Freeze and Dabo negative religious recruit UT

#276
#276
drvenner said:
I don't know. Maybe he was recruited by coaches with similar recruiting philosophies.
Click to expand...

I didn't hear swain say this but I'm guessing he is making an educated guess based on his knowledge of the recruitment process and what coaches are willing to use/have had a history of using to negative recruit against us and other schools.
 
#277
#277
BigZiti09 said:
Actually this one has remained fairly civil and produced healthy discussion for the most part.

The politics forum makes me want to lick a 9 volt battery.
Click to expand...


If people would stay on point, it would be fine. This is not a "God is real, God is a sham" thread, it's a thread about religion being used to recruit. Whether or not someone believes in the existence of God, there are those that do, and religion is being used to recruit football players.

If either Freeze or Dabo are negatively recruiting against UT using religion, I fail to see how that would support their own piousness. They're not familiar with what actually happens here. Anything would be gossip. The Bible speaks against gossip. So, if they're spreading gossip, that would be un-Christian.
 
#278
#278
Weezer said:
If people would stay on point, it would be fine. This is not a "God is real, God is a sham" thread, it's a thread about religion being used to recruit. Whether or not someone believes in the existence of God, there are those that do, and religion is being used to recruit football players.

If either Freeze or Dabo are negatively recruiting against UT using religion, I fail to see how that would support their own piousness. They're not familiar with what actually happens here. Anything would be gossip. The Bible speaks against gossip. So, if they're spreading gossip, that would be un-Christian.
Click to expand...

I agree with your overall point and with your take on negative recruiting.

The discussion turned when someone came in the thread taking a shot at Christianity. From that point I think it turned into two discussions. I thought that both sides contributed to a better discussion than I am accustomed to seeing in the politics forum. The recruiting forum seems to have more level headed and generally optimistic people who are regular posters.
 
#279
#279
BruinVol said:
Yes 5-10 scholarships would hurt for sure but wouldn't that harsh of a penalty come with a bowl ban as well?
Click to expand...

Maybe but I think the SEC has enough pull to keep any of it's teams from a bowl ban unless there has been a lack of institutional control found. The loss of schollies hurts a program much more anyway.

I really just hope to see a 5 year probation period. If they are paying the families of football players as some speculate, that should clean up their act. Get caught paying players while on probation and your program gets nuked.
 
#280
#280
BigZiti09 said:
I agree with your overall point and with your take on negative recruiting.

The discussion turned when someone came in the thread taking a shot at Christianity. From that point I think it turned into two discussions. I thought that both sides contributed to a better discussion than I am accustomed to seeing in the politics forum. The recruiting forum seems to have more level headed and generally optimistic people who are regular posters.
Click to expand...

I do a lot of forum jumping. I can assure you, every forum has its regulars who feel this way about their particular forum.
 
#282
#282
Not turning back to a religion thread but false accusations is a sin. Even if someone did something, you forgive them and pray for them for guidance. If I was butch I would tell the recruits is they were choosing schools based on religion, then why would you choose ole miss when there coach, gossips, lies, and cheats.
 
#283
#283
gobraves101035 said:
Not turning back to a religion thread but false accusations is a sin. Even if someone did something, you forgive them and pray for them for guidance. If I was butch I would tell the recruits is they were choosing schools based on religion, then why would you choose ole miss when there coach, gossips, lies, and cheats.
Click to expand...

And harbors a culture that promotes buck teeth. I smell lawsuit.
 
#284
#284
Weezer said:
I do a lot of forum jumping. I can assure you, every forum has its regulars who feel this way about their particular forum.
Click to expand...

Up until the last year I almost exclusively posted in the hoops forum. Since then I've migrated here and I occasionally post in the pub/movies forums.

This one seems to remain the most sane. Maybe it's because recruiting junkies kinda live in the future a little more.
 
#286
#286
BigZiti09 said:
Up until the last year I almost exclusively posted in the hoops forum. Since then I've migrated here and I occasionally post in the pub/movies forums.

This one seems to remain the most sane. Maybe it's because recruiting junkies kinda live in the future a little more.
Click to expand...

Sanity is a matter of perspective. :)


There's no crime in finding your niche. If this is where you feel most comfortable, kudos to that. My only advice, never totally disregard the opinions of others. People who challenge thought continue to grow.
 
