of course, i was very young then, very young -- [laughter] i was 2 -- [laughter] so, of course, i wasn't thinking as a professional scholar then, but i got interested, and i started collecting materials, in a sense, then. so when i decided to write this book, i actually had to blow the dust off some of my own personal boxes. so there was a long phase of collecting materials when i was in germany. i went back to germany as a graduate student, and i also worked there as a journalist. i actually ended up living in germany for over four years, and this topic just wouldn't let go of me. i always just kept collecting materials. and they just kind of collected dust, or they were on my desktop. but then after i wrote that book on the foreign policy that followed the fall of the berlin wall and realized there was a huge curiosity about how the wall came down, once i decided to actually write this book, then i went back to germany for more targeted interview ises. so i did about 50 interviews, and they're listed in the book. but then in the final phase when you're just sitting down and writing, it's great to have both a great library, which harvard's

widener library is, and it's also great to have really smart people around to discuss your ideas, to show drafts to, to share concepts. ..

last question who wants the last question. >> if no one else has one my question wasn't apparently clear. i was interested in how the people who were pressing to the border crossings, how they knew about each other's activities and successes at other border crossings? i don't know if you spoke to back. >> there are two ways that happened. first is the sheer side size of the crossing becomes very large and people can see that with their own eyes. by that point that herald editor opens up you have 20,000 peoplee multiple estimates. the first way it happens is

people see with their own eyes they are at the border crossing. the border crossing is the biggest crowd for a similar phenomena are at the board's people can see with their own eyes what's happening. there's also word of mouth. people try to get the border crossing and realize there's 20,000 people. i can't get anywhere near the border crossing. some again and again you hear stories. you starts to start to have a bush telegraph and event once you get people over into the west they have access. so we have these multiple reinforcements of this process of the wall opening cascading throughout the night.

thank you for coming out and helping me tell these stories. i am happy to sign books to you or any of your holiday gift recipients booktv continues now in what you baptize an extraterrestrial and astronomer at the vatican observatory and the recipient of the astronomical society award response to questions about the science and the catholic church. this is about an hour.

>> good evening and welcome to the planetarium. i am an astronomer here and i'm also very pleased and honored to be able to present to you tonight's speaker. the third guy is a longtime friend and one is a remarkable group of people that i first met about 30 years ago as a young graduate student at the university of arizona which is a part time home at the astronomers vatican observatory. brother guy has had a long history in the chicago area institutions. he is also one video upstairs in the universe walk through space and time gallery a piece that not even brother guy has seen it so for those of you who are not quite sure what to expect tonight i can tell you this won't be an apologetic talk for

science and religion. in other words, don't expect to hear science used to refute or promote a particular religious view. rather expect to hear how science religious views at the cosmos can not only coexist without diminishing the integrity of either how the way of thinking about the world and one can often average the other. he's the curator of the collection in one of the largest in the world. here in the undergraduate masters degrees from mit and a phd and planetary sciences and the university of arizona. he's worked at harvard and mit, the u.s. peace corps in kenya and blasted college before entering the water from 1989. there is the evolution of the smaller solar system bodies he

spent six weeks collecting meteorites with the foundation sponsored team in antarctica. several years ago he gave an excellent talk about those here by the way. in 2000, he was fond of these come honored by the union for his contributions to the study of meteorites asteroids with the naming of 4597. he is the author of more than 200 scientific papers as well as a number of books including the one you will hear about tonight would you baptize an extraterrestrial and other questions from the astronomers inbox at the vatican observatory. co-authored. we are hearing copies of the book and they will be available after the presentation.

