Theology and Cosmology

Sir: In the midst of speculation about black holes and the number of galaxies, Tony Caldersmith (Letters, March 2018), like many fascinated by cosmology, wanders into the field of theology in the belief that his cosmological insights equip him to make theological judgments. Rather than dealing with the fact of the position of the Earth in relation to the Sun, Mr Caldersmith proposes a hypothetical: “If evolution went a slightly different way and Earth was a bit closer to the Sun, it could have meant that this planet would never have had intelligent life on it. Would that mean there was no god?”

Putting aside the facts that evolution did not go a slightly different way and the Earth is not a bit closer to the Sun, the answer to Mr Caldersmith’s question is, “No. Those things would not have meant that God does not exist. They simply mean that there would have been no one to whom God could reveal Himself.”

Now, doesn’t that open up a field for consideration much more fascinating than how many galaxies there are? It goes directly to the age-old question of why we are here. There are some of us who believe that God created man to know Him, to love Him and to serve Him here on Earth and to be happy with Him forever in Heaven. He, therefore, created planet Earth and furnished it with everything the human species needs for life and happiness. He prevented evolution from going a slightly different way and He made sure Earth did not go that little bit closer to the Sun. Planet Earth gives every appearance of having been specially designed to fill the needs of the human species about to be created. There was nothing accidental about it.

Then God created man, for the reasons listed above.

I propose to Mr Caldersmith that theology is of greater value to cosmology than cosmology is to theology.

Frank Pulsford
Aspley, Qld

Sir: Thanks to Professor Jones for “The Utopian Ambitions of Silicon Valley” (March 2018). Worse than the data-mining that occurs in social media is the inbuilt obsolescence of the hardware and software we are using. It is these inbuilt evils, rather than the gathering of data, that will eventually lead to AI-type interactions with the user.

By purchasing an operating system we are immediately sedated by the inbuilt stupidities of the system that could have been designed better, but was made half-rotten as a principle of marketing. The human mind and body are naturally inclined to detect and correct stress elements in a machine if it is made from scratch; but by disengaging ourselves with machines that are built this way, we become effectively mere appendages to the machines. Popups that we don’t know how to get rid of, keyboards which are so user-unfriendly that we make stroke errors every few words, software installations that virtually self-destruct for some “strange” reason and require repeated connections to the internet (for the purpose of data-mining).

Advertisers cheer on the latest gadgetry and gimmickry, thus boosting sales, while inbuilt obsolescence roams the programs, preventing serious users from focusing on working constructively and intently; and goading them on to buy, but never master, machinery that is ever newer and more expensive.

Marc T. Low
via e-mail