#289
#289
Theres no telling what kind of angles coaches take in recruiting anymore. College football recruiting has to be the most cut throat buisness in sports. Its a dog eat dog world!
 
#290
#290
JDisThereThere said:
So are you saying the universe is perfect? Because I don't really see how anyone could say it is.

Are you saying that it was created perfect and then became imperfect simply because Adam and Eve sinned, which was God's fault anyway?
Click to expand...

You were doing so well until the very end of your post.

-The universe WAS created to be perfect. God pronounced everything "good" after its completion.

-The sin of God's "image-bearers" tainted all of creation (not that everything became evil but that evil permeated everything).

-Again, you were doing so well until the last part. Yes, God gave Adam & Eve a choice. What good is it to be given free-will if you have no choices? The first humans were given everything and they could do anything, but one thing and that's where they failed, resulting in sin and death. But, of course, God knew this before time and creation. However, He knew that He would also send His Son to die as a substitute for us. Again, a choice is involved once again as to whether we decide to trust in His sacrificial death on our behalf. When Jesus returns again, He will restore creation to perfection (the first 2 chapters and the last 2 chapters of Scripture describe this scenario).

Now I will sign off before Freak slaps my hand for getting all "religious-like" on a football forum... :)
 
#291
#291
sanddune50 said:
Blanket statements and way more reaching as to why we are here than those who believe in Creationism. It speaks of self-aggrandizement and is straight up delusional to believe simpletons like human beings and random chance could land us where we are today.
Click to expand...

Creationism? As in the earth is only 7000 years old? C'mon Sandvol, you can do better than that. I don't have a dog in this catfight of religion vs atheism, but when a group (such as that one in Kentucky) pushes their agenda as fact all in the sake of $$$ is just plain immoral. Preying (praying) on the gullible is not a thing of beauty.
 
#294
#294
volfan_89 said:
There are other older books that have been around longer than the bible so I'm not sure I would go by that alone.

I totally agree about having to have faith. That's a main reason I no longer do. Even as a child faith never came easy for me. As an adult it became more difficult.
Click to expand...

In actuality, if you fully believe God's word, there's not other books that have been around longer. The Bible started being "written" on the 1st day of creation. God chose to wait until Moses came to start actually recording all the events leading up to his lifetime, and then used numerous other writers over hundreds and hundreds of years (with the inspiration from the Holy Spirit) to record His laws and events He felt that needed to be included in it. I think there are over 40 different writers spanning that long of a time period, yet the Bible is in complete harmony. Prophecies prophesied hundreds of years before the event actually happened...over 300 prophecies in the Old Testament about the Christ, and Jesus fulfilled every single one of them in the New Testament. The probability of that occurring is an astronomically staggering number, that we can't even comprehend and seems virtually impossible. Yet, with God, all things are possible.

I hope and pray that you find your faith again one day, fellow VFL.
 
#295
#295
OGbabyaviVol said:
In actuality, if you fully believe God's word, there's not other books that have been around longer. The Bible started being "written" on the 1st day of creation. God chose to wait until Moses came to start actually recording all the events leading up to his lifetime, and then used numerous other writers over hundreds and hundreds of years (with the inspiration from the Holy Spirit) to record His laws and events He felt that needed to be included in it. I think there are over 40 different writers spanning that long of a time period, yet the Bible is in complete harmony. Prophecies prophesied hundreds of years before the event actually happened...over 300 prophecies in the Old Testament about the Christ, and Jesus fulfilled every single one of them in the New Testament. The probability of that occurring is an astronomically staggering number, that we can't even comprehend and seems virtually impossible. Yet, with God, all things are possible.

I hope and pray that you find your faith again one day, fellow VFL.
Click to expand...

It's easy to write about fulfilled prophecies after events have happened. I predict Denver will win the super bowl. See how easy it is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#296
#296
JDisThereThere said:
So are you saying the universe is perfect? Because I don't really see how anyone could say it is.

Are you saying that it was created perfect and then became imperfect simply because Adam and Eve sinned, which was God's fault anyway?
Click to expand...

It's not God's fault that Eve believed the serpent and ate of the one tree that God commanded her and Adam to not eat. God does not know evil...evil and temptations to sin come from Satan. James 1:13-15:

Jas 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempteth no man:
Jas 1:14 but each man is tempted, when he is drawn away by his own lust, and enticed.
Jas 1:15 Then the lust, when it hath conceived, beareth sin: and the sin, when it is fullgrown, bringeth forth death.