last week he was awarded the 2014 medal at the division for planetary sciences in tucson. for his decades long planetary science to the public while maintaining an active science career. his unique position within our profession as a credible spokesperson for scientific honesty within the context of religious beliefs and for being a rational spokesperson who can convey exceptionally well how religion and science can coexist for believers please join me in welcoming brother doctor, doctor brother. [applause] >> thank you everybody. >> the book is the star of the show and what we are going to do is start with a short film that tells you a little bit about the observatory where i work. i'm going to do a presentation based on the question that a question that makes up the title of the book and i wouldn't have

a short reading from earlier on in the dock and then we can have a couple questions and answers to read among other things, this is being recorded by c-span which means if you're going to ask questions, please wait for the microphone or else people will not hear your questions to adjust my answer. let's start with the film. >> they are scientific conversations about the universe and ways of learning how we interact with this universe. it isn't a question of is there a god that there is a god now what do god now what do we do. it's not just a question of there are a bunch of stars but rather why are there stars and how do they work and how does that tell us how things work here on earth. the interaction that i see in my own life is the religion gives me the reason to do the science. >> francis benedict when of his lines in the final fathers of the general congregation was go

to the frontier. there isn't much front here more than 3.7 billion years away. >> it was id within 1582 was a reform and abandoned 1881 they wanted to show. >> they start getting telescopes and then as the city lights grow and as the italian government gives them back the territory in the 30s they build new built a new telescopes on the roof of the palace. by the 1980s they make it unusable so we built a new telescope in the dark skies of arizona.

♪ ♪ the first one is a near earth object. so i am doing a commit the second project is the videos -- meteors and what we call a shooting star. and the third project is the

networks here and under tucson. >> this telescope of advanced technologies get telescope is the first of the new technology telescope that has been considered pretty much the norm in developing to to the scopes. thank with the advance of computer technology, we have the capability of bringing that advanced technology directly into our telescope, so telescope comes of it as an expendable. it's almost like it is a living machine comes of it can grow as technology grows. >> it's still very important to maintain that scientific research simply because there's still a lot of confusion about this relationship between time and space. they are not here to prove the existence of law that isn't per

doing. but looking through that telescope we needed we needed it and placing it as a work ethic that is in fact to the same work ethics and the bible itself tells us through. >> they want to know what is that about and how do i fit in. they hear about the moon landing and they want to know what was it like. if we are part of the human race, we are part of the race that went to the moon. we are part of the species that looks at the stars and wonders what are those things. looking at the sky reminded you that there is more to the universe. what's more is if you believe in

a universe that god so loved the heat and his son. not only will you want a state of the universe because it is kind of cool but it's an act of worship. it is getting closer to the creator and getting closer to a universe 1500 years ago that was cleansed" and. then doing science as an act of worship. >> that gives you an idea of who we are and where we come from. this is not the covers of the book. if you look carefully, you'll notice that the subtitles have changed. we went through various incarnations.

this was other strange questions in the inbox of the observatory. it was originally great week for crazy questions. we decided that crazy might discourage people to distrust other questions. but the idea of the book came out of the experience of paul and i and many other people at the observatory have people coming to us with the same questions over and over and over again. and not only are we kind of tired of answering that you realize the answers we have been giving really were not satisfied otherwise they wouldn't keep asking them. the questions being asked are not questions that they are talking about the questions that are being consumed before they ask. i want to give an example of what i'm talking about. in september of 2005 is in birmingham england. i was there to give an astronomy talk about birmingham science

festival. as it turned out, the day of my talk in birmingham england happened to click side debate cocoon site could coincide exactly to the so the british journalism all there to cover the pope and i had a great to be interviewed in order to publish publish -- publicized. the questions are things like when mr. last time that he interfered with your work and what was your biggest conflict with the pope. >> assuming that there is a conflict conflict between ever experienced in fact the pope supported this quite a bit how they were not happy, they were not getting the story that they wanted, and so finally, one of them asks me what you baptize in

extraterrestrial and i answered only if she asks. [laughter] got a good laugh. that's what i wanted. they all laughed. and the next day they reported in the paper as if it was a big vatican announcement. why a bad reaction to ask why did they ask that in the first place? certainly it is a popular question why to use it in the title of the book because it is going to sell books. but i do people ask is that questions will often? i think in the case of the journalists come it was meant to be a trick question. they were looking for waste make the pope look bad as the pope tried to work at that kind of

