Do you agree with the Rare Earth Hypothesis?

Question

In planetary astronomy and astrobiology, the Rare Earth hypothesis argues that the emergence of complex multicellular life (metazoa) on Earth (and, subsequently, intelligence) required an improbable combination of astrophysical and geological events and circumstances. The hypothesis argues that complex extraterrestrial life requires an Earth-like planet with similar circumstance and that few if any such planets exist.

Rare Earth suggests that much of the known universe, including large parts of our galaxy, cannot support complex life

The data imply that the Earth is among the first planets to develop intelligent life, on a cosmological timescale. Under these assumptions it is unlikely that there are civilizations more than ten million years more advanced than humanity as this implies that said civilization was originally seeded in an earlier time when interstellar seeding of life was less common

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_Earth_hypothesis

Answer 1

I find the hypothesis credible.



The main reason boils down to the Fermi paradox. If our galaxy were teeming with spacefaring alien races with the ability to visit Earth and make their presence known, the obvious question we should all be asking is "Where ARE they?"



Also, as someone familiar with science, I can tell you that the universe is a dangerous place. Large portions of it are simply not conducive to the long term stability that a planet would need in order to evolve intelligent life. For example, the centers of galaxies where stars are relatively close together would probably witness frequent supernova explosions that would sterilize all nearby planets. A single massive gamma ray burst could quickly sterilize literally billions of stars of all complex lifeforms.



That's not to say that we are alone in this universe. I'm convinced that alien life does exist on other planets, even if it is just microbial. There's a very good chance that at least *some* intelligent life exists elsewhere in our vast universe too. But intelligent alien life is probably rarer than those of us who have grown up with Star Trek would hope it to be.

Answer 2

It is certainly a possibility. There is really too little data to say.



I find this part rather dubious: "ply that the Earth is among the first planets to develop intelligent life, on a cosmological timescale. Under these assumptions it is unlikely that there are civilizations more than ten million years more advanced than humanity as this implies that said civilization was originally seeded in an earlier time when interstellar seeding of life was less common".

Ten million years is a short time in astronomical terms.

Answer 3

The universe is vast in which there are 100-200 billion galaxies and our own galaxy the Milky Way Galaxy there are about 200-400 billion star systems in which there continues to be hundreds of discoveries of other planets in different solar systems other than our own some are even possible earth like planets which might sustain life. If a planet is within the habitable zone of their star(s) and it has a sufficiant supply of water most likely there is life on that planet.

I look at it like this the universe could not have been soley made for mankind because we can only appreciate a tiny piece of the universe, we can't even see the other side of our own galaxy. So you can either believe that God created this vast universe which would just be a waste of empty space unapreciated by anyone.

Answer 4

I guess you just missed the news. Cosmologists have discovered there are far more possibly habitiable planets than previously though, so your claim is demonstrably false.



However, let's say it were true and that for life to appear on Earth, it took an improbable combination of circumstances. How does that prove God? You're saying that all astronomically improbable events require a supreme intelligence?



Using that logic, the appearance of an infinite, all powerful intelligent being with the magical powers to create universes would require an infinitely more improbable combination of circumstances. Using your logic, that means God requires a creator too, right?



Also, if I take 10,000 die and throw them on the ground, the combination of sides that comes up is HIGHLY unlikely and improbable. Does this mean that the arrangement of the die didn't happen because of the natural laws of physics and was actually arranged by an intelligent designer?



Please educate yourself on critical thinking; you're easily duped by these "hypotheses"

Answer 5

It is silly to assume Earth is the only planet in our section of the galaxy to sustain life, to say nothing of the rest of the galaxy or the millions of galaxies in our universe. The fact that numerous planets in the Goldilocks zone is indicative of extraterrestrial life. The fact that life evolved naturally on our planet is also a good indication. It is the height of arrogance to believe we are the only life in the universe. It is also arrogant to assume we are the epitome of intelligence in the universe. I keep hearing (and seeing) answers stating interstellar travel is not possible because we can't. That is a completely STUPID argument. We are in the pre-infancy stage of technology and space travel. In a hundred years or so we will probably have a rudimentary form of FTL drive. In three hundred years, interplanetary travel will be as common as driving a car is now. There is another point I need to make. You are all assuming life needs to follow our evolutionary steps and be based on carbon and oxygen. There is no reason life could not exist under completely different conditions. Considering just how much life seems to be able to exist in environments that would kill us, it is impossible to rule out the possibility that life could have totally different chemical reactions and be based on elements other than oxygen and carbon.

Answer 6

The rare earth hypothesis is contrary to the principle of mediocrity (also called the Copernican principle), advocated by Carl Sagan and Frank Drake, among others. The principle of mediocrity states that the Earth is a typical rocky planet in a typical planetary system, located in a non-exceptional region of a common barred-spiral galaxy. Hence, it is probable that the universe teems with complex life. Ward and Brownlee argue to the contrary: planets, planetary systems, and galactic regions that are as friendly to complex life as are the Earth, the Solar System, and our region of the Milky Way are very rare.



On 4 November 2013, astronomers reported, based on Kepler space mission data, that there could be as many as 40 billion Earth-sized planets orbiting in the habitable zones of sun-like stars and red dwarf stars within the Milky Way Galaxy. 11 billion of these estimated planets may be orbiting sun-like stars. The nearest such planet may be 12 light-years away, according to the scientists.



Nonetheless, by concluding that complex life is uncommon, the Rare Earth hypothesis is a possible solution to the Fermi paradox: "If extraterrestrial aliens are common, why aren't they obvious?" <<<<< I don't see this as a paradox at all. Maybe they aren't obvious because they don't want to have anything to do with a planet such as ours - I wouldn't blame them.

Answer 7

While there certainly are going to be millions of planets within the "habitable" zone of their stars in the universe it seems that advanced life is connected to a lot of things that may have been unique or extremely rare. One of the key ones was when Earth was 65 million years old it collided with another smaller planet. This sheared off a good portion of the Earth and aided in the formation of our large moon as well as established Earth's tilt on its axis. The orbit of that moon was FAR closer to Earth at that time and it gravitational forces created were crucial for the formation of life. At various stages of its history life was almost completely destroyed allowing different species to become dominent. Close to 99% of all life was destroyed when a new species began to create what was a poisonous gas to the them... that gas was oxygen. The meteor which destroyed all the dinosaurs and most of other life led to the rise of mammals. We went from a fire planet to "Snowball Earth" to the water planet to ..... I wonder what will happen next.

Answer 8

Because everything we know about life and science is relevant to earth I cannot answer this question. I say we can only became to agree or disagree with this idea when we star visiting other planets, and try to accurate date them as well.

Answer 9

If one star in a billion is of the right type, if one planet in a billion in that group is the right size, if one planet in that subgroup is in the "life zone", if one planet............



According to the numbers there are billions of planets out there which can support life.

Answer 10

Yes I do in fact I believe that 1 in every 500,000 planets have simple life and 1 in every 100,000,000 have more complex life.

Answer 11

I disagree with it, since it's been recently show that many billions of earth sized planets exist in their stars' habitable zone.

Answer 12

Exactly like Earth is likely rare, but I expect God's children live on many worlds

Answer 13

Yes, you could drive your space ship a long way before you could fill the tank again.

Answer 14

No we do not. Read Proverbs 8 and know that everything was created by God to sustain life on earth forever.