Thus is exactly what happened to Eve...the serpent tempted her with the thought that if she ate the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, then she would be able to be just like God in discerning good and evil. The serpent planted the seed, and then Eve began to lust after that knowledge that she didn't currently have, so she ate the fruit and then gave some of it to Adam and he sinned. The same thing happens today...Satan gives us temptations to sin (God allows him to do that (1 Corinthians 10:13) because if we don't have the ability to make our own free will choices, then we are robots and have no reason to even be here). Our choice is do we follow God and His commands and resist the temptations, or do we do like Eve and let the lust of the eyes and the pride of life get in the way, leading us to sin? The choice is ours and has always been since God created mankind in His own image (Genesis 1:26-27).
 
#297
#297
KoachKletus said:
It's easy to write about fulfilled prophecies after events have happened. I predict Denver will win the super bowl. See how easy it is.
Click to expand...

If you have faith, then you believe those prophecies were made 100s and 100s of years before Christ was even born. Actually the 1st prophecy about the Christ was made in Genesis 3:15, shortly after God created the universe and everything in it.

Take evolution...if it's true, then why don't we have any recordings of how things have evolved over millions of years that have stood the test of time? At least some recordings that date back a few 1000 years? Why is it that the father of this theory, Darwin, wasn't born until 1809? That's only 200 years. It's the same as it always has been and always will be...man is so desperate to prove his wisdom that he will continue to make up theories, such as evolution, to try to prove himself smarter than God. However, God and His infinite wisdom will continue to stand the test of time. Take a moment and read 1 Corinthians 1:18-31.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#298
#298
start here for a general well stated summation of the evidence
Is There Scientific Evidence for the Existence of God? How the Recent Discoveries Support a Designed Universe

As Stephen Hawking has noted, "The laws of science, as we know them at present, contain many fundamental numbers, like the size of the electric charge of the electron and the ratio of the masses of the proton and the electron. ... The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life."


"A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question." Fred Hoyle

Someone asked why stars explode.... well if they did not we wouldnt be here. Hoyle established such. There would be only hydrogen and helium if stars did not explode. This is why we are called stardust

Paul Davies (British astrophysicist): "There is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all....It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature’s numbers to make the Universe....The impression of design is overwhelming". (4)
Paul Davies: "The laws [of physics] ... seem to be the product of exceedingly ingenious design... The universe must have a purpose". (5)
Alan Sandage (winner of the Crawford prize in astronomy): "I find it quite improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be some organizing principle. God to me is a mystery but is the explanation for the miracle of existence, why there is something instead of nothing." (6)
John O'Keefe (astronomer at NASA): "We are, by astronomical standards, a pampered, cosseted, cherished group of creatures.. .. If the Universe had not been made with the most exacting precision we could never have come into existence. It is my view that these circumstances indicate the universe was created for man to live in." (7)
George Greenstein (astronomer): "As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?" (8)
Arthur Eddington (astrophysicist): "The idea of a universal mind or Logos would be, I think, a fairly plausible inference from the present state of scientific theory." (9)
Arno Penzias (Nobel prize in physics): "Astronomy leads us to a unique event, a universe which was created out of nothing, one with the very delicate balance needed to provide exactly the conditions required to permit life, and one which has an underlying (one might say 'supernatural') plan." (10)
Roger Penrose (mathematician and author): "I would say the universe has a purpose. It's not there just somehow by chance." (11)


there are between 10^78 to 10^82 atoms in the known, observable universe. many of the constants exceed this vastly fine tuned range

some of those constants: http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2010/10/fine-tuning-an-argument-and-a-universe

some more: Is There Scientific Evidence for the Existence of God? How the Recent Discoveries Support a Designed Universe

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/nave-html/faithpathh/hoyle.html

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...iVdzeLQfw&sig2=GyWrPeOa8QXGAWZ_KneVhA&cad=rja


More than two dozen parameters for the universe must have values falling within narrowly defined ranges for life of any kind to exist.

