Does Evolution Lead to Fear of Aliens?

[there4eyeM]

When the same question has no answer after so much time, we must ask if there is something wrong with the question.
What is often 'wrong' with questions about 'God' is that we fail to see all the impositions upon 'God' that the framing of the question makes.
There can be no 'knowing God' merely through hearing or reading. In a way, it is like riding a bicycle; one can read every work about bicycles, one can know all the techniques required to build a bicycle, and one can build any number of bicycles, but none of that will teach one to ride a bicycle. That can only be done directly, personally.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Hawking is a total moron.

"If It's Weird, It's Wise"

If he looked like Brad Pitt, nobody would pay any attention to his Quantum Quackery. His entire appeal is to bitter, pencil-necked, hollow-chested nerds who go overboard on the idea that looks don't matter.

His spiritual perfect self could look like Brad Pitt or better.

People Will Always Be Kind, by Wilfrid Sheed

Hawking is a charlatan who takes advantage of people who feel sorry for him because of his freakish looks.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Any alien species, assuming they exist, that are capable of interstellar or intergalactic travel would certainly be far more advanced than we are.

That makes perfect sense.

If that is true then they would have noticed that this planet was teeming with life long before any human being ever wondered what a fart was.

You two might as well forget about the feasibility of interstellar or intergalactic travel. Any object with mass will have its mass approach infinity as it nears the speed of light, thus requiring infinite energy to continue accelerating towards the speed of light.

Maybe but then again maybe an advanced alien species knows something we don't

This is your opinion based on vastness of space. This is what atheist scientist Carl Sagan believed. He would not accept UFO sightings as he thought they were unreliable. It means there wasn't a sighting that a scientist would accept unless he was a weirdo. First, show us there's an advanced alien species. Can you show a single-cell one? Oh yeah, Carl Sagan sent time capsules into space for intelligent aliens to find, but still no response. He died with no evidence of aliens. I would think so would you.

NA$A Is an Escapist Trekkie Circus

People are not informed that the odds against life forming on Earth were practically impossible. We are lottery winners, so life here doesn't mean that similar planets overcame the odds. The odds were 2 to the 200,00 power of chemical reactions to create life; we hit the jackpot at only 2 to the 200th power.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Before weren't you theorizing that Jesus was an avatar from another world? Now you're claiming his kingdom is not of this world. Which world is this?

Yes. Which world is this? Earth?

Where am I suppose to find this world?

The kingdom of God is within.

Thinking is the best way to travel.

Using thinking, I don't think it's on Earth because we all end up leaving it. Now, some may return as written in the Bible but what about heaven? Where is that in your thinking?

It is the highest realm of conscious life, a realm of incorporeal beings and spheres of intelligences eternal in nature, only open to the pure of mind who accept divine instruction, master the law, and become holy as God is holy..

What made Lucifer rebel against God?

The same thing that made Prometheus rebel against Zeus.

 

[james bond]

My bad. I was more open minded about aliens and another life form existing until I heard the fine tuning theory. Now I tend to doubt it. If there is, then there would be a good chance it escaped from our planet. For example, if we found bacteria growing on the moon. Moon Microbe Mystery Finally Solved

I think extrapolating the properties of the entire universe from our most minuscule little corner of it to be an error.

Why? You do realize that we are not extrapolating from our minuscule little corner, right? The red shift tells us that everything is moving away from us. That coupled with the solutions of Einstein's Theory of General relativity - which has been confirmed in a myriad of ways - tells us that all the matter in the universe occupied the space a million billion billion times smaller than a single atom and then expanded and cooled.

that has nothing to do with life in the universe does it? I didn't even mention the big bang

You didn't mention much science either. Big oak trees come from little acorns, but the little acorns first came from big oak trees. Thus, the universe started from what? Teensy, tiny invisible particles?

you want to rehash the accepted science feel free.
The big bang is a theory that fits our observations so it is useful in that way.

The thread is , I thought, about the possibility of other sentient life in the universe

You said that creation science has nothing to do with life in the universe which isn't correct. It's one part that make up our worldview. There's also atheist science, but it's usually wrong. If you want to relate it to other sentient life in the universe, then science can help find them. However, creation science also gives us the fine tuning theory which states the probability is very low. So based on what SETI has revealed so far, we can conclude the amazing things that happen in our universe happens here. Yet, there's loads of people who want to live on Mars.

 

[james bond]

Renowned celebrity physicist Stephen Hawking is at the forefront of the search for extra-terrestrial life. But he warns against making contact with aliens as he fears they will be two-billion-years ‘more evolved’.

