Sponsored Links
UPDATED Again: I included a reply at the bottom.
Yesterday I made a post on scientific attempts to claim that things on our own planet were actually “alien.” Not only that, it seems scientists have decided to even open a whole new branch of research to searching for things on our own planet, and will then call it “alien.” I personally think they are silly.
I also talked a little about evolution, and a few other topics. I had a question (or more accurately, a comment) below that I thought I would share & respond to:
I disagree with you on our scientists quest to look for alien life. I don’t believe they have an agenda to prove evolution right by searching for alien life nor do I believe this is a sign of desperation, they look because the question is there, so they continue to ask. As long as a question mark hangs in the heavens over alien life they will continue searching. What I love about scientists, and Atheists, is that they relentlessly question everything. If there were enough evidence to debunk evolution as a failed theory and replace it with a new theory, they would. Scientists are more willing to change their views on a theory because they work with data. If their data suggests that life is possible on earth-like planets then that is enough to drive them to search until they find life even if it’s not in the form that they were looking for carrying ray guns. Earth may be unique as the only planet with sentient life but it seems like an awful waste of space for us to be the only ones.
Peace and blessing be upon you,
~Eruesso~
First of all, thank you for your comment and I completely understand where you are coming from. You are certainly not alone in your interest for other life, as many religious people are also intrigued by it. I guess I perhaps didn’t write some things clearly, and I wanted to elaborate a little more. By the way, you read a few posts on your blog, and I see that you are somewhat like me in that you are at this point not affiliated with any major religion or organization. So hopefully we will learn together over time! But I get the feeling that at this point you are still very uncertain about many things, and have more of a “Deist” view, so I will be interested to see how your views progress over time.
Anyways, please allow me to elaborate on my other post, and express some of my views more clearly on various topics below:
First, you said the following:
I disagree with you on our scientists quest to look for alien life. I don’t believe they have an agenda to prove evolution right by searching for alien life nor do I believe this is a sign of desperation, they look because the question is there, so they continue to ask. As long as a question mark hangs in the heavens over alien life they will continue searching.
I am fully aware that not all people who are intrigued by the possibilities of life are atheists, in fact, many are probably very religious. I myself find it somewhat interesting, although I am much more skeptical about it than most.
Do all scientists looking for alien life have a secret agenda to prove evolution or try to disprove God? Absolutely not. Do some? You BETTER BELIEVE IT! It doesn’t take too long to search on Youtube for videos of “scientists” like Richard Dawkins (who by the way hasn’t made one solid contribution to science), and he rants about putting an end to religion and how God is irrational and silly.
These same people set up funds & organizations with one main purpose in mind: To try to destroy a belief in God. I take offense to that. May God have mercy on their foolishness. If people don’t want to believe in God, that is their business. There are many things I don’t believe in (example: Boogeyman), but I certainly don’t go and create organizations, write books, create websites, or anything else to try and disprove it. The fact that these people put so much effort to disprove the one true creator should offend you as well.
One of the “missing links” of evolution is the fact that it surely doesn’t make sense why Earth is filled with such life, yet everything else in the solar system looks like a barren rock. NO life is found at all so far. If there is a microbe or piece of bacteria, I would be shocked, but even then it is nothing in comparison of Earth.
Should Scientist Waste Resources Searching for Life?
You said, “as long as the question hangs there, they should ask.” I have no problems with asking, or even exploring. Science is fun and I love science & I love innovation, exploration, etc. But here is the sad fact: If something is found on Earth, it is not ‘alien.’ So trying to search on Earth is rather pointless in regards to the hunt for aliens, agreed?
To search in space for alien life certainly isn’t cheap. Do you know how much money it costs to send a mission to Mars to dig for life? You better believe it isn’t cheap. NASA’s budget is a joke. So consider this: If you had the option of saving the lives of starving children in Africa, or investing in potential cures for cancer, or sending a space ship to Mars to dig around in hopes to find even 1 microbe (they haven’t found one yet), what would you do?
Could you honestly look even 1 kid in the face today, and say, “Sorry, you are going to die. I could spend money on buying you a pill that could cure you from Malaria (or any other disease), but I will choose to let you die so I can buy a toy space ship for fun.” I don’t even think I could look one kid in the face.
Now imagine millions of kids that could be helped with the money NASA spends on this crap. Or they could help the economy, or any number of things. Don’t get me wrong, not all space projects are worthless. Satellites actually help humans be increasing communication, and some space missions are done with a desire to help, and I fully support those few missions. But what good does it do to dig on Mars? Really? None. Or at least it certainly hasn’t helped thus far. My point: Sure it is fun to wonder and think about other life, but when lives can be saved, it is rather arrogant to spend MILLIONS of dollars to dig in the dirt.
