1. The Planets Move (2000 B.C. – 500 B.C.)
A thousand years of observations reveal that there are stars that move in the sky and follow patterns, showing that the Earth is part of a solar system of planets separate from the fixed stars.

2. The Earth Moves (1543)
Nicolaus Copernicus places the sun, not the Earth, at the center of the solar system.

3. Planetary Orbits Are Elliptical (1605 – 1609)
Johannes Kepler devises mathematical laws that successfully and accurately predict the motions of the planets in elliptical orbits.

4. Jupiter Has Moons (1609 – 1612)
Galileo Galilei discovers that Jupiter has moons like the Earth, proving that Copernicus, not Ptolemy, is right. Copernicus believes that Earth is not unique, but instead resembles the other planets, all of which orbit the sun.

5. Halley's Comet Has a Predictable Orbit (1705 – 1758)
Edmund Halley proves that comets orbit the sun like the planets and successfully predicts the return of Halley's Comet. He determines that comets seen in 1531 and 1607 are the same object following a 76-year orbit. Halley's prediction is proven in 1758 when the comet returns. Unfortunately, Halley had died in 1742, missing the momentous event.

6. The Milky Way Is a Gigantic Disk of Stars (1780 – 1834)
Telescope-maker William Herschel and his sister Carolyn map the entire sky and prove that our solar system resides in a gigantic disk of stars that bulges in the center called the Milky Way. Herschel's technique involves taking a sample count of stars in the field of view of his telescope. His final count shows more than 90,000 stars in 2,400 sample areas. Later studies confirm that our galaxy is disk-shaped, but find that the sun is not near the center and that the system is considerably larger than Herschel's estimation.

7. General Relativity (1915 – 1919)
Albert Einstein unveils his theory of general relativity in which he proposes that mass warps both time and space, therefore large masses can bend light. The theory is proven in 1919 by astronomers using a solar eclipse as a test.

8. The Universe Is Expanding (1924 – 1929)
Edwin Hubble determines the distance to many nearby galaxies and discovers that the farther they are from us, the faster they are flying away from us. His calculations prove that the universe is expanding.

9. The Center of the Milky Way Emits Radio Waves (1932)
Karl Jansky invents radio astronomy and discovers a strange radio-emitting object at the center of the Milky Way. Jansky was conducting experiments on radio wavelength interference for his employer, Bell Telephone Laboratories, when he detected three groups of static; local thunderstorms, distant thunderstorms and a steady hiss-type static. Jansky determines that the static is coming from an unknown source at the center of the Milky Way by its position in the sky.

10. Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (1964)
Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson discover cosmic microwave background radiation, which they suspect is the afterglow of the big bang. Their measurements, combined with Edwin Hubble's earlier finding that the galaxies are rushing away, make a strong case for the big bang theory of the birth of the universe.

11. Gamma-Ray Bursts (1969 – 1997)
The two-decade-long mystery of gamma-ray bursts is solved by a host of sophisticated ground-based and orbiting telescopes. Gamma-ray bursts are short-lived bursts of gamma-ray photons, which are the most energetic form of light and are associated with nuclear blasts. At least some of the bursts have now been linked with distant supernovae — explosions marking the deaths of especially massive stars.

12. Planets Around Other Stars (1995 – 2004)
Astronomers find a host of extrasolar planets as a result of improved telescope technology and prove that other solar systems exist, although none as yet resembles our own. Astronomers are able to detect extrasolar planets by measuring gravitational influences on stars.

13. The Universe Is Accelerating (1998 – 2000)
Unexpectedly, astronomers find that instead of slowing down due to the pull of gravity, the expansion of the universe at great distances is accelerating. If these observations are correct and the trend continues, it will result in the inability to see other galaxies. A new theory of the end of the universe based on this finding has been called the "big rip."

>> ^BicycleRepairMan:
Half of what Turek was saying was how specially designed for life the Universe and the Earth are. It's so weird that I haven't heard the anthropic principle even be mentioned yet.
Hitchens , while perhaps not naming it, does use it, he explains how the universe is most dead, empty space and its moving apart at accelerating speeds, and how we well soon crash with Andromeda, "some Design" As he puts it. This easily lay in ruins any suggestion that the universe is "finely tuned". Anyone who suggests this is either ignorant or unable to see things in perspective. The universe, if designed, seems to be designed to be as hostile and unsuitable for life as physically possible. So far, we've only found one tiny suitable speck able to support life, and the only reason we found that one, is that we are standing on it.


