“In the immensity of space, there is room for millions of worlds as large or larger than ours, and each of them millions of miles apart from each other.”

—-Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason.

Paine’s statement may be proven correct as ten NASA scientists have recently discovered what might be fossils of life forms from the planet Mars.

If these billions of years-old rocks contain signs that life indeed blossomed on Mars, two very compelling questions must be addressed.

Number one, is there any more life on Mars? Now, before we all begin to panic or rejoice in Orson Welles’ nightmare come true, let’s remember that even if life does still exist on Mars, it’s probably no more than microscopic organisms on the simplest of levels, not little green men with ray guns.

The second question was posed in the August 19th issue of The New Yorker: “Is life, far from being a singular miracle,” instead “the routine consequence of certain planetary conditions?”

If these “planetary conditions” are indeed all too common within the scope of the universe (two planets in one solar system with life, an infinite number of solar systems in which life could possibly occur…), where does this place humanity in the scope of existence?

If were are truly not alone on this plane of reality, how does this affect our relationship with other organisms, our world, our universe and our god(s)?

Science and religion often conflict when it comes to explaining the phenomena of life, as a battle between faith and logic and the seen and unseen rage in the hearts and minds of man.

Paine himself had difficulty at times in reconciling his pursuit of science with his Christian faith: “To believe that God created a plurality of worlds, at least as numerous as what we call stars, renders the Christian system of faith at once little and ridiculous, and scatters it in the mind like feathers in the air.”

Faced with the prospect that there may very well be a plurality of worlds, how does this affect man’s relationship with his deity?

Through the course of Copernicus, Galileo, Newtonian physics and Einstein, man has deduced that he is not arranged at the center of existence, at least geographically speaking. With the possibility of life on other planets, is our role as the center of spiritual existence also in doubt?

Faced with the prospect that life is not a special gift from a supreme being, but a natural freak occurrence that could occur without any sort of guidance under the right conditions (sort of like mold on bread, as unappealing as that image is), the purpose and meaning of basic existence could be questioned.

This, quite frankly, scares the holy bejesus out of me. Through reading various materials, we can take heart in that there is some logical validity to the existence of some higher power.

The testimonials in books such as the Bible, as well as the foundations of other religions, point to the existence of a Supreme Being. And books such as the Bible aren’t necessarily folklore to scare the kiddies and teach moral lessons.

The forging of bronze tools in the Bible is attributed to Tuval-Cain, son of Lemach. In Gerald Schroeder’s Genesis and the Big Bang, he illustrates that archaeological finds have shown that the scientific estimation for the Bronze Age actually coincides with Tuval-Cain’s lifetime as documented in the Bible.

Schroeder also described how the difference in opinion between creationists (who believe the universe was created some 6,000 years ago) and those of the scientific community (who hold that the Big Bang occurred 15 billion years ago) actually coincide when observing Einstein’s work on the properties of light, time and relativity.

These, and other scientific observations, lend weight that the Bible, even the Old Testament, is more historically accurate than imagined. So I hold some comfort in the fact that unbiased science can support the presence of a higher power.

But then, all I have read regarding this subject has one thing in common: it’s all been written, translated or transcribed by humans. And when it comes to our existence, how can we not be but a little bit biased? So is it possible that all of our scientific and theoretical posturing is rooted in the fact that we must give some legitimacy to our existence in order to comfort ourselves, as we are unable to grasp the concept of non-existence?

Iforget who said it, but one of the most chilling statements Ihave ever heard is, “”If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.”

Could it be true that thousands of years of contemplation on human existence is simply a collective reassuring hug to maintain some sense of order in society, to prevent planetary chaos? I quoted Nicolas Cage from Moonstruck last semester: “We are here to ruin ourselves and break our hearts and love the wrong people and die.”

That can’t be all, can it?

I am reminded of the beauty of existence in the smell of the ocean at Cape Cod, a sunset in July, or Prince’s solo at the end of “Purple Rain.” Surely, humans, who can appreciate and create the beauty that is all around us, are more than complex organisms whose every thought, impulse and emotion is simply highly evolved synapses.

Two people falling in love is more than an evolutionary urge to procreate. Isn’t it?

I have no answers, only questions to what life is, and, ultimately, death.

“To die? To sleep – no more.

“And by a sleep to say we end the heartache and the thousand natural shocks that flesh is heir to…”

Tim Davis is a senior in Theatre Studies from Carlisle. He is the editor of the Opinion Page.