thing. the reporters were looking for a story. so what do the baptize if i had said yes i will baptize et then i would have looked cosmically naïve. if it is something that they can send spaceships across the space and time on the other hand if i had no i wouldn't, then it would have no significant and i would be saying that not in the grand scheme of things. either way they thought they had me. so when i blurted out the first thing i could think of michael me if she asks. i wound up turning the tables on

them because i made it not my decision but et. if they have decided freely to ask what with all of her advanced knowledge accepting that our human figure actually have something of importance to her, that would make them look stupid for having their petty skepticism. the question of whether or not extraterrestrials would be involved in our religion is not a new question. people on both sides of the issue have addressed it. joseph paul writes to the glory of god demands not just us theologically he is assured of that. on the other hand the radicals on this page used the inevitability of life elsewhere

to make fun of christianity in the age of reason he says that christianity either demands the unlikely proposition of all of the world and the universe god chose to be incarnated only an hours because some guy and girl decided to eat an apple. they would have nothing else to do then travel from world to world in an endless succession of death. it's not outside of the possibility that we are unique in the universe. it's not outside of the possibility that the second person of the trinity was indeed present and they see this in the beginning was the word and the word is the second. it's not to say that it can't be

expressed in more than one language if it were. if you delete it is the sacrifice it does happen a million times every day. near to the point was to say any race of salvation story has two parallel hours. think about the legends completely different kind of salvation story. certainly if you were going to create the universe big enough in the billions of galaxies, you know, you can either say the universe is so big on our planet is so tiny how could god have even paid attention to me or you could say the universe is so big, i'm so insignificant by the fact those tell me just how incredibly big key must be.

contemplating what it would mean for humans to encounter aliens does something else. it forces us to ask what is it to be human in comparison to what? to ask what it means for a alien to have a full makes me say what we mean, what is a soul and how it might work for other beings makes it look like what is this supposed to be about anyway? in islam ways it is summed up in this cartoon if you can't read it, the philosopher of the cartoon people have been speculating that maybe people with advanced brains more than us, on the other hand maybe of all of the universe, we have the

most advanced. either way, it is a sobering thought. we also have to recognize that when the question comes up there is another reason why a lot of people are not just curious but actually hungry to be visited by aliens, seeing the pain, full of injustice. they hope that any race is advanced enough to cross the stars and visit us and nearly out of the advanced enough to figure out how to overcome those human ills. these people are looking to the aliens for the aliens to be the saviors of humankind. about two weeks ago i got one of those e-mails i get all the time this one demanding that i i help of friends tell pope francis the next time i see him delegate pope francis to tell us the truth about et and i quote

because he already knows the truth about it is, it's likely to be more ethically evil in less satanic than humans. pope francis must emphasize that things of extraterrestrial not sharing in the original being more ethically evil dead being capable of sharing the message i love how he knows all about what it's going to be like. think back to the atheists who are convinced that it will prove that atheism is correct and who thinks that finding et will prove that he actually made all of these. the fact fact is that caused any of them to doubt their faith. i don't see why finding them should convince anybody. and furthermore, who is to say that et is going to be better or

worse? maybe they are better. maybe they are worse. either way it is a sobering thought. okay so maybe they exist. maybe they are less satanic. maybe they can get us to live better lives. maybe they can be our brothers. maybe -- while i consider the fate of that in the day the earth stood still came to earth to save humankind. i hope i don't spoil things by telling you that it's not a happy ending. and after all, haven't we already had a savior on earth, look at what happened to him. incidentally the people that made the movie in case you didn't get the message he calls himself mr. carpenter. one thing you learn from science fiction as any creature of this universe should be subject not