"Time and again I am confronted with the view from young people that “Of course there are aliens out there. We can’t be the only ones.” This is a surprise to many of the older church folk in my acquaintance. However, CMI’s UFO authority, Gary Bates, indicates that in his experience belief in aliens can be found across all age groups—including churchgoers. Surveys estimate that more than 80% of Western peoples believe that ET is ‘out there somewhere’ which presumably encapsulates a lot of believers also.1 But many young folk in particular have been influenced by science fiction notions of aliens traversing the galaxy in their faster-than-light spaceships and advanced weaponry. And older folk are especially surprised to see that young people’s belief in extra-terrestrials often goes hand-in-hand with a morbid fear of what aliens will do to them.

Belief in aliens—and fear arising from that—is a logical outflow of our young people having been sold the idea that we are the result of evolution, not creation. Life evolved on Earth (the argument says), therefore elsewhere in the universe—billions of years older than our solar system according to evolutionary reckoning—it would surely have evolved there, too.2 As well-known Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) researcher Seth Shostak said when asked why he believed in the existence of intelligent extraterrestrials:

By hawking evolution to a vulnerable public, they’re also hawking fear of aliens, too
“To believe that they don’t exist requires positing that what’s happened on Earth is some sort of miracle. I find that premise a tougher sell than to think that intelligence is a fairly frequent development in a 14-billion-year-old cosmos.”3"

It's amusing in that it's science fiction, but I also know that people who believe in other people will believe it no matter how smart they think they are. To believe that they don't exist means that some kind of miracle happened on Earth.

1. Bates, G., and Cosner, L., UFOlogy: the world’s fastest-growing ‘scientific’ religion?, 2016; creation.com/ufology. ET needed evolution, 2016; creation.com/et-evolution.
2. DiGregorio, B., Interview: The alien hunter, New Scientist 199(2674):42–43, September 2008; newscientist.com.
3. DiGregorio, B., Interview: The alien hunter, New Scientist 199(2674):42–43, September 2008; newscientist.com.

Full article here
Hawking fear of aliens - creation.com

Well, if one were to start with the premis that God was responsible for the Big Bang, there are not many inconsistencies left to deal with.

The creation scientists are saying the BBT is wrong although it helps them with Genesis. BBT explains it in a material world or with a material explanation.

.
Then this would imply aliens on another planet were also created by God. Right? I don't really see any inconsistencies yet.

The Bible states that God created the earth for us. That is all. I haven't seen any inconsistencies with this yet. The atheist scientists think earth is doomed so they want to have multiplanetary human life. The creation scientists think we should make this a better place to live and die. It is prophecized that we'll all die here.

 

[james bond]

Then you're good with science fiction, for the most part. There's more evidence of God if you ask me.

God created the Natural Universe and all the laws within it. We were born with brains and heart. The expectation seems to be that we should use both. Science is a method to study the laws of God's work and, therefore, science is the study of the divine.

To ignore our gifts and to ignore the God's creation is to deny God.

It depends on the science, whether it's creation science or atheist science (which split beginning in the 1800s).

 

[james bond]

Before weren't you theorizing that Jesus was an avatar from another world? Now you're claiming his kingdom is not of this world. Which world is this?

Yes. Which world is this? Earth?

Where am I suppose to find this world?

The kingdom of God is within.

Thinking is the best way to travel.

Using thinking, I don't think it's on Earth because we all end up leaving it. Now, some may return as written in the Bible but what about heaven? Where is that in your thinking?

It is the highest realm of conscious life, a realm of incorporeal beings and spheres of intelligences eternal in nature, only open to the pure of mind who accept divine instruction, master the law, and become holy as God is holy..

What made Lucifer rebel against God?

The same thing that made Prometheus rebel against Zeus.

The context is important in my question. I assume God made the angels for companionship, but he didn't want robots who just obeyed him. Thus, he gave them free will. I assume that the angels had powers to change their environment but I'm not sure. What some Christians say is the following (sorry getting off on a tangent here),

"Angels are worshipping God every second, of every minute, of every day and night. They worship Jesus (Hebrews 1:6) and they surround God‘s throne as it says in Revelation 4:8, “Each of the four living creatures had six wings and was covered with eyes all around, even under its wings. Day and night they never stop saying: “‘Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty,’ who was, and is, and is to come.” The angels declare God’s glory and some were created just for this reason. At Jesus’ second coming, “He will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other” (Matthew24:31). But this duty of the holy angels will be foreboding for those who have not put their trust in Christ because “This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous and throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matthew 13:49-50)."

We are told a huge war broke out as Lucifer wanted to be a God, too, since his powers were the most compared to the other angels. What were the angels doing to distinguish themselves?

 

[hobelim]

The Bible states that God created the earth for us. That is all. I haven't seen any inconsistencies with this yet.

you are way way off man..

The bible states that God created heaven and earth and said, 'let there be light' when the world was without shape and void, which only means that divine law, like a light, was established in the midst of the darkness of a lawless planet which wasn't created for you anymore than it was created for a jellyfish.

 

[Divine Wind]

It depends on the science, whether it's creation science or atheist science (which split beginning in the 1800s).