  1. strong nuclear force constant
    If larger: no hydrogen; nuclei essential for life would be unstable
    If smaller: no elements other than hydrogen
  2. Weak nuclear force constant
    If larger: too much hydrogen converted to helium in big bang, hence too much heavy element material made by star burning; no expulsion of heavy elements from stars
    If smaller: too little helium produced from big bang, hence too little heavy element material made by star burning; no expulsion of heavy elements from stars
  3. Gravitational force constant
    If larger: stars would be too hot and would burn up too quickly and too unevenly
    If smaller: stars would remain so cool that nuclear fusion would never ignite, hence no heavy element production
  4. Electromagnetic force constant
    If larger: insufficient chemical bonding; elements more massive than boron would be too unstable for fission
    If smaller: insufficient chemical bonding
  5. Ratio of electromagnetic force constant to gravitational force constant
    If larger: no stars less than 1.4 solar masses hence short stellar life spans and uneven stellar luminosities
    If smaller: no stars more than 0.8 solar masses, hence no heavy element production
  6. Ratio of electron to proton mass
    If larger: insufficient chemical bonding
    If smaller: insufficient chemical bonding
  7. Ratio of numbers of protons to electrons
    If larger: electromagnetism would dominate gravity, preventing galaxy, star, and planet formation
    If smaller: electromagnetism would dominate gravity, preventing galaxy, star, and planet formation
  8. Expansion rate of the universe
    If larger: no galaxy formation
    If smaller: universe would collapse prior to star formation
  9. Entropy level of the universe
    If smaller: no proto-galaxy formation
    If larger: no star condensation within the proto-galaxies
  10. Mass density of the universe
    If larger: too much deuterium from big bang hence stars burn too rapidly
    If smaller: insufficient helium from big bang, hence too few heavy elements forming
  11. Velocity of light
    If faster: stars would be too luminous
    If slower: stars would not be luminous enough
  12. Age of the universe
    If older: no solar-type stars in a stable burning phase in the right part of the galaxy
    If younger: solar-type stars in a stable burning phase would not yet have formed
  13. Initial uniformity of radiation
    If smoother: stars, star clusters, and galaxies would not have formed
    If coarser: universe by now would be mostly black holes and empty space
  14. Fine structure constant (a number used to describe the fine structure splitting of spectral lines)
    If larger: DNA would be unable to function; no stars more than 0.7 solar masses
    If smaller: DNA would be unable to function; no stars less than 1.8 solar masses
  15. average distance between galaxies
    if larger: insufficient gas would be infused into our galaxy to sustain star formation over an adequate time span
    if smaller: the sun¹s orbit would be too radically disturbed
  16. average distance between stars
    if larger: heavy element density too thin for rocky planets to form
    if smaller: planetary orbits would become destabilized
  17. decay rate of the proton
    if greater: life would be exterminated by the release of radiation
    if smaller: insufficient matter in the universe for life
  18. 12Carbon (12C) to 16Oxygen (16O) energy level ratio
    if larger: insufficient oxygen
    if smaller: insufficient carbon
  19. ground state energy level for 4Helium (4He)
    if larger: insufficient carbon and oxygen
    if smaller: insufficient carbon and oxygen
  20. decay rate of 8Beryllium (8Be)
    if slower: heavy element fusion would generate catastrophic explosions in all the stars
    if faster: no element production beyond beryllium and, hence, no life chemistry possible
  21. mass excess of the neutron over the proton
    if greater: neutron decay would leave too few neutrons to form the heavy elements essential for life
    if smaller: proton decay would cause all stars to collapse rapidly into neutron stars or black holes
  22. initial excess of nucleons over anti-nucleons
    if greater: too much radiation for planets to form
    if smaller: not enough matter for galaxies or stars to form
  23. polarity of the water molecule
    if greater: heat of fusion and vaporization would be too great for life to exist
    if smaller: heat of fusion and vaporization would be too small for life¹s existence; liquid water would become too inferior a solvent for life chemistry to proceed; ice would not float, leading to a runaway freeze-up
  24. supernovae eruptions
    if too close: radiation would exterminate life on the planet
    if too far: not enough heavy element ashes for the formation of rocky planets
    if too frequent: life on the planet would be exterminated
    if too infrequent: not enough heavy element ashes for the formation of rocky planets
    if too late: life on the planet would be exterminated by radiation
    if too soon: not enough heavy element ashes for the formation of rocky planets
  25. white dwarf binaries
    if too few: insufficient fluorine produced for life chemistry to proceed
    if too many: disruption of planetary orbits from stellar density; life on the planet would be exterminated
    if too soon: not enough heavy elements made for efficient fluorine production
    if too late: fluorine made too late for incorporation in proto-planet
  26. ratio of exotic to ordinary matter
    if smaller: galaxies would not form
    if larger: universe would collapse before solar type stars could form
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#299
#299
volfan_89 said:
Never said they were true or not. Just that they are two second hand accounts. Wouldn't you think there'd be more eye witness accounts of Jesus if what the bible says of him is true? Which states that if all the miracles of Jesus were written down that all the books in the world wouldn't be able to hold them. Out of all the people that witnessed Jesus's miracles no one, other than a handful of his closest friends wrote about what they saw.
Click to expand...

