OB: People who claim there are only two possible explanations for anything are either knaves or fools.
Spirited: And some people-—you for example-—are gullible, shallow thinkers. Read on:
“I suppose the reason we leaped at the origin of species was because the idea of God interfered with our sexual mores,” confessed Sir Julian Huxley, former president of UNESCO and grandson of Darwin’s colleague Thomas Huxley.
We objected to Biblical morality “because it interfered with our sexual freedom,” said Aldous Huxley in agreement.
“I do not want to believe in God,” confessed Dr. George Wald, Nobel Prize winner and professor emeritus of biology at Harvard University. “Therefore I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible, spontaneous generation arising to evolution,” said Wald in a Scientific American magazine article.
“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.” (“Billions and Billions of Demons,” Richard Lewontin (b. 1929), PhD Zoology, Alexander Agassiz Research Professor at Harvard University)
Paul Davies said elsewhere:
“… Darwin’s celebrated tome On the Origin of Species, which had been published just three years before Pasteur’s experiments, sought to discredit the need for God to create the species by showing how one species can transmute into another. But Darwin’s account left open the problem of how the first living thing came to exist. Unless life had always existed, at least one species — the first — cannot have come to exist by transmutation from another species, only by transmutation from nonliving matter. Darwin himself wrote, some years later: ‘I have met with no evidence that seems in the least trustworthy, in favour of so-called Spontaneous Generation.’ Yet, in the absence of a miracle, life could have originated only by some sort of spontaneous generation. Darwin’s theory of evolution and Pasteur’s theory that only life begets life cannot both have been completely right.” (The Fifth Miracle, 1999, p. 83, Paul Davies (b. 1946), Director of BEYOND: Center for Fundamental Concepts in Science)
Davies naturally hoped that spontaneous generation (abiogenesis) might eventually prove true. But after more than one hundred years of combining inert chemicals in the vain hope that life might finally emerge, Davies and many other naturalists have abandoned abiogenesis in favor of panspermia.
Panspermia is the idea that life on earth was accidentally seeded by meteorites containing the essential building blocks of life or perhaps by highly evolved extraterrestrials who for billions of years have been guiding the evolution of man. The extraterrestrial idea was favored by Arthur C. Clarke in his book, “Childhood’s End” and a variation on this theme has recently been advanced by Davies, Francis Crick, and Ralph Pudritz of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario. (Fall of mankind, L. Kimball, Renew America, June 20, 2012)
Panspermia does not solve the origin of life problem. It merely moves it out into deep space.
Louis Pasteur definitively disproved spontaneous generation (abiogenesis), the indispensable ground of evolutionary naturalism. So not only is naturalism an empty vain conceit but so too are Darwinism and Teilhardism, which springboards off of Darwinism.
All of this means that the triune Creator exists and further that wittingly or unwittingly, evolutionary naturalists have made a covenant with death.
“I suppose the reason we leaped at the origin of species was because the idea of God interfered with our sexual mores,” confessed Sir Julian Huxley, former president of UNESCO and grandson of Darwin’s colleague Thomas Huxley.
You have a source for this?