The problem is, when Turek mentions arguments like:
Earth needs to be at exactly the right distance from the sun.
Earth needs to complete a spin near 24 hours.
Earth needs to have the right tilt.
Earth needs to be next to a Jupiter-like planet.

He's fully realizing that the vast majority of the rest of the planets in the universe cannot support life. That's his argument. Earth is so much more special than all those other planets! For some reason he actually thinks this is evidence FOR Earth being specially designed for us. It seems like he really needs a basic lesson on what the anthropic principle is.

No one ever mentions the anthropic principle. It totally explains the whole "our planet is lucky" argument. We KNOW there are other planets out there, (about 10^20), and we are of course going to find ourselves on a "lucky" one.

Okay, am I nuts or does the language of this just not match with mormonism? Joseph Smith lived in 1800s (think he died in the mid 1800s or so). I'm fairly certain there is nothing in the book of mormon about "starbases." Don't know about the "other planets" stuff, but I'm thinking this was written WAY after. I mean, don't get me wrong, it is yet another quack religion, but this seems more like Scientology than Mormonism.

Um, oh yeah, I guess I didn't make a clear point...

Point was this; evolution is an idea that jives with every scrap of evidence we've tossed at it. Significant challengers have risen, but further research has explained away the apparent contradictions to the 'natural selection' program.

Its incumbent on the current generation to inspire the next to keep piling up more clues and delving deeper into the intricacies of our natural world. In other words, one way science fails is by giving value to ideas that have little to no evidence to support them. And another way science fails is by allowing a neglect of critical thinking to flourish.

It is important to know that the earth revolves around the sun; we can then begin to understand seasons, shooting stars, other planets, the moon... etc. Similarly it is important to know that evolution occurs by natural selection; we can then begin to understand why there are hundreds of thousands of non-interbreeding beetle species, how ants know what to do, why my great grandfather looks just like me but was a foot shorter, why our bananas are in danger of being wiped out by a fungus, and why squirrels and cats can climb trees while little dogs can not!

"groups of these robots could be use to...explore other planets"? wha?
Isn't that a bit to optimistic of the jumping capacity of these things? come on.

most likely, it was done for many reasons-most of the time when someone thinks or acts unilaterally, if they are not extremely anti-social or sociopathick, and qm is neither it tends to rub the mob the wrong way-
MG and JD have a healthy way of looking at the situation through their apparatus, you other folks do sound just a bit whinier...figure out your own bullshit and use a mirror as an example of how not to be, and expect the same from others...planet fucking earth!

I have xenophobia when it comes to aliens from other planets.....all they want to do is invade us or kill us, mine our organs and planet, or inhabit our bodies.....

>> ^Kreegath:
Sighed heavily when the rabbi brought up the fact that we haven't found life on other planets.
Seriously, the fact that he's so poor at arguing and has so poor arguments makes this hard to watch in one sitting.



So true. It's really disheartening...

Sighed heavily when the rabbi brought up the fact that we haven't found life on other planets.
Seriously, the fact that he's so poor at arguing and has so poor arguments makes this hard to watch in one sitting.

Speaking of eyes and the fossil record: http://evolutionvscreationism.info/Evolution%20vs.%20Creationism/19..html

I think that sometimes Carl is a bit desirous about the idea of life on other planets. I think the estimated values he gave reflect that.

CaptWillard, I don't think population would be a problem. In the developed world we live a lot longer but have less children. While in the developing world they have more children because the child mortality rate is higher (and lack of access to birth control) among other things. So if we started living for hundreds of years we'd still only likely have children for the first few decades, and we may even have colonies on other planets to have people on. Who knows?
Which leads to another problem I have with this technology. That is the future being such an unknown variable (but I'm guessing for some that's part of the attraction).

I suggest SciFi fans read Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy. It delves into a lot of these issues, and its a superb read to boot .

People who are bashing military technology should stop and think that much civil technology ultimately traces its origin from military technology. Rail gun technology might have applications for launching satellites from Earth or spaceships from the surface of other planets with less gravity and atmosphere.

Why did I label this nature? An investigation of whether god exists is an investigation of nature. A universe without a god would be different from a universe with a god.

The FAQ definition of nature, taken literally, wouldn't include things like stars, galaxies, nebulae, other planets, physics, chemistry, etc. That's extremely narrow. So I assumed it wasn't meant to be taken literally and used the dictionary definition of nature.

i'm not watching that dufus tell about his inventing the internet and how global warming will devastate the earth we have other planets to live on we can get wireless internet up there i bet al gore gets good bandwidth on his macbook he invented that too