only to the same wall and physics and chemistry but the same rules of right and wrong. if you ever did come across across the race that but never send, how would you know that they have the freedom to sin. the freedom that you need to be truly good. and should anybody think that technical advances actually mean moral advances? is the human race of the 20th century more moral than our technologically primitive ancestors it also gave us world war i and world war ii. the technology is cumulative. the more you have, the more you can build on what you've got. part, beauty, ethics. not so. we don't have better artists

than michelangelo. and the fact that we have better posture doesn't make with michelangelo did obsolete. we can rely on technological advances. you don't have to reinvent the wheel. but we cannot let earlier generations make moral decisions for us. the decisions made by any of these others were the correct positions. and if we could, we would no longer be free. so that we can all become better behaved little children is a a long way to think about the problem. it's a kind of baptizing in universe by imposing our own

preconceptions onto the universe. i think everyone here agrees that there's a reason to be weary of imposing our view of religion for or against. we must also be wary of imposing our view of religion onto the way that we do the science that might find those aliens. and wind up baptizing the science. what do i mean? it is like looking at the big bang theory and saying the universe started by light, just like genesis had. no, it doesn't work that way. it's like looking at the origin of the universe as a possible quantum fluctuation of the gravity field. there is no need for god to stir the universe any more just like i said. in both cases, you wind up with an argument proving the assumption that you made.

in the fluctuations of gravity and and whatever started the universe therefore there is no god. all that proves is that god must be gravity, which of course explains why catholic celebrates mass. [laughter] [applause] more to the point do you remember the game mouse trap where you have all of the pieces and you end up with. and the ball comes down. that idea is saying that though it is one of the players in the game that starts the ball rolling.

believers -- onto the universe. good you baptize could be heard in a couple of different ways and emphasis. is et somebody that you want to baptize and it could be heard as what you baptize as like who are you to decide who gets in and who stays out. the early christians had to deal with the same ambiguity. that's what the pope was talking about earlier this year when he said the idea for them of letting the gentiles in with the christians was as crazy as putting them become christians.

what would you do that he was trying to make the point and it's a good point. it is a point without an answer. he's not telling you the answer. he's saying think about the question. because the question asked you think more about what is baptism mean. what is being a human mean? i don't know if you're familiar with this. it wouldn't convert them. the question raises an important point. all religions do have a right of passage with her to call it a baptism or something else when you've gone through the right of

passage once you are in the club venue appear and you. you are equal and a.q. have new rights and you have new privileges, but presumably it's about more than just right and privileges. you shouldn't have to run across the street alone. those dogs should be helping you could across the street. that isn't really the question that we should be asking. are you a link to share a meal with et or share a meal with you? would do the same for you and are you willing to suffer and die for et come is et willing to suffer and die for you if you

could answer yes to those questions then maybe you are already in the same demagogue. religion exists to try to foster a relationship between us and god. such a relationship you hope is based on love. it presumes we must find something special with us. usually it is presented that the idea is taken to mean that god finds humanity different from how god loves the rest of the universe. then too bad for the rest of the universe. but think about your own experience of love. that isn't how it works. love doesn't exclude, it includes. when someone falls in love, do you treat everybody better. they love everybody more.

when god falls in love with us, he treats the whole universe better. he treats everything in the universe as though he's fallen in love with it. if we are at the center of the concern, maybe there's something about us that god loves. what if, whatever that thing is is not something that separates us from the rest of the universe but something that is characteristic of the human race, of the universe. >> we human beings are material, thinking, willing, free, loving. and in asp that universe has become self-aware. all of us us but for planet or place or time a time myspace we happen to inhabit, all of us are

the bearers of the purpose for which this universe exists. that means we are all at the center of this universe. with cobwebs in a scene modes and the rest of the universe. we are all star stuff. maybe it is equally true to say that the stars are also us. the existence of all of these other self aware entities raises an interesting challenge to each of us. are we willing to accept the presence of some other in the universe even as we are aware of the presence of god are we willing to accept that maybe there's somebody else that god cares about, too. was also aware of god. put it another way. we are people with intelligence.

