What do you think?
Rate this book
The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos Is Designed for Discovery
Is Earth merely an insignificant speck in a vast and meaningless universe? On the The Privileged Planet shows that this cherished assumption of materialism is dead wrong. In this provocative book, Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay W. Richards present a staggering array of evidence that exposes the hollowness of this modern dogma. They demonstrate that our planet is exquisitely fit not only to support life, but also to give us the best view of the universe, as if Earth were designed both for life and for scientific discovery. Readers are taken on a scientific odyssey from a history of tectonic plates, to the wonders of water and solar eclipses, to our location in the Milky Way, to the laws that govern the universe, and to the beginning of cosmic time. The Privileged Planet contains astounding findings that should lead any individual to reevaluate and even to reconsider our very purpose on what so many have dismissed as nothing more than an accident of cosmic evolution.
464 pages, Hardcover
First published February 1, 2004
131 people are currently reading
1207 people want to read
About the author
Guillermo González
51 books25 followersGuillermo Gonzalez is an Assistant Professor of Astronomy at Ball State University.
He received his Ph.D. in Astronomy in 1993 from the University of Washington. He has done post-doctoral work at the University of Texas, Austin and at the University of Washington and has received fellowships, grants and awards from such institutions as NASA, the University of Washington, Sigma Xi (scientific research society) and the National Science Foundation.
Dr. Gonzalez has extensive experience in observing and analyzing data from ground-based observatories, including work at McDonald Observatory, Apache Point Observatory and Cerro Tololo Interamerican Observatory. He has also published over sixty articles in refereed astronomy and astrophysical journals including Astronomy and Astrophysics, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Astrophysical Journal and Solar Physics. His current research interest in astrobiology focuses on the "Galactic Habitable Zone" and captured the October 2001 cover story of Scientific American.
Another area of his research is focused on analyzing and interpreting ground-based photometric and spectroscopic observations of low and intermediate mass stars in relation to current theories concerning the late stages of stellar evolution and the formation and evolution of planetary systems.
He received his Ph.D. in Astronomy in 1993 from the University of Washington. He has done post-doctoral work at the University of Texas, Austin and at the University of Washington and has received fellowships, grants and awards from such institutions as NASA, the University of Washington, Sigma Xi (scientific research society) and the National Science Foundation.
Dr. Gonzalez has extensive experience in observing and analyzing data from ground-based observatories, including work at McDonald Observatory, Apache Point Observatory and Cerro Tololo Interamerican Observatory. He has also published over sixty articles in refereed astronomy and astrophysical journals including Astronomy and Astrophysics, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Astrophysical Journal and Solar Physics. His current research interest in astrobiology focuses on the "Galactic Habitable Zone" and captured the October 2001 cover story of Scientific American.
Another area of his research is focused on analyzing and interpreting ground-based photometric and spectroscopic observations of low and intermediate mass stars in relation to current theories concerning the late stages of stellar evolution and the formation and evolution of planetary systems.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 45 reviews
March 28, 2023
I really liked this book, totally factual, and very well argued. I was lost briefly in some paragraphs due to the nature of the subject, mainly advanced astrophysics, but overall the arguments were accessible and well argued.
[Objection 9: There may be separate pathways significantly different from ours leading to equally habitable environments. -- Further readings on this speculative counter-argument.]
[Objection 9: There may be separate pathways significantly different from ours leading to equally habitable environments. -- Further readings on this speculative counter-argument.]
May 13, 2018
كتاب رائع وفريد من نوعه..
الفصول الأولى منه كانت مملة بعض الشيء نظرًا لكثرة المعلومات التي تحتاج قراءة متأنية وذهنًا صافيًا؛ كما أن الترجمة العربية بها بعض الأخطاء ولم تكن جيدة عمومًا.
الفصول الأولى منه كانت مملة بعض الشيء نظرًا لكثرة المعلومات التي تحتاج قراءة متأنية وذهنًا صافيًا؛ كما أن الترجمة العربية بها بعض الأخطاء ولم تكن جيدة عمومًا.
