Posted on 12/19/2008 5:27:13 AM PST by moneyrunner
Atheists consider themselves the supreme realists. They don’t believe in the “ghost in the machine” and ridicule those of us who believe that God exists and is the creator of the universe.
But they do have a metaphysical problems relating to the origin of things. Does the universe have a beginning or an end? How did life begin? What was there in the beginning of things?
The last question cannot be dismissed because the theory of evolution, which seeks to explain how we are what we are demands that there be a beginning. If life began an eternity ago, is the world as we see it and all the things in it the natural end result of … forever? That seems to be illogical.
So I read with interest an article Glenn Reynolds liked to in Popular Mechanics 5 Projects Ask if Life on Earth Began as Alien Life in Space.
To try to answer the question of the origin of life on earth and to answer critics who reason that life’s complexity is too great to have evolved spontaneously, theories have been created that life on earth began on some other planet.
That underscores the reasons that people like Ben Stein have given for Intelligent Design, and the reasons for allowing it a place at the table of science. If enough scientists are concerned that life may not have begun from non-life on earth, doesn’t that leave open the possibility that the explanation may not be entirely materialistic in the way we understand the term?
If reputable scientists are actually exploring the possibility that life arrived on the earth wholly formed and not just the building blocks of life, but
...organisms that were ready to rock and roll when they arrived,
(Excerpt) Read more at moneyrunner.blogspot.com ...
I believe in God. Now for the aliens; are we talking about legal or illegal?
Their legality isn’t the real issue; it’s the jobs they hold in Congress.
First, they believe in government.
Not just a sarcasm, that is their religion. Radical misnamed “environmentalism” is a close second.
Dennis Kucinich ????
Now that's funny.
Have you ever seen him and a little green man in the same room at the same time? Makes you think, doesn't it?
It seems to me that the main problem that a scientist has with creationism/intelligent design is that it yields neither specific explanations of, nor specific predictions about, the origin and the development of specific structures and functions of biological entities. “The deity did it” allows pretty much anything to be the case; once that’s said, what else is there to say? Asking for further explanation becomes a matter of either reading the deity’s mind (how?) or reading old texts of pre-scientific provenance and ethical, not scientific, intent.
Molecular biology has shown even the “simplest” life forms to be astoundingly complex. The “irreducible complexity” problem that was difficult for the human eye is impossible for intracellular molecular machinery, and evolutionists know it. It was this realization that drove Crick (of DNA fame) to come up with “directed panspermia”; the idea that life spontaneously evolved somewhere else in the universe and was brought here. Really, just a way to “buy more time” to make the impossible possible.
The only possible explanation is that he is some sort of alien life form .. with mind control capabilities.
His wife doesn’t exactly look like a terrestrial either.
“....It seems to me that the main problem that a scientist has with creationism/intelligent design is that it yields neither specific explanations...”
Science demands empirical proof to be weighted, measured, x-rayed (except for globally warming) to accept the truth.
God says, humble yourselves, seek me with child-like faith and you will find me.
Science is demanding that God reveal himself on their terms, not His.
Arrogance, pure human, stiff-necked pride and arrogance; they could know if they humble themselves.
Atheists are not credible. And judging by their behavior, they are aware of this. They are often pointing out some Christian as a "believer in evolution" or some other pet theory of theirs because they know that this adds the credibility that they lack. Few people would be impressed by a long list of atheist believers in, say, Darwinism or Marxism. Instead they say the Hutterites and Amish are Marxists, and that St. Augustine believed in evolution. One Christian name carries with it more credibility and authority than a thousand atheist names. And the atheists know this about themselves.
From Earth, of course.
I suppose that the integrity of the whole evolution/intelligent design debate rests not so much upon disproving one or the other but in the attempt to discover the real answer to our origins. Merely disproving one argument does not prove another, and neither side knows in a factually demonstrable way the truth. The debate is highly charged and entertaining, though.
The atheist believing in aliens was the basis for a Dean Koontz novel.
Science demands nothing. People make demands, often conflicting and mutually exclusive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.