What other book does it need to be recorded in? God sees the Bible, writings penned by numerous writers over 100s and 100s of years with inspiration from His own Spirit in complete harmony, as the best book possible for these things to be recorded in. All these things showing Jesus' deity didn't need to be in an uninspired book. Also, many of those who witnessed all of these things first hand and recorded them in the Bible were killed for their beliefs and teachings of Jesus...and you can find information about their deaths in uninspired writings. Do you think they would all be killed early in life for all the things that they saw with their own eyes and upheld, if they weren't true? They knew the Christ and knew it was worth the short-term pain and suffering, in order to gain an eternal home where there will not be any pain and suffering.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#300
#300
StoVol said:
start here for a general well stated summation of the evidence
Is There Scientific Evidence for the Existence of God? How the Recent Discoveries Support a Designed Universe

As Stephen Hawking has noted, "The laws of science, as we know them at present, contain many fundamental numbers, like the size of the electric charge of the electron and the ratio of the masses of the proton and the electron. ... The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life."


"A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question." Fred Hoyle

Someone asked why stars explode.... well if they did not we wouldnt be here. Hoyle established such. There would be only hydrogen and helium if stars did not explode. This is why we are called stardust

Paul Davies (British astrophysicist): "There is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all....It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature’s numbers to make the Universe....The impression of design is overwhelming". (4)
Paul Davies: "The laws [of physics] ... seem to be the product of exceedingly ingenious design... The universe must have a purpose". (5)
Alan Sandage (winner of the Crawford prize in astronomy): "I find it quite improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be some organizing principle. God to me is a mystery but is the explanation for the miracle of existence, why there is something instead of nothing." (6)
John O'Keefe (astronomer at NASA): "We are, by astronomical standards, a pampered, cosseted, cherished group of creatures.. .. If the Universe had not been made with the most exacting precision we could never have come into existence. It is my view that these circumstances indicate the universe was created for man to live in." (7)
George Greenstein (astronomer): "As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency - or, rather, Agency - must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?" (8)
Arthur Eddington (astrophysicist): "The idea of a universal mind or Logos would be, I think, a fairly plausible inference from the present state of scientific theory." (9)
Arno Penzias (Nobel prize in physics): "Astronomy leads us to a unique event, a universe which was created out of nothing, one with the very delicate balance needed to provide exactly the conditions required to permit life, and one which has an underlying (one might say 'supernatural') plan." (10)
Roger Penrose (mathematician and author): "I would say the universe has a purpose. It's not there just somehow by chance." (11)


there are between 10^78 to 10^82 atoms in the known, observable universe. many of the constants exceed this vastly fine tuned range

some of those constants: http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2010/10/fine-tuning-an-argument-and-a-universe

some more: Is There Scientific Evidence for the Existence of God? How the Recent Discoveries Support a Designed Universe

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/nave-html/faithpathh/hoyle.html

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...iVdzeLQfw&sig2=GyWrPeOa8QXGAWZ_KneVhA&cad=rja


More than two dozen parameters for the universe must have values falling within narrowly defined ranges for life of any kind to exist.