March 16, 2014
“In addition, these findings cast a different light on the general narrative of discovery from Copernicus to the present. The existence of other planets, stars, galaxies, and the like is unambiguous (though limited) support for the Copernican Principle only if these are not at all relevant to our own existence. But as we’ve seen, there’s no reason to assume this. With respect to habitability, our existence depends on such local variables as a large stabilizing moon, plate tectonics, intricate biological and non-biological feedback, greenhouse effects, a carefully placed circular orbit around the right kind of star, early volatile elements-providing asteroids and comets, and outlying giant planets to protect us from frequent ongoing bombardment by comets. It depends on a Solar System placed carefully in the Galactic Habitable Zone in a large spiral galaxy formed at the right time. It presupposes the earlier explosions of supernovae to provide us with the iron that courses though our veins and the carbon that is the foundation of life. It also depends on a present rarity of such nearby supernovae. Finally, it depends on an exquisitely fine-tuned set of physical laws, parameters, and initial conditions.” ~ Summary of The Privileged Planet Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay W. Richards (Gonzalez; Richards, 271-272)
June 17, 2015
Many Christians would disagree with the Old Earth persecutive of this book, but this is a great resource on the unique habitability of Earth. A great resource on combating the Copernican Principle.
October 15, 2022
The authors present a fascinating argument that observability and habitability are closely related.
Some scientific background is useful in order to be able to follow some of their arguments.
Some scientific background is useful in order to be able to follow some of their arguments.
December 24, 2016
Materialism, the belief that reality consists, at bottom, of matter and energy in mindless motion, is the background philosophy of our day, at least among our cultural elites, those who, in the words of Marx, “hold the commanding heights of culture.”
Carl Sagan opened every episode of his “Cosmos” series with Materialism’s version of the Gloria Patri: “The Cosmos is all that is, or ever was, or ever will be.” And it did not have us in mind, but is cold, pitiless, and indifferent toward our existence. As human beings we are a cosmic accident. There is nothing special about our planet, our solar system, our sun, or anything about our place in the vast stillness of the universe. Sagan calls the idea that we have some privileged position in the universe a “delusion,” and advises us to get used to the fact that “our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark.”
This is what we have been told. But is it true? What’s the evidence? Carl Sagan was an astronomer. So is there evidence from astronomy that speaks, one way or the other, to the question of purpose in the cosmos? Can we tell whether or not we were intended? Is there anything special about the earth that might make us rethink the prevailing thought on these questions?
This is the subject of the book “The Privileged Planet.” And part of the answer to the question of purpose and significance that is offered has to do with whether complex life is common or rare in the universe. But this is only part of the answer. Sometimes people act as if that in itself would be enough to give the answer.
And so some people have the idea that if life is found elsewhere in the cosmos, that this somehow disproves the existence of God. The flip side of this is the thought that if we can show that life is very rare or even virtually unique to earth, that this somehow proves the existence of a Creator. Neither of these are good arguments, and they are not the arguments that the authors are making here.
In the not-too-distant past it was commonly assumed that life could thrive just about anywhere in our solar system, our galaxy, or in the universe at large. We now know that this is not the case. At the very least, life of even the simplest kind is going to require two things – carbon, for information-bearing molecules, and liquid water, as a medium for chemical reactions. Even this basic requirement greatly restricts the possibilities. Right off the bat we know that the vast majority of the universe is not going to be a likely location for life, because the vast majority of the universe is either too hot or too cold for liquid water.
Now, this kind of pessimism may seem to be contradicted by the cautious optimism we get from popular articles that suggest that we might find life as close as Jupiter’s moon Europa. What is usually not mentioned is that there is a big difference between the requirements for simple microbial life and those for complex, intelligent life like ourselves.
The authors, Jay Richards and Guillermo Gonzalez, agree with the conclusions of the book “Rare Earth,” that while relatively simple microbial life may thrive on planets throughout the universe, planets capable of sustaining complex life are exceedingly uncommon.
What they discuss is that in addition to the constraints imposed by the requirements for liquid water and carbon, complex life such as ourselves has a whole list of further requirements, things you need to make complex life possible. Some of these are a terrestrial (rocky) planet, as opposed to a gas giant. This terrestrial planet has to have plate tectonics, and it has to have a certain kind of geological activity that produces a magnetic shield so that it keeps its atmosphere.
The planet has to be the right size, and it has to have a large stabilizing moon. It has to have the right kind of star and be the right distance from it. It has to have the right kind of planetary neighbours like Jupiter and Saturn that protect it from bombardment by comets. It has to be in the right location in the galaxy, and be in the right kind of galaxy. And the list goes on.
