“One of the “cosmic coincidences” cited in the intelligent-design treatise The Privileged Planet1 is the “galactic habitable zone” – a fairly narrow region of the galaxy where planets can form and exist safely. The outer regions of the galaxy were described as lacking the heavy elements necessary for planet formation.
Score one for the authors.”
— Score for mentioning something known for decades? Some people are too easily impressed.
And it strikes me as odd to call it a “coincidence” that we find planets primarily where planets can most easily form - in fact, in my vocabulary that’s the *opposite* of coincidence.
Well, that’s assuming that the nebular hypothesis is correct. And so... isn’t this article arguing *against* ‘young earth Creationism’?
Unless solar systems do indeed form via something resembling the “nebular hypothesis”, than why are we finding planets precisely where there’s material for planets to form? Just a ‘coicidence’?
Can't even imagine where you grabbed that quirky thought from! - The article strongly affirms conditions that support both special creation, and the predicted configuration of a finite, bounded universe, all of which are consistent with a universe that expanded from a center at our approximate location.