but intelligence only makes sense if there is someone else to share that intelligence. we only grow and stretch ourselves when we are challenged to relate to others. the ability to be self-aware and the will to act on that awareness, the basic definition of the soul into lies and maybe it even demands the existence of another entity in this universe and also self-aware whom we can choose to love or choose to ignore. that's why i would be surprised if there were not et but i have no data. still, to put it where does that relate to my own christianity come it means that admitting that yes it was for all of us that christ died, and it was for all of us that the universe was

born. the search for life outside of the earth as earth as an exercise of the imagination. it's a speculation actually better served by science fiction or poetry banned by the definitions of science at the theology. with that in mind, i would like to close this part two read a poem nearly written 100 years ago by the englishwoman who was published in the work in 1917 which incidentally was ten years before the first that started about travel to other solar systems. i will read it. with this ambiguous serve its been told. and the young man crucified but

a start of the innumerable hosts as heard how we administer this hour race have kept the word. in the secret cherished this week aren't shoving secret of his way with us. now in our little day his pilgrimage is to be manifest. but in the eternities does this show here a million alien gospels. the prepared.

we showed to them in a man. and i would like to finish with a little reading from the book itself. reading from the book according to -- [laughter] it by myself and paul and it's written as a dialogue. so i'm going to have to play to of these roles. this is from the first day we have six days and six questions. the questions range from biblical genesis were big bang to ever happen to pluto to whatever happened to galileo. what about the star of bethlehem. we get this one all the time in the year. but at the end of the universe and how does that work and of course would keep -- baptize

e.t.. i chose this because it is his set at the. paul begins today we are going to talk about the beginning of all things, the creation itself. so it is appropriate that we are here in chicago as a kind of personal beginning here in the windy city. the philosophy studies at the university, shortly after he became a judge of it and i earned my doctorate in history philosophy of science at the university of chicago. to which i added when i read the opening verse of genesis where a wind from god slipped over the face of the waters i always picture myself standing by -- were of the lake where i come from but because michigan and the windy city. it's tough for us to try to admit, but i love chicago. it's like having to me.

so many places to find their favorites. the answer planetarium. it's the kind we are going to talk to the beginning of the universe, why are we here at the art institute? shouldn't we be at the planetarium where we can watch a show that illustrates the big bang or maybe we can be at the field museum and have natural history in the collection of fossils and meteorites. paulson is think about all those people were always asking about science and religion and the beginning of the universe. but the ones who want us to choose between genesis and the big bang bust of them are not scientists. i am not sure that addressing the questions that a of a scientific placekicker planetarium or acute museum would be all that useful. so often we divide our time into separate camps, separate buildings if you would.

a query them versus planetarium, work versus play a science versus religion and so forth. sometimes it is hard to move from one to the other. i want to start today in a place where science and religion can overlap here at the art institute. i can't help seeing that there's more than one way to present reality. more than one style of painting if you would. isn't that american gothic, the couple standing in front of the house of a man holding a pitchfork staring out of the canvas and the woman giving a dirty look. i remember that one. he says the painting may be a little bit of a cliché. it is as realistic as a photograph but still it seems to tell you something about the two people that the photograph wouldn't be able to do.

it is pretty abstract because it is realistic enough that they've shown this weird line and angle and this blue color scheme it's a whole different take on the human form. it looks more modern and effectively painted about 30 years earlier. both paintings depict people in the trades. both communicate something deep and true about humanity intellectually committed emotionally in ways that a book couldn't. but neither tries to tell you everything about its subject.