The first part of the authors’ argument is that complex, intelligent life is going to be rare, very rare in the universe. But they are not arguing that on that basis alone one can conclude that it is the product of design, because it is not known exactly how unlikely it is that these conditions can be met all at once. The universe is a very large place, with possibly 100 billion galaxies out there, containing maybe 1 X 10 exp. 22 stars. So that’s like a big cosmic lottery, a lot of chances to get things right maybe once, even if it doesn’t happen a lot.
But that doesn’t really matter because that’s not the whole argument that they are advancing, it’s just the first part.
The second part of their argument involves this question: is there something else we could learn about this evidence, other than merely its rarity, that would suggest purpose rather than a mere cosmic lottery? What if this rare convergence of factors that we see here on earth didn’t come about as simply the result of a mere fluke or luck? What if it’s the result of some underlying purpose or design? Is there any way we could tell?
The answer to this question is the thesis of the book, and it is this: the same narrow circumstances that allow us to exist, that is, that make earth habitable, also provide us with the best overall setting for making scientific discoveries. In other words, the very rare set of conditions that allow observers like us to exist also provide the best overall set of circumstances for observing.
So, for example, we need a large moon for complex life to be possible on earth. But this large moon also makes possible total solar eclipses, which, due to the unique circumstances they create, have been the single most important source of information regarding our sun and distant stars. Total solar eclipses, the product of a large moon which we need to survive, have been essential for the opening up of the field of stellar astrophysics.
Or another example: the atmosphere that life needs to exist on the surface of a planet – an oxygen and nitrogen-rich atmosphere – also happens to be transparent to that part of the electromagnetic spectrum that’s the most informative about the universe around us. In other words, that life on the planet with a life-giving atmosphere – that life is able to see into the distant universe.
Now you might think, big deal. Well, if you were transported to any of the other planets in our solar system that have thick atmospheres, first of all, you’d be dead. And second, you wouldn’t even see the other planets. So this isn’t just something you’d assume would happen on every planet. The atmosphere that life needs allows that life to see the distant universe.
A third example is that the safest and probably the only place in our galaxy for complex life – between spiral arms, which is where we find ourselves – is also the best place for observing the universe beyond our own galaxy. More examples are given in the book, but you get the idea.
The correlation between habitability and discoverability is just the sort of pattern that ought to suggest to people “conspiracy” rather than “mere coincidence.” There’s something about the universe that can’t be simply explained by the impersonal forces of nature and atoms colliding with atoms. And so you have to reach for something beyond the universe to try to account for it.
We’ve often been told that the universe did not have us in mind, that it was not designed for beings like us. We are simply life that happened to come about on a tiny little planet surrounding a tiny insignificant star in a very large universe that was not intended.
But evidence that has emerged in the last 30 years suggests something completely different. It suggests that the universe was intended, that the universe exists for a purpose, and that this purpose isn’t simply for beings like ourselves to exist, but for us to extend ourselves beyond our small home, to view the universe at large, to discover the universe, and in fact, perhaps, to consider whether the universe points beyond itself.
Carl Sagan opened every episode of his “Cosmos” series with Materialism’s version of the Gloria Patri: “The Cosmos is all that is, or ever was, or ever will be.” And it did not have us in mind, but is cold, pitiless, and indifferent toward our existence. As human beings we are a cosmic accident. There is nothing special about our planet, our solar system, our sun, or anything about our place in the vast stillness of the universe. Sagan calls the idea that we have some privileged position in the universe a “delusion,” and advises us to get used to the fact that “our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark.”
This is what we have been told. But is it true? What’s the evidence? Carl Sagan was an astronomer. So is there evidence from astronomy that speaks, one way or the other, to the question of purpose in the cosmos? Can we tell whether or not we were intended? Is there anything special about the earth that might make us rethink the prevailing thought on these questions?
This is the subject of the book “The Privileged Planet.” And part of the answer to the question of purpose and significance that is offered has to do with whether complex life is common or rare in the universe. But this is only part of the answer. Sometimes people act as if that in itself would be enough to give the answer.
And so some people have the idea that if life is found elsewhere in the cosmos, that this somehow disproves the existence of God. The flip side of this is the thought that if we can show that life is very rare or even virtually unique to earth, that this somehow proves the existence of a Creator. Neither of these are good arguments, and they are not the arguments that the authors are making here.
