[2banana]

Their reasoning is that even if the type of life found is only microscopic in nature which existed many millions of years ago in the past, it would prove once and for all that life on our planet is not a one-off event requiring the services of a creator. In other words, discover life on Mars; prove evolution; disprove God.

The money paragraph...

[2ndDivisionVet]

What’re they smokin’? Have they ever thought that the patterns of DNA, etc. pretty much PROVES intelligent design, if not a deity?!

[MrB]

The atheists will be in a constant search for the “blow that kills God”.

Every atheist-turned-believer that I’ve ever read about states that their primary reasoning for being atheist was that it justified their selfish, arbitrary, and immoral lifestyle choices.

[allmendream]

“Their reasoning is that even if the type of life found is only microscopic in nature which existed many millions of years ago in the past, it would prove once and for all that life on our planet is not a one-off event requiring the services of a creator. In other words, discover life on Mars; prove evolution; disprove God. Neither follows from the premise.”

If God made the formation of biological molecules and the formation of life something that was probable on Earth due to simple chemistry, then it is quite likely that life formed elsewhere in the UNCOMPREHENDINGLY VAST universe. This in no way means that God didn't create life in ALL places, or that it was not part of God's plan.

Also one might conclude that it was evidence for abiogenesis on Mars, which would be evidence that abiogenesis on Earth is probable. Evidence isn't “proof”. And it wouldn't be evidence against God (let alone ‘disproof of God); just the notion that God created life ONLY on Earth.

After all, didn't the Mormon God already make life on other planets (AFAIK)?