each painting selects and exercises only certain things and leaves out other stuff that is a relevant word that would've her get in the way. and science does the same thing. science involves selective observation. science involves paying special attention to certain things while ignoring other things. and i go yes that reminds me of the super painting that i've seen in the city diner. the woman sitting next to him coming you see them through the diner window from across the street and it's late at night. but i could never take a photograph like that because of the parked cars and telephone wires and the like. but every time i see the painting i get hungry for fried eggs and coffee. that's actually also here at the art institute in the special exhibits.

i never knew that you were such an art nerd. i'm no art expert actually. but back when i was in college i spent 90 minutes standing in front of the painting at the museum in boston taking notes on a yellow legal pad. as i stood there taking notes, other museum visitors started asking me questions about the painting as if i were some kind of expert. first i laughed it off, but then i started talking to people about the painting to them but i noticed in the interesting discussions and what they thought. on the other hand, if i had been at the science museum and we were looking at the demonstration of a pendulum, i

wouldn't be having a discussion about our opinions about whether the pendulum worked. how interesting. okay. where do we go next? you go to the impression of some it's one of my favorites, he says. it's in the same in circa 34. he used a technique instead of strokes of paint, he built up the image by adding the colors dot i. dot. kind of went away like the way that the digital images do it years later they expect i know my painting. wasn't that on paris buhler's day off? is the centerpiece of the

pivotal scene in the movie. three high school kids playing hooky and when they come to the art institute, one of them named cameron stares for a long time at the painting. as he gazes more and more deeply into the painting, with a stricken look on his face, the scene disappeared from view and it falls apart into a chaotic random collection of colored dots. it's at that moment he realizes his own life seems to be falling apart. i have a certain sympathy for him, but what i see when i look at the painting is in chaos. i don't see the world falling apart. what i see is the world being analyzed down to the smallest and most basic parts.

seeing the little dots for which it is made up that it doesn't seem to me that the world is falling apart, it means more than one way to look at the picture. and there is more than one way to look at the world. the other is of common experience yet to see the world as analyzed by science, fields of force and it can be described mathematically. that's one way of getting it related to science and faith. think of it as back-and-forth between the two different ways of seeing one and the same world. we can see the way through the eyes of faith. when you see the world through the eyes of faith in your very concerned with everyday experiences of what is right and good and beautiful. you're concerned with how your vikings together and make sense

or doesn't. when you see the world through the eyes of science, concerns are different. you want to know how the world works and what it is made of. it is analyzed by science and it can seem disconnected the world of everyday experience just as the doubts in the painting can seem disconnected from the larger image. but the trick is to get comfortable with an idea of something back and forth between the two ways of seeing. and the trick is not to panic if one way of seeing him it's something that the other includes or emphasizes something in the neglect. you can see the painting as a collection of thoughts or you can see it as an image of people in the park. both descriptions are true.

thanks for coming. [applause] >> we have some microphones and some people are going to walk around and do you want to be about? fuel free to ask if i don't want to answer, i won't. >> here comes another microphone >> since i can't see very well you have to wake your way down to the people in the microphones.

>> it takes a minute or two for it to warm up and told. >> my question was you see depending on the interpretation of the bible, the kind of command to be a caretaker in the world that we've been given. so i'm curious on your thoughts when we look at the possible extensions to other planets we look at the mars project and things like that. how did you describe the discover the duties and responsibilities that we have to care for the universe that we are in and when we look to expand into other places. >> it is central to everything we do in science. we cannot do science without worrying about the ethics of what we are doing and it's not just because we want to be good people but we also ought to be good scientists. for instance, i really, really

hates the idea of sending human beings to mars in an uncontrolled way because i want to know did mars develop its own life and human beings week a call ebola all over the place. we will find something on mars that looks like earthlike and we will never do know if it's developed independently or not. but in addition, we also have to recognize that nothing that we do comes without a cost including doing nothing. >> and so, part of being i think a good curator and caretaker is to make sure that the benefits that we produce in the end of talents is the cost. and that is true for everything we do in life. how do we guarantee that? we can't. but we try because we are more than just sinners.