In the not-too-distant past it was commonly assumed that life could thrive just about anywhere in our solar system, our galaxy, or in the universe at large. We now know that this is not the case. At the very least, life of even the simplest kind is going to require two things – carbon, for information-bearing molecules, and liquid water, as a medium for chemical reactions. Even this basic requirement greatly restricts the possibilities. Right off the bat we know that the vast majority of the universe is not going to be a likely location for life, because the vast majority of the universe is either too hot or too cold for liquid water.
Now, this kind of pessimism may seem to be contradicted by the cautious optimism we get from popular articles that suggest that we might find life as close as Jupiter’s moon Europa. What is usually not mentioned is that there is a big difference between the requirements for simple microbial life and those for complex, intelligent life like ourselves.
The authors, Jay Richards and Guillermo Gonzalez, agree with the conclusions of the book “Rare Earth,” that while relatively simple microbial life may thrive on planets throughout the universe, planets capable of sustaining complex life are exceedingly uncommon.
What they discuss is that in addition to the constraints imposed by the requirements for liquid water and carbon, complex life such as ourselves has a whole list of further requirements, things you need to make complex life possible. Some of these are a terrestrial (rocky) planet, as opposed to a gas giant. This terrestrial planet has to have plate tectonics, and it has to have a certain kind of geological activity that produces a magnetic shield so that it keeps its atmosphere.
The planet has to be the right size, and it has to have a large stabilizing moon. It has to have the right kind of star and be the right distance from it. It has to have the right kind of planetary neighbours like Jupiter and Saturn that protect it from bombardment by comets. It has to be in the right location in the galaxy, and be in the right kind of galaxy. And the list goes on.
The first part of the authors’ argument is that complex, intelligent life is going to be rare, very rare in the universe. But they are not arguing that on that basis alone one can conclude that it is the product of design, because it is not known exactly how unlikely it is that these conditions can be met all at once. The universe is a very large place, with possibly 100 billion galaxies out there, containing maybe 1 X 10 exp. 22 stars. So that’s like a big cosmic lottery, a lot of chances to get things right maybe once, even if it doesn’t happen a lot.
But that doesn’t really matter because that’s not the whole argument that they are advancing, it’s just the first part.
The second part of their argument involves this question: is there something else we could learn about this evidence, other than merely its rarity, that would suggest purpose rather than a mere cosmic lottery? What if this rare convergence of factors that we see here on earth didn’t come about as simply the result of a mere fluke or luck? What if it’s the result of some underlying purpose or design? Is there any way we could tell?
The answer to this question is the thesis of the book, and it is this: the same narrow circumstances that allow us to exist, that is, that make earth habitable, also provide us with the best overall setting for making scientific discoveries. In other words, the very rare set of conditions that allow observers like us to exist also provide the best overall set of circumstances for observing.
So, for example, we need a large moon for complex life to be possible on earth. But this large moon also makes possible total solar eclipses, which, due to the unique circumstances they create, have been the single most important source of information regarding our sun and distant stars. Total solar eclipses, the product of a large moon which we need to survive, have been essential for the opening up of the field of stellar astrophysics.
Or another example: the atmosphere that life needs to exist on the surface of a planet – an oxygen and nitrogen-rich atmosphere – also happens to be transparent to that part of the electromagnetic spectrum that’s the most informative about the universe around us. In other words, that life on the planet with a life-giving atmosphere – that life is able to see into the distant universe.
Now you might think, big deal. Well, if you were transported to any of the other planets in our solar system that have thick atmospheres, first of all, you’d be dead. And second, you wouldn’t even see the other planets. So this isn’t just something you’d assume would happen on every planet. The atmosphere that life needs allows that life to see the distant universe.
A third example is that the safest and probably the only place in our galaxy for complex life – between spiral arms, which is where we find ourselves – is also the best place for observing the universe beyond our own galaxy. More examples are given in the book, but you get the idea.
The correlation between habitability and discoverability is just the sort of pattern that ought to suggest to people “conspiracy” rather than “mere coincidence.” There’s something about the universe that can’t be simply explained by the impersonal forces of nature and atoms colliding with atoms. And so you have to reach for something beyond the universe to try to account for it.
We’ve often been told that the universe did not have us in mind, that it was not designed for beings like us. We are simply life that happened to come about on a tiny little planet surrounding a tiny insignificant star in a very large universe that was not intended.