Now, when we consider the costs and resources it takes to carry out missions of finding life, it seems rather silly to do it JUST for that purpose. And in terms of exploring other galaxies/solar systems, forget about it. The nearest one would take so long that no humans could survive the travel, and it would take millions of years IF we could travel as fast as light (which we can’t do). So our only options of life on other planets will never be anything more than wondering in our own minds (at least in our lifetime). And I seriously doubt they will find anything if they look in our own solar system, and it is quite obvious that all the planets look very barren, and at best may have a small microbe or two.
Anyways, what ever happened to poor old planet Earth? We still have undiscovered things on our own planet. We find new species and more each year. Why not spend more energy finding out all our planet has, before wasting time on other planets?
You then said an interesting comment that I see among those who listen to most “atheists” lies:
What I love about scientists, and Atheists, is that they relentlessly question everything.
This is a big misconception about science & atheists, and they actually are the ones who say this the most. Religion has no problem with searching for truth, knowledge, or wisdom in life. There is no objection to searching for answers, questioning things, etc. Never has it said that. I don’t know 1 single religious person who doesn’t enjoy truth, knowledge, questions, etc. Here is what the bible says we should do about knowledge/wisdom/education:
- Proverbs 18:15
An intelligent heart acquires knowledge, and the ear of the wise seeks knowledge. - Proverbs 1:7
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction.
The bible is clearly for us to search knowledge in ALL things (science, scripture, etc.). There is no issue there. In fact, most atheists hate to admit the FACT that science originated from religion. It was religious people thinking that if a God created a universe, it must have some basic pattern or laws which could be discovered.
Many of our most brilliant scientists believed in God very devoutly. Isaac Newton was a genius, and lived with the belief that God created all things. Einstein also believed in God. Gregor Mendel, Robert Boyle also believed in God. Even most modern scientists believe in God, such as Francis Collins (the guy who led the US team of decoding the Genome).
I too love science, and love truth. I have no problems with most scientific claims. Only those who try to twist science to fit their atheist agenda.
If there were enough evidence to debunk evolution as a failed theory and replace it with a new theory, they would. Scientists are more willing to change their views on a theory because they work with data. If their data suggests that life is possible on earth-like planets then that is enough to drive them to search until they find life even if it’s not in the form that they were looking for carrying ray guns. Earth may be unique as the only planet with sentient life but it seems like an awful waste of space for us to be the only ones.
I always hear the word “Evidence” when evolution/God comes into a debate. I don’t understand why people use the word so much, as if somehow evidence=truth. It doesn’t, not by a long shot. Even OVERWELMING evidence doesn’t always=truth.
Every day, there are people released from prison that were wrongly convicted based on “evidence.” There is evidence for a flat Earth. Again, just because there is evidence for something, it doesn’t mean it is truth.
They will never “debunk” evolution. Evolution, as they claim, takes millions of years. No one can live millions of years, therefore, the theory can never be debunked. They can find contradictory evidence to some parts of evolution (which they have found, and even atheists admit this), but they can never “debunk” it, just like the existence of God can never be debunked. No one was here when life sprang into action, thus all we will ever have is a belief, nothing more (until God proves otherwise).
And by the way, I don’t have problems with all of the theory of evolution. It is quite obvious that things can adapt and change within a species. Did life originate that way? I seriously doubt it. If a scientist today can create a totally new species in a lab by altering genes, and it didn’t have to evolve naturally over millions of years…. Then how can any logical person deny that a God (intelligent designer) could have created all life in present form, and allow in its genetic code to slightly adapt. If man can do it, why not God?
And as you point out on your blog, there is just way too much organization in this universe to have happened by chance alone. Is there life out there? Possibly. Do I think there is? Only in the context of God/Angels/spiritual beings. Not little green men.
Again, I certainly respect your beliefs, as I know many people who are so fascinated by life on other planets. But I am not convinced. Thanks again for your comments! Keep an open mind about God.
UPDATE: Thanks for your reply Eruesso. I will paste your reply below, and add just a few things under it. It sounds like we agree on most things, and of course, probably have different views on others. I really respect your views, I appreciate your open-mindedness, and wish you the best on your journey!
All of my replies & quotes from above are in black, and your new replies are in orange.
“The fact that these people put so much effort to disprove the one true creator should offend you as well.”