>> okay. who else. >> somebody naturally in the middle. >> thank you for the talk once again. i understand. i kind of have a good idea of what the reaction would be if extraterrestrials were ever discovered, but does the vatican have a sort of protocol and what would their reaction be? >> this is a great question because it comes to the heart of what i've learned after 20 years of living in the vatican. the vatican is a remarkably dinky place. the old joke is how many people work at the vatican, about half. depending on how you count as it is about 5,200 people work there. this is to try to render the rockers the of the church of

more than a billion people. so, there are no protocols. people have daydreamed about this since people have daydreamed, but i think wisely so. you don't break the protocol until we have seen what we are dealing with. if there are earthlike planets common in the solar system, if those planets managed to develop life. if that life is intelligent and if that life is able to communicate to us and we are able to communicate. those are a lot of laughs and if they turn out not to be true, the question will never come up. it's always dangerous to hypothesize too much. we always hypothesize with inadequate data. it's dangerous to believe the hypothesis. so, no there actually are not articles like that. there are enough little committees of people making these decisions.

>> thank you for being here. i teach science at an all boys school on the city's west side. they are actually wonderful bb did or not most people don't believe it. and i'm wondering what the writers and thinkers in addition to your own text would recommend for people turning over these questions at the intersection of science and religion for the first time. >> i think the best thing would be to recommend good science fiction. science fiction stories that force you to confront the questions. and they don't have to be science fiction stories that you necessarily agree with. it can be at the end of the day you read the story and say that doesn't work. but by posing it in the context of the question you can relate

to the characters in the story which i don't know much about science and a 12-year-old or 14 year old might say, but i know people and that's the way people would behave. no, people really don't behave like that. so i would say science fiction or fantasy. and you can't do better than the books and lord of the rings to start with. and harry potter. so i highly recommend. i think that there's a lot of really good serious stuff including the fact that the hero that's going to save everything has the free claim and yet is still a hero and you can still launch into the right and wrong and who's right and who's wrong. >> thank you.

>> with your expertise and water coming from commentary and maybe the organic material on the comets and meteors. how does that fit into your universal view of life and creation? >> the interesting thing, those are interesting ideas. they are ideas that come in and out of fashion, and they are coming back in fashion right now but wait five years and we we were able to fashion again. i have no problem with it from a philosophical point of view. god could god could have made the universe and made our planet

in any dozen of different ways and what i want to find out is what we do they actually do it. scientifically, i have a problem with some of those theories because i'm not convinced you can get all of the water and organics and then you have the question of the earth got to talk him mars didn't or mercury didn't or the moon didn't and there are ways you can wave your hand around that. for a long time coming people were convinced it wouldn't work because the isotopes didn't work now we've seen where they do work and suddenly they believe it. but it's not too early to explore the hypothesis, so let's see what happens.

>> one more and then we will go to book signing. >> i thought your talk was a very interesting one. i don't know if this is a question or observation but i just wanted to post it while you were reading this well written column i noticed it came out from saying the eternal word. >> that's because i'm standing here and i can't read it correctly. i meant no theological meaning to it. >> i was just curious. there is a difference between the trust. >> go ask alice. >> there is one other question so let's but can have the last

word. >> i'm just really amazed when i think that the earth and the vastness of it and i think in the day-to-day life people just don't think about that by cutting the galaxy is that when you walk through the halls and have photos of the milky way and things like that i was just curious as a man of faith with questions but questions go through your mind or what thoughts go through your mind when you think about it or look up at the stars? >> it's interesting because the universe could have been totally chaotic. i could imagine human race is often thought that it's just chaos. stuff happens. but science seems to show that it acts in a way of rational enough that you and i can actually figure it out. and that's amazing. but the fact that the universe

does have walls and we can figure them out, that's astonishing. but even more than that, that universe is not only rational, it's also beautiful. and the law is also beautiful. ..