But evidence that has emerged in the last 30 years suggests something completely different. It suggests that the universe was intended, that the universe exists for a purpose, and that this purpose isn’t simply for beings like ourselves to exist, but for us to extend ourselves beyond our small home, to view the universe at large, to discover the universe, and in fact, perhaps, to consider whether the universe points beyond itself.
March 25, 2013
The book is a unique American product where scientists and theologists work together to write extensive technical material to confuse and impress people misdirecting them in science. One author is a scientist and the other is a theologist. It is a bizarre output that is, in literary terms, may be described as a very well-written book. But as far as the content goes it is a shame that somebody would be expected to spend so much time reading this heavy book to be convinced about a place for intelligent design in science.
May 21, 2010
I have used parts of this book for writing and research in my work in intelligent design. I can finally say that, yes, I've read the book in because my most recent research for a program and paper on cosmology involved delving into the last half of the book.
If you are studying cosmology, I recommend this book as part of your studies. Gonzales is an astronomer and Richards is an author and scholar (he's also an excellent speaker). I've had the privilege of meeting Richards on a few occasions and have sat in on Kerby's radio interviews with him.
If you are studying cosmology, I recommend this book as part of your studies. Gonzales is an astronomer and Richards is an author and scholar (he's also an excellent speaker). I've had the privilege of meeting Richards on a few occasions and have sat in on Kerby's radio interviews with him.
Want to read
April 19, 2007This is a fascinating book about science, and the cosmos. It also shows that one can believe in intelligent design, and the truth of science. In the Qur'an, God tells us to reflect upon his creation, whether through geology, astronomy, hydrology, embryology etc. Science is a means of knowing God better.
October 9, 2017
The author read the book Rare Earth and then set out to make the claim that all the specifications needed for intelligent life to form are even more uncommon than that books hypothesis. The author then for some reason makes the illogical jump to the watchmaker argument in which we were intelligently designed, specifically by the Christian god lmfao.
July 27, 2022
Fascinating! I’d love to read an update by these authors on more recent discoveries. This book took me a LONG time to get through and was pretty dense at times but overall I loved the way that the authors arguments were so detailed and thorough. Very very interesting take on the subject of who we are and why we’re here.
November 2, 2011
Author Jay Richards is head of the ID movement and Discovery Institute of Seattle. They go into great detail explaining just how our planet is fine tuned for carbon-based life form to exist. To much detail in 300 or so pages..I couldn't stick with it.
January 9, 2021
Fantastic read.... some of the science was a bit over my head but that was expected going in. The authors Jay Richards and Guillermo Gonzalez explain things in palatable chunks. They do a great job framing the argument that our planet is perfectly placed as to observe Gods wonderful creation.
November 13, 2022
Very thorough thinking about our planet. From its inner workings to its place in the solar system and the galaxy. How rare we might be? This book dives into that very question.
January 8, 2021
This was a difficult, but fascinating, book.
Guillermo Gonzalez (the primary scientist) and Jay Richards, in “The Privileged Planet” wrote an intriguing presentation and defense of a simple argument: our Earth appears to be “just right” both as a habitation in the universe AND as a place from which the universe and its laws can be discovered. Moreover, they argue, these two phenomena are related: the characteristics of our Earth that make it habitable are also those that make it friendly to scientific discovery.
They develop their argument in three sections. The first looks at the Earth and its “local environment” (to an astronomer, “local environment” means “to solar system.”) In fascinating chapters they explain how eclipses, water and the “information recording” of sediments and ice layers, our ability to see deep into the universe and the unique ways our specific solar system is designed for stability, habitability and discovery. The second expands their reasoning into the larger universe, explaining our positioning within our galaxy, our galaxy’s positioning and construction compared to most others, and the relative uniqueness of stars like our sun all support their basic hypothesis.
In these two sections, the authors try to present difficult science in terms non-scientists can understand. They only partially succeed. The trip through these sections is a difficult slog—their conclusions are clear and well-founded, but following them to those conclusions will be a difficult trip for those (like me) unfamiliar with the depths of their science. This is the reason for my rating of 3–it’s not a bad book, just difficult.
The third section, “Implications,” however, is a much easier read. In it, they take on the prevailing scientific dogma (there is no design in the universe, only apparent design that has come from chance and natural law working together) and explain how the design of our Earth and its place within the Solar System and larger cosmos challenge that assumption. In a key passage, they note the very strong evidence for design and purpose, then ask, “But if science is a search for the best explanation, based on the actual evidence from the physical world, rather than merely a search for the best naturalistic or impersonal explanations of the physical world, how responsible is it to adopt a principle that makes one incapable of seeing an entire class of evidence?” Indeed.