Your reply:
Tribalism. I find it exhausting going round and round with others trying to argue something that can not be factually proven. Now I’m talking about those on forums, youtube, talkshows, and everyday people that make it their goal to try to get you to join their team. Now I’m not trying to argue with you because from following your blog I understand that you are a open-minded person. Those that I don’t bother with are those that are so closed-minded to ignore factually sound evidence when found. I completely agree with you that those that go on a personal crusade to prove your (or someone else’s) personal beliefs can be irritating. I also agree that until we have scientific evidence to support a specific claim it’s all just theory, but when we do have that evidence I find it hard to ignore.
I agree, arguing can be a huge waste of time. I myself have ended up spending hours and even days arguing with atheists and others online. In most cases, it is totally pointless. They have their views, I have mine. I certainly agree with you there. As you pointed out, it is frustrating that some try to evangelize atheism more than most religious people try to evangelize their beliefs.
About scientific evidence, again, I agree with all of most scientific evidence, and even most parts of the theory of evolution. I disagree that is how life started, and just please understand that there can NEVER be evidence to show this. All they can show is that things can perhaps change or adapt today. Even if they could form something in a lab that can grow and come to life on its own, that still doesn’t mean that is how it started.
I think we were all created in present form. Perhaps you feel different, and there is nothing wrong with that. It is just a difference in opinion, nothing more.
“One of the “missing links” of evolution is the fact that it surely doesn’t make sense why Earth is filled with such life, yet everything else in the solar system looks like a barren rock.”
Your Reply:
I read somewhere that one of the theories that responds to this point is that there may have been some form of sentient life out there in the cosmos that evolved and died out before we reached our present stage. And that there may be sentient life out there now that is currently evolving but that they’re at a earlier stage of their evolution.
Yes, there is always that possibility. Perhaps God himself is nothing more than a mass of energy & super strings that always existed, and developed consciousness, emotions, abilities, etc. Perhaps there is life out there, and it is intriguing to think about. But that is always just speculation, and we will never have hard proof of that in our lifetime, probably never. It just strikes me as odd that even planets that are relatively stable and suitable for life (Mars), is completely void so far, and certainly doesn’t have abundant life like Earth.
There are tons of theories out there, but many are never provable simply because we will never be able to venture to test them or see for ourselves. So they remain just nothing more than an idea.
“If something is found on Earth, it is not ‘alien.’ So trying to search on Earth is rather pointless in regards to the hunt for aliens, agreed?”
Your reply:
Agreed 100%, unless what scientist are looking at are fragments of meteorites.
I don’t have any issues at all with searching for meteorites. Calling bacteria alien because it is a new type in our own atmosphere is pretty far fetched, which is what inspired me to originally write the article. And the only problem with meteorites is that they are already on Earth, which means contamination. So it would be extremely difficult to prove that any life found in a meteor on Earth actually was present before hitting Earth, and it is even more difficult to tell where it could have originated. Who is to say that perhaps the meteor isn’t a chunk of Earth itself, blown into another part of the planet by an explosion or volcano or something.
“My point: Sure it is fun to wonder and think about other life, but when lives can be saved, it is rather arrogant to spend MILLIONS of dollars to dig in the dirt.”
Your Reply:
Well said! But I’m not a member of the U.S. Congress nor do I have the power to do the amount of good that Congress would be able to do with their budget. All I can do is be a force of good on a local level while living a loving, compassionate, and just life by reaching out to those here at home.
I agree with you, and I wasn’t suggesting that you have a responsibility to do anything about it. I am just point out the folly and sillyness of these people who push to get NASA’s budget there, so they can simply dig in dirt. I agree that we should all be loving, compassionate, and live our lives in a model way.
“This is a big misconception about science & atheists, and they actually are the ones who say this the most.”
This could be a misconception and this could be a lie, if it is I could not universally prove it. There is a difference between “searching for truth, knowledge, or wisdom in life” and analyzing reality with a critical eye. I’m leaving it at that because I am enjoying this dialogue and I don’t want to ruin it by entering into a debate over factual evidence in holy texts.
I understand what you are saying, and I both agree & disagree. Searching for truth, knowledge, & wisdom is analyzing reality with a critical eye. If we were blind & totally biased, it wouldn’t be true searching. So we must be critical in any endeavor of gathering knowledge. Again, where the “big trick” is used is combining true facts with false statements. This can be done by anyone.
The best lie is always the one with the most truth mixed in. Evolution (or I should say parts of it) are absolutely fact. That all life started this way, or that one type of animal can change into another has NEVER been proven, and by definition can never be proven. That is faith. Can evidence be collected which suggests it? Sure. Does evidence=truth? Absolutely NOT. Even if they present evidence, I laugh at it because most attempts thus far have been later refuted (such as the “transition cavemen (lucy, etc.)).
