207 00:10:24,640 --> 00:10:27,720 Speaker 2: in places, say, other than Earth. And by intelligent life 208 00:10:27,720 --> 00:10:30,199 Speaker 2: I means or you know, chemical life with bodies as 209 00:10:30,200 --> 00:10:33,679 Speaker 2: opposed to intelligences like angels. There's nothing really in scripture 210 00:10:33,679 --> 00:10:36,320 Speaker 2: one way or the other about that. But the topic 211 00:10:36,480 --> 00:10:39,000 Speaker 2: as a kind of question of philosophy theology has been 212 00:10:39,080 --> 00:10:41,720 Speaker 2: raised really kind of from the beginning of Christian theology, 213 00:10:41,760 --> 00:10:44,120 Speaker 2: and the general agreement has been it's like, well, God 214 00:10:44,160 --> 00:10:45,720 Speaker 2: created the universe. If that's what he wants to do, 215 00:10:45,800 --> 00:10:47,959 Speaker 2: he can do it. So let's go out and look. 216 00:10:48,280 --> 00:10:51,120 Speaker 2: A lot of people will claim, well, you know, discovery 217 00:10:51,160 --> 00:10:55,000 Speaker 2: of life somewhere else would just completely demolish traditional religion 218 00:10:55,040 --> 00:10:58,040 Speaker 2: in Christianity. I don't see that, and most of the 219 00:10:58,240 --> 00:11:00,920 Speaker 2: historical Christian thinkers have said to us, really not true. 220 00:11:01,040 --> 00:11:04,480 Speaker 2: Now there's this other question, do I think that's true? Right? 221 00:11:04,559 --> 00:11:06,400 Speaker 2: And so to me, I'm sort of agnostic on the 222 00:11:06,480 --> 00:11:08,920 Speaker 2: question that we do have a very large universe. It 223 00:11:08,960 --> 00:11:10,880 Speaker 2: does not follow though, that just because we have a 224 00:11:10,920 --> 00:11:14,559 Speaker 2: big universe with maybe billions or trillions of planets, that 225 00:11:14,640 --> 00:11:17,520 Speaker 2: life occupies those. Because the stuff we talked about in 226 00:11:17,520 --> 00:11:20,160 Speaker 2: the Privileged Planet is that a lot of stuff has 227 00:11:20,200 --> 00:11:23,720 Speaker 2: to go right in the planetary scale in order to 228 00:11:23,800 --> 00:11:27,880 Speaker 2: have an environment where life can prosper. It turns out 229 00:11:28,040 --> 00:11:30,959 Speaker 2: really kind of a narrow set of conditions in terms 230 00:11:30,960 --> 00:11:34,600 Speaker 2: of location and properties and temperature in order for any 231 00:11:34,720 --> 00:11:38,120 Speaker 2: kind of life to exist. So life could exist, and 232 00:11:38,240 --> 00:11:40,120 Speaker 2: I can think of evidence that would persuade me that 233 00:11:40,160 --> 00:11:43,360 Speaker 2: life exists elsewhere. But at the moment, by far, the 234 00:11:43,400 --> 00:11:47,640 Speaker 2: most earthlike planet that we have ever discovered is Mars, 235 00:11:48,120 --> 00:11:51,000 Speaker 2: and Mars is utterly lifeless. So if you just think 236 00:11:51,040 --> 00:11:53,880 Speaker 2: about Venus and Mars, which are on either side of 237 00:11:53,960 --> 00:11:56,160 Speaker 2: us in our orbits around the Sun, both very much 238 00:11:56,240 --> 00:11:58,520 Speaker 2: like the Earth, idiot lifeless, that kind of tells you 239 00:11:58,520 --> 00:12:01,760 Speaker 2: how narrow the range is that a planet needs in 240 00:12:01,880 --> 00:12:03,480 Speaker 2: order to be able to host life. 241 00:12:03,520 --> 00:12:05,760 Speaker 1: It's mostly philosophical. What I've always just thought of this 242 00:12:05,800 --> 00:12:08,800 Speaker 1: issue as that God created a massive universe simply to 243 00:12:08,800 --> 00:12:12,199 Speaker 1: show how massive and awesome he is, and that's it. 244 00:12:12,240 --> 00:12:13,880 Speaker 2: That's it, that could be it, and that could be 245 00:12:13,920 --> 00:12:14,440 Speaker 2: it right now. 246 00:12:14,480 --> 00:12:17,640 Speaker 1: It has his reasons, Yeah, we don't know. Final question 247 00:12:17,679 --> 00:12:19,480 Speaker 1: for you, what do you want the audiences to take 248 00:12:19,480 --> 00:12:22,080 Speaker 1: away as they watch this in their living rooms. 249 00:12:22,320 --> 00:12:25,360 Speaker 2: I want audiences to take away the sense that, Okay, 250 00:12:25,679 --> 00:12:29,080 Speaker 2: these kind of silly nineteenth century just so stories that 251 00:12:29,200 --> 00:12:31,680 Speaker 2: materialists have fed us in the culture and maybe in 252 00:12:31,679 --> 00:12:34,560 Speaker 2: our classrooms just don't hold up to scrutiny, and that 253 00:12:34,600 --> 00:12:37,640 Speaker 2: the evidence of Nature of the Book of Nature. Just 254 00:12:37,920 --> 00:12:39,880 Speaker 2: like a book with an author, the Book of Nature 255 00:12:39,920 --> 00:12:41,880 Speaker 2: points beyond itself to its author. 256 00:12:44,520 --> 00:12:47,240 Speaker 3: If you enjoy today's interview, please make sure to describe 257 00:12:47,240 --> 00:12:49,800 Speaker 3: and share the episode with a friend. A big thanks 258 00:12:49,920 --> 00:12:52,200 Speaker 3: to the team at life Audio for their partnership with 259 00:12:52,280 --> 00:12:55,559 Speaker 3: us on the podcast. If you go to lifeaudio dot com, 260 00:12:55,559 --> 00:12:59,480 Speaker 3: you will find dozens of other faith centered podcasts and 261 00:12:59,600 --> 00:13:00,280 Speaker 3: their new work. 262 00:13:00,679 --> 00:13:01,440 Speaker 1: See you next time.