The most interesting chapter of the book for me was their description of “The Copernican Principle.” This principle which they say underlies most science—especially astronomy and cosmology—is, for them, an improper extrapolation of Copernicus’ observation that the Earth is not at the center of the universe. From that observation, modern science has concluded this “Copernican Principle: we should assume there is nothing special about the time or place of Earth in the universe.” The authors take on this assumption in detail, putting it both to a philosophical test, and then testing seven predictions of this principle against the observed evidence. Unsurprisingly, they find it wanting.
For those willing to make the difficult trip through Parts I and II, the book will be very rewarding.
Guillermo Gonzalez (the primary scientist) and Jay Richards, in “The Privileged Planet” wrote an intriguing presentation and defense of a simple argument: our Earth appears to be “just right” both as a habitation in the universe AND as a place from which the universe and its laws can be discovered. Moreover, they argue, these two phenomena are related: the characteristics of our Earth that make it habitable are also those that make it friendly to scientific discovery.
They develop their argument in three sections. The first looks at the Earth and its “local environment” (to an astronomer, “local environment” means “to solar system.”) In fascinating chapters they explain how eclipses, water and the “information recording” of sediments and ice layers, our ability to see deep into the universe and the unique ways our specific solar system is designed for stability, habitability and discovery. The second expands their reasoning into the larger universe, explaining our positioning within our galaxy, our galaxy’s positioning and construction compared to most others, and the relative uniqueness of stars like our sun all support their basic hypothesis.
In these two sections, the authors try to present difficult science in terms non-scientists can understand. They only partially succeed. The trip through these sections is a difficult slog—their conclusions are clear and well-founded, but following them to those conclusions will be a difficult trip for those (like me) unfamiliar with the depths of their science. This is the reason for my rating of 3–it’s not a bad book, just difficult.
The third section, “Implications,” however, is a much easier read. In it, they take on the prevailing scientific dogma (there is no design in the universe, only apparent design that has come from chance and natural law working together) and explain how the design of our Earth and its place within the Solar System and larger cosmos challenge that assumption. In a key passage, they note the very strong evidence for design and purpose, then ask, “But if science is a search for the best explanation, based on the actual evidence from the physical world, rather than merely a search for the best naturalistic or impersonal explanations of the physical world, how responsible is it to adopt a principle that makes one incapable of seeing an entire class of evidence?” Indeed.
The most interesting chapter of the book for me was their description of “The Copernican Principle.” This principle which they say underlies most science—especially astronomy and cosmology—is, for them, an improper extrapolation of Copernicus’ observation that the Earth is not at the center of the universe. From that observation, modern science has concluded this “Copernican Principle: we should assume there is nothing special about the time or place of Earth in the universe.” The authors take on this assumption in detail, putting it both to a philosophical test, and then testing seven predictions of this principle against the observed evidence. Unsurprisingly, they find it wanting.
For those willing to make the difficult trip through Parts I and II, the book will be very rewarding.
May 17, 2020
This is a superb work. Astrophysicist, Guillermo González, and philosopher Jay W. Richard, constructed truly well-researched and nuanced central argument in the book. The gist of it has to do with the idea that planet Earth is extraordinarily well-suited for both, habitability and discoverability. That is to say, that given Earth's incredibly unique properties and location within the Habitable Galactic Zone, technological life was not only possible, but also the discoverability of the universe. Had Earth been located elsewhere within the Milky Way, our scientific endeavor would have been greatly hindered due to stardust and other galactic blockers.
The authors also have a lot to say about the Copernican Principle, which is often used as a tool to disregard our planet's place in the universe as a speck of dust in the empty and vast universe. The assumption, as the authors point out, seems to be that smallness is an indicator of worth or value. That's a faulty assumption, though. Just as miners extract large volumes of rocky materials to later discard them in order to find much more smaller pieces of diamonds, this pale blue dot we call Earth might not be at the literal center of the Milky Way or the Universe, but it most certainly is like no other planet we have ever found, sitting at the center of the Galactic Habitable Zone where discoverability is inherently possible. That's an outstandingly, incredibly, and incomprehensibly privileged planet.