Again, I agree with you and I prefer not to get into a debate on these various topics, but it just strikes me as odd that we don’t see WAY more evidence if this is so true. Every single creature should be filled with vestigial organs. Yet almost every single claimed “vestigial” part is now being discovered by science to be used by that actual creature (which means by definition it isn’t vestigial).
I personally examine the bible very critically, as I did when I first started to read it (as other religious texts). But I am compelled to believe it as truth after long amounts of time, research, etc. There are certainly no great flaws in them, and any apparent contradiction or scientific inaccuracy can almost always be quickly resolved or explained upon close examination. That is why I follow it.
“I too love science, and love truth. I have no problems with most scientific claims. Only those who try to twist science to fit their atheist agenda.”
I agree, science is only pure if there is no agenda driving it to a certain conclusion. But this is true of anyone trying to support their ideas by ignoring the other side. I try and listen to all sides of any debate and use Reason to come to my own conclusion. This is how I’ve come to where I am now spiritually. I may be right or wrong, but to me the journey is more important.
I agree 100%. Anyone should have a non-biased & objective state of mind when studying anything. Unfortunately as humans this is nearly impossible. Our preconceived ideas will always impact our views. In the same way a computer system runs from an operating system pre-programmed on it, our minds run based on our life experience and knowledge. I am glad you at least listen to both sides, as that is the only way to find truth.
I remember when I was in college & many of my professors mocked people for believing in God. Many of the textbook writers are devout atheists who do have a hidden agenda (like Dawkins). These are the people I am most disappointed in. At the same time, there are very many honest & truthful scientists out there (even those who don’t believe in God), and they are talented and honest people who don’t try to shove their beliefs on others.
I too consider spiritually and a relationship with God to be a journey. But like all journeys, there is always a final destination point. If we are correct on our journey, we will arrive at the correct destination.
When sailors used to journey the seas, they had to rely on a compass for navigation. A compass is guided by an invisible force (magnetism), which is created by the flow of liquid magma in the Earth. This flow creates magnetic poles at each end of the Earth, and the compass uses this force in its design. You can’t see the force, yet it would always let them know which direction they were going.
In that same way, I view spirituality as a journey. There is force that exists in the universe which can show us if we are on the correct path or not, and that force is God. And just like the sailors used the compass to measure and interpret this force, God too can be known by using our “compass” which is the bible and other religious texts. All religions have at least a seed of truth in them, but I view the Bible as the most complete truth.
“Every day, there are people released from prison that were wrongly convicted based on “evidence.” There is evidence for a flat Earth. Again, just because there is evidence for something, it doesn’t mean it is truth.”
Exactly! But pure science is more willing (or at least should to be called science) to look at whatever data/evidence they have and revise their statements/theories/views than those with religious views BECAUSE it focuses on something you can measure. You can’t measure, test, and weight anything in the spirit realm or else it wouldn’t be called faith, it would then be fact. My goal is not to convince you, or anyone for that matter, of anything I believe in but to listen, talk, learn, and grow. If I walk down a different path than you we may cross paths again only to realize that we were headed in the same direction. May the Lord Creator guide you and yours back to him.
Again, I understand what you are saying here. But I am not aware of any parts of science that contradict religious statements. If you are referring to Genesis & creation, there is no science that can ever prove this wrong. Evidence can be collected which say the Earth is a Gazillion years old, or whatever claim they want to make. Or they can observe that a species can change over time (but it has not been observed that they originated this way). But it can never say for sure that the other method is wrong. They are both faith based, and evidence does exist for creation as well.
In other words, science can never contradict the truth in the Bible. It can never measure God, will never be able to know exactly what happened in the beginning, or what lies beyond our universe, etc. So I am not sure what you mean when you say that religious views need to be revised. What needs revising? The creation story? That is about the only thing science tries to go after in the bible, and it has not ever observed abiogenesis, or evolution in the context of what they teach today. Even if they could prove both, how could any logical person say that is how it all started for sure? We weren’t there, and it is only a guess. Again, both creation & evolution can contain evidence. Evidence for either side does not=truth. I would rather put faith in God before science. If I am wrong, I have no consequences of it. If I put faith in science & I am wrong about God, there could be a consequence.
I agree that there are things science absolutely cannot measure (spirit, love, souls, etc.). That is the big misconception among atheists. They assume if science can’t find evidence for it, it doesn’t exist. God, by nature, is spirit, and it is a fact that some things exist (and we know this by experience), that science cannot yet measure. Simple examples are love, ideas, happiness, etc. They may be able to ask people, but they certainly have no way of testing this without asking a person individually what they felt.