  1. strong nuclear force constant
    If larger: no hydrogen; nuclei essential for life would be unstable
    If smaller: no elements other than hydrogen
  2. Weak nuclear force constant
    If larger: too much hydrogen converted to helium in big bang, hence too much heavy element material made by star burning; no expulsion of heavy elements from stars
    If smaller: too little helium produced from big bang, hence too little heavy element material made by star burning; no expulsion of heavy elements from stars
  3. Gravitational force constant
    If larger: stars would be too hot and would burn up too quickly and too unevenly
    If smaller: stars would remain so cool that nuclear fusion would never ignite, hence no heavy element production
  4. Electromagnetic force constant
    If larger: insufficient chemical bonding; elements more massive than boron would be too unstable for fission
    If smaller: insufficient chemical bonding
  5. Ratio of electromagnetic force constant to gravitational force constant
    If larger: no stars less than 1.4 solar masses hence short stellar life spans and uneven stellar luminosities
    If smaller: no stars more than 0.8 solar masses, hence no heavy element production
  6. Ratio of electron to proton mass
    If larger: insufficient chemical bonding
    If smaller: insufficient chemical bonding
  7. Ratio of numbers of protons to electrons
    If larger: electromagnetism would dominate gravity, preventing galaxy, star, and planet formation
    If smaller: electromagnetism would dominate gravity, preventing galaxy, star, and planet formation
  8. Expansion rate of the universe
    If larger: no galaxy formation
    If smaller: universe would collapse prior to star formation
  9. Entropy level of the universe
    If smaller: no proto-galaxy formation
    If larger: no star condensation within the proto-galaxies
  10. Mass density of the universe
    If larger: too much deuterium from big bang hence stars burn too rapidly
    If smaller: insufficient helium from big bang, hence too few heavy elements forming
  11. Velocity of light
    If faster: stars would be too luminous
    If slower: stars would not be luminous enough
  12. Age of the universe
    If older: no solar-type stars in a stable burning phase in the right part of the galaxy
    If younger: solar-type stars in a stable burning phase would not yet have formed
  13. Initial uniformity of radiation
    If smoother: stars, star clusters, and galaxies would not have formed
    If coarser: universe by now would be mostly black holes and empty space
  14. Fine structure constant (a number used to describe the fine structure splitting of spectral lines)
    If larger: DNA would be unable to function; no stars more than 0.7 solar masses
    If smaller: DNA would be unable to function; no stars less than 1.8 solar masses
  15. average distance between galaxies
    if larger: insufficient gas would be infused into our galaxy to sustain star formation over an adequate time span
    if smaller: the sun¹s orbit would be too radically disturbed
  16. average distance between stars
    if larger: heavy element density too thin for rocky planets to form
    if smaller: planetary orbits would become destabilized
  17. decay rate of the proton
    if greater: life would be exterminated by the release of radiation
    if smaller: insufficient matter in the universe for life
  18. 12Carbon (12C) to 16Oxygen (16O) energy level ratio
    if larger: insufficient oxygen
    if smaller: insufficient carbon
  19. ground state energy level for 4Helium (4He)
    if larger: insufficient carbon and oxygen
    if smaller: insufficient carbon and oxygen
  20. decay rate of 8Beryllium (8Be)
    if slower: heavy element fusion would generate catastrophic explosions in all the stars
    if faster: no element production beyond beryllium and, hence, no life chemistry possible
  21. mass excess of the neutron over the proton
    if greater: neutron decay would leave too few neutrons to form the heavy elements essential for life
    if smaller: proton decay would cause all stars to collapse rapidly into neutron stars or black holes
  22. initial excess of nucleons over anti-nucleons
    if greater: too much radiation for planets to form
    if smaller: not enough matter for galaxies or stars to form
  23. polarity of the water molecule
    if greater: heat of fusion and vaporization would be too great for life to exist
    if smaller: heat of fusion and vaporization would be too small for life¹s existence; liquid water would become too inferior a solvent for life chemistry to proceed; ice would not float, leading to a runaway freeze-up
  24. supernovae eruptions
    if too close: radiation would exterminate life on the planet
    if too far: not enough heavy element ashes for the formation of rocky planets
    if too frequent: life on the planet would be exterminated
    if too infrequent: not enough heavy element ashes for the formation of rocky planets
    if too late: life on the planet would be exterminated by radiation
    if too soon: not enough heavy element ashes for the formation of rocky planets
  25. white dwarf binaries
    if too few: insufficient fluorine produced for life chemistry to proceed
    if too many: disruption of planetary orbits from stellar density; life on the planet would be exterminated
    if too soon: not enough heavy elements made for efficient fluorine production
    if too late: fluorine made too late for incorporation in proto-planet
  26. ratio of exotic to ordinary matter
    if smaller: galaxies would not form
    if larger: universe would collapse before solar type stars could form
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top