I'll end this review with my favorite quote from the book:
"We not only occupy an exceptional location within the universe, we also occupy a special moment in cosmic history. While we and our environs are not literally the physical center of the universe, we are special in other, much more significant ways. In a sense, we are nestled snugly in the "center" of the universe not in a trivial spatial sense but with respect to habitability and measurability. This fact stands in stark contrast to expectations nurtured by the Copernican Principle...With respect to habitability, our existence depends on such local variables as a large stabilizing moon, plate tectonics, intricate and nonbiological feedback, greenhouse effect, a carefully placed circular orbit around the right kind of star, early volatile elements-providing asteroids and comets, and outlying giant planets to protect us from frequent ongoing bombardment by comets. It depends on a Solar System placed carefully in the Galactic Habitable Zone in a large spiral galaxy formed at the right time. It presupposes the earlier explosions of supernovae to provide us with the iron that courses through our veins and the carbon that is the foundation of life. It also depends on a present rarity of such nearby supernovae. Finally, it depends on an exquisitely fine-tuned set of physical laws, parameters, and initial conditions."
The authors also have a lot to say about the Copernican Principle, which is often used as a tool to disregard our planet's place in the universe as a speck of dust in the empty and vast universe. The assumption, as the authors point out, seems to be that smallness is an indicator of worth or value. That's a faulty assumption, though. Just as miners extract large volumes of rocky materials to later discard them in order to find much more smaller pieces of diamonds, this pale blue dot we call Earth might not be at the literal center of the Milky Way or the Universe, but it most certainly is like no other planet we have ever found, sitting at the center of the Galactic Habitable Zone where discoverability is inherently possible. That's an outstandingly, incredibly, and incomprehensibly privileged planet.
I'll end this review with my favorite quote from the book:
"We not only occupy an exceptional location within the universe, we also occupy a special moment in cosmic history. While we and our environs are not literally the physical center of the universe, we are special in other, much more significant ways. In a sense, we are nestled snugly in the "center" of the universe not in a trivial spatial sense but with respect to habitability and measurability. This fact stands in stark contrast to expectations nurtured by the Copernican Principle...With respect to habitability, our existence depends on such local variables as a large stabilizing moon, plate tectonics, intricate and nonbiological feedback, greenhouse effect, a carefully placed circular orbit around the right kind of star, early volatile elements-providing asteroids and comets, and outlying giant planets to protect us from frequent ongoing bombardment by comets. It depends on a Solar System placed carefully in the Galactic Habitable Zone in a large spiral galaxy formed at the right time. It presupposes the earlier explosions of supernovae to provide us with the iron that courses through our veins and the carbon that is the foundation of life. It also depends on a present rarity of such nearby supernovae. Finally, it depends on an exquisitely fine-tuned set of physical laws, parameters, and initial conditions."
August 7, 2018
I love this book. It is one of my favorites along the lines of Intelligent Design. I used it for the basis of a college paper and got a A+ for the final paper. It flies in the face of the current storyline that so many follow, that the universe, if there's only one, is all by chance. Inspiring to see that there is a much greater, more fantastic story behind our universe and creation than what many "scientists" want us to believe.
The book is fascinating reading but I had to stop after the midpoint. The technical details got too deep for me to follow or enjoy. That's not a complaint of the author; it's the reality of my lack of background in Physics and Astronomy. You may do much better than I did.
The book is fascinating reading but I had to stop after the midpoint. The technical details got too deep for me to follow or enjoy. That's not a complaint of the author; it's the reality of my lack of background in Physics and Astronomy. You may do much better than I did.
May 8, 2019
To be honest, I don't think I understood half of what Dr. Gonzalez wrote. I borrowed the book for two reasons. The first was to find information that I could use in world-building as a writer. The second was to educate myself about evidence that our universe is not a muddle of random chance and coincidence. I ended up buying a copy of the book, and once it arrives, I'll have to reread it with two or three highlighters. One for world-building information, one for ID information, and one for miscellaneous information if I find any. For the world building part, the first half of the book is useful.
February 10, 2025
I picked up this book after hearing one of the authors interviewed on a podcast. He was interesting and engaging, and very enthusiastic about the subject—that our planet enjoys a special place in the cosmos, not only for life to occur and thrive, but a place where we are uniquely positioned to observe the cosmos.