I, like you, want very much to learn more and grow both mentally & spiritually. I wish you well on your journey! Thanks again for all of your replies. I agree with most of what you say. Just please keep an open mind, and I will too. God bless my friend!
A few final words on the last post. I know how long these dialogues can get (I’ve held religious dialogues through email that would be 3-4 pages long per message) but I just want to touch on a few points. Again, your comments are in quotes.
“In that same way, I view spirituality as a journey. There is force that exists in the universe which can show us if we are on the correct path or not, and that force is God. And just like the sailors used the compass to measure and interpret this force, God too can be known by using our “compass” which is the bible and other religious texts. All religions have at least a seed of truth in them, but I view the Bible as the most complete truth.”
The compass analogy is one that I love dearly. I used it to describe my personal beliefs in one of my posts.
Wow, that is funny how you used that as well. I think it is a good analagy as well. In fact, on that webpage above I can say that I agree with most of your thoughts on Jesus. I certainly (against most Christian theology), don’t view Jesus as God as some (not all) Christians do. I certainly think that he is the son of God & messiah, but not God in the context that the trinity tries to spell out. I too share some beliefs of Jesus with Muslims, but at the same time, I tend to give more weight to the Messiah thing, which is a big deal in Judaism, so it only makes logical sense that Jesus being the Messiah is a big deal to God. I have been studying this issue for a while now, and hope to continue to research the topic of Jesus’ divinity.
“Again, I understand what you are saying here. But I am not aware of any parts of science that contradict religious statements. If you are referring to Genesis & creation, there is no science that can ever prove this wrong.”
“So I am not sure what you mean when you say that religious views need to be revised. What needs revising? The creation story?”
I meant that it is easier for scientists to revise their views/theories based on new “evidence” than it is for people to revise their religious views with new ones. I did not mean that religion or the creation story need revising to match with science, that would be absolutely absurd. But some find it difficult to let go of old religious views for new ones. I went through what I call a religious identity crisis where I struggled between two faiths. I found truth in both and I thought that ONE had to be absolutely correct. At the peak of my struggle I had an epiphany where I realized that both can be spiritually correct. Spiritual truths (love, patience, kindness, justice, compassion, etc.) should be more important to those with faith than historical truths. To me the Noah story does not have to be 100% historically accurate as the Bible portrays for me to be awe-inspired by the majesty of God. I don’t read the Bible as 100% literal, I read it as allegory to receive the spiritual message beneath the texts.
Okay, I kind of see what you are saying. I guess there are some religious teachings that are false, yet difficult for them to let go of (the trinity doctrine comes to mind). But at the same time, science too does fall in love with some of its theories and has a difficult time adapting to new ones. Especially ones that do tend to have evidence for them.
One thing I do notice, however, is that I actually do regard most ALL stories in the bible as actual historic events. You mentioned the flood, and I actually believe it was a real event, and not an allegorical story. Science & archeology has found many things which seem to support many biblical stories (such as finding what they believe to be cities of Sodom & Gomorrah, and they cities were destroyed by fire). So I am a bit of a literalist when it comes to those things, and I view them as God using science to do them (such as a volcano or meteor in the case of Sodom).
Again, I enjoy dialogue and would love to continue over any subject. If there were a clearer way to continue our sharing of thoughts that would be great (maybe like a joint authorship on a blog where we cover a specific topic every week), but that’s just a thought.
I enjoyed this dialogue myself. You have some interesting articles on your blog. I have added your site to my “bookmarks” so I can check up on it regularly.
I also would like to continue to discuss various religious topics in the future. I have been considering adding “comments” back to this site. I removed them because I as getting so much spam. But I also dislike them because sometimes I try to send out a positive message about God, and I know religion is one of those “controversial” topics. It is hard to write an article and have a lot of people agree with you when it is religious-based.
Not that I need everyone to agree, it is just that sometimes you want to spread information about God without a bunch of negative comments ripping apart your message (like from hard-core atheists or something).
But I may bring them back (I still haven’t decided), so that way it would be easier for more of a dialogue (I could comment on your blog, you could comment on mine, etc.). Another thing we could do is you could write a post discussing your views, then use the ask me a question to see my views (or I can just voluntarily write an article discussing my views & link to a similar post made by you). I can then link to your post, you can link to mine, and we can share our views on topics.
But I am definitely interested in discussing various religious topics in the future. It seems we have quite a few beliefs in common. I have a very deep interest in finding out the universal truth and making a complete picture of God/spirituality in my mind.
Thanks again for everything, and God bless!
Sponsored Links
Posted under Ask a Question, science
This post was written by Revelation on March 19, 2009