I like science. I liked the interview I heard. I did not like this book. It reads like that textbook you had to slog through for a class you were required to take. The good news is I’m not taking a class and I’m not required to read this book. DNF
I like science. I liked the interview I heard. I did not like this book. It reads like that textbook you had to slog through for a class you were required to take. The good news is I’m not taking a class and I’m not required to read this book. DNF
March 10, 2018
Amazing book, even for non experts, and it is quite useful that the more complicated stuff is relegated to the notes. But I would have appreciated more techanical explanations at some points...! I thing that the authors are so comfortable with their knowledge that sometimes does not understand how difficult some of the topics are. In any case, a wonderful book!
August 19, 2019
I didn't actually finish reading this book. I only read 11%. The problem was not that this book did not cover important topics, it did. The problem was that the writing was uninteresting. There were a lot of complex topics and the writing style simply did not hold my interest. I have read many technical scientific books but this one is not one that I could recommend.
November 8, 2022
An excellent book that shows how the universe was uniquely designed to support life on earth. The author's experience with a total solar eclipse helped him to come to conclusion that the universe is uniquely designed to support life on earth.
September 8, 2023
I read this years and years ago and apparently forgot to put it on my Goodreads. My memories of the book are a bit vague by this point, but I believe I marginally enjoyed it, so I gave it three stars :)
January 19, 2024
Maybe a good book for some. This was way too much for me...so difficult to understand...much terminology that I was unfamiliar with. Definitely not for the layman...I mean it took me 3 years to finsih it.
December 28, 2024
Another excellent book which demonstrates that science and faith are not in conflict but complement each other. I have loved astronomy since I was a kid so had a bias for liking the subject matter and the expertise of the author.
February 26, 2025
This book is essentially a fascinating argument that earth is not just a rare habitable planet, but also uniquely positioned specifically for scientific discovery. Great blend of astrophysics, chemistry, and philosophy to challenge the idea that our existence is accidental.
January 3, 2026
Interesting arguments that i think have validity, but i would like to see an update since the research was done in 2004, and that hangs over the argument for me. Is what was said still true; is the argument better, worse, about the same?
I just need some confirmation.
I just need some confirmation.
October 2, 2019
Fascinating, but not my cup of tea. It's just a bit too science-heavy for me right now. I'll try again in a year or two.
November 24, 2025
Good book. Science isn’t a huge interest of mine though so it was hard to get into
May 15, 2021
[Imported automatically from my blog. Some formatting there may not have translated here.]
I was prodded to read this book by this article at the Weekly Standard website, alleging that one of the authors, Guillermo Gonzalez, was denied tenure at Iowa State due to his outrageous personal views, as expressed here. As it turns out, the UNH Library was broad-minded enough to score a copy, so it was a low-risk venture to check it out.
Gonzalez is an actual astronomer, but the book's viewpoint is well outside scientific orthodoxy. It makes the argument for so-called "intelligent design", at least in in a (non-biological) specific area. The argument is that our lovely planet is the result of a long combination of extremely unlikely events, way too many to be the result of accidental chance. Not only is our environment well-suited to intelligent life, but it's also well-suited for that intelligent life to make discoveries about itself and its universe.
While Gonzalez is a member of the Discovery Institute, a well known anti-evolution organization, there's not much of that in the book; theology only raises its head to be disclaimed. Instead, it's a wide-ranging examination of the science behind "all the things that had to go right" in order to put you and me in the here and now. And there's no denying that it's a pretty impressive list.
Unlike (say) creationists, Gonzalez comes off as pro-science; he's very willing to look at all the evidence, and he knows his way around the literature. But he doggedly wants to put "design" on the table as a valid scientific hypothesis, anathema to just about everyone else in his field. It's too bad this sort of thing can't be openly hashed out without it being painted as yet another instance of the yahoos versus the scientific martyrs.
Amusing side note pointed out here: while Harvard prof Steven Pinker recently wrote an op-ed in defense of "dangerous ideas", this only came a month after his letter to the Boston Globe excorciating that paper for daring to print an article in defense of Gonzalez's views, likening them to—I'm not kidding—Holocaust denial. Anyone reading this book will know, at the very least, how inappropriately stupid that analogy is. Apparently some ideas are just too dangerous for Pinker's sensibility; maybe he should wait more than a month before contradicting himself so obviously.
Having said that, however, this Wikipedia entry on Gonzalez details the history and argues that his current performance may not have been adequate for a grant of tenure.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 45 reviews