It's either science or it isn't. There aren't different types any more than any other verifiable fact.

 

[ding]

What does it say about a concept of 'God' that 'creation' had to be in stages/days and not all complete at once? It should be obvious that any and all descriptions of 'God' limit 'God' and can at the very most only be a tool for explaining, as to a child.

It says there are natural laws and a natural order. It says there are causes and effects. It says everything happens for a reason. It says everything is connected. What kind of a philosopher are you anyway?

 

[there4eyeM]

"It" 'says', no thing.

 

[ding]

"It" 'says', no thing.

So you believe that the evolution of space and time - which shows us that there has never been an uncaused event since space and time began - does not prove cause and effect exists? Really? Can you tell me why you believe that?

So you believe that cause and effect doesn't mean that everything happens for a reason? Really? Can you tell me why you believe that?

So you believe that nothing is connected because everything happens randomly? Really? Can you tell me why you believe that?

I'm curious have you ever thought anything through before in your life?

 

[james bond]

The Bible states that God created the earth for us. That is all. I haven't seen any inconsistencies with this yet.

you are way way off man..

The bible states that God created heaven and earth and said, 'let there be light' when the world was without shape and void, which only means that divine law, like a light, was established in the midst of the darkness of a lawless planet which wasn't created for you anymore than it was created for a jellyfish.

Now, we get to the point where we disagree. I think we agree on what the Bible says, but it does state that earth was created for us in Genesis (my view). Now, this type of "geocentric" and "literal" thinking led us to interpret it to mean geocentrism which is way off, but these people did not back up their theory using science. That was one of the mistakes of Christian scientists using "God of the Gaps." Sir Francis Bacon warned us of that. (God of the Gaps was a warning by Christians to their scientists to not use God as an answer when they were stuck. Atheists usurped it for their own purposes when discussing the BBT.)

Does the Bible teach geocentrism?

I have more to say, but will stop here for your response.

 

[james bond]

It depends on the science, whether it's creation science or atheist science (which split beginning in the 1800s).

It's either science or it isn't. There aren't different types any more than any other verifiable fact.

I agree that your first sentence is the way it should be. However, if you study history, then you'll find the atheist scientists took control in the 1800s with uniformitarianism vs creationism. This lead to evolution and today where the creationists theories will not be peer-reviewed. Science should allow both theories to be peer-reviewed. However, this is not the case and thus we have the two different sciences. I used to believe in evolution and learned it at evolution.berkeley.edu . However, once I started to investigate what the creation scientists were saying, I thought they had the better theories. It's a huge conflict of worldviews. It can't be so far different and that only one can't be right. For science to be decided by atheist scientists is not right. You may call these secular scientists or secular science, but the foundation is atheist science. Charles Lyell was an atheist and he turned his pupil, Charles Darwin, to atheism and disavow his Christianity.

 

[Indeependent]

Here's Hawkings motivation and Modus Operendi...
It's a sad fact that he needs someone to feed him and wipe his ass, so every now and then he revises what he said 5 years ago to remain relevant and get some attention and interview cash.
Not to mention that every theory he spouts has it rearing it's head 700,000,000 years from now.
He should just shut the fuck up.

 

[Divine Wind]

I agree that your first sentence is the way it should be. However, if you study history, then you'll find the atheist scientists took control in the 1800s with uniformitarianism vs creationism. This lead to evolution and today where the creationists theories will not be peer-reviewed. Science should allow both theories to be peer-reviewed. However, this is not the case and thus we have the two different sciences. I used to believe in evolution and learned it at evolution.berkeley.edu . However, once I started to investigate what the creation scientists were saying, I thought they had the better theories. It's a huge conflict of worldviews. It can't be so far different and that only one can't be right. For science to be decided by atheist scientists is not right. You may call these secular scientists or secular science, but the foundation is atheist science. Charles Lyell was an atheist and he turned his pupil, Charles Darwin, to atheism and disavow his Christianity.

There is only one science. Anything that doesn't fit the definition below isn't science.

What is the ``scientific method''?
The scientific method is the best way yet discovered for winnowing the truth from lies and delusion. The simple version looks something like this:

• 1. Observe some aspect of the universe.
• 2. Invent a tentative description, called a hypothesis, that is consistent with what you have observed.
• 3. Use the hypothesis to make predictions.
• 4. Test those predictions by experiments or further observations and modify the hypothesis in the light of your results.
• 5. Repeat steps 3 and 4 until there are no discrepancies between theory and experiment and/or observation.

When consistency is obtained the hypothesis becomes a theory and provides a coherent set of propositions which explain a class of phenomena. A theory is then a framework within which observations are explained and predictions are made.

 

[Divine Wind]

Here's Hawkings motivation and Modus Operendi...
It's a sad fact that he needs someone to feed him and wipe his ass, so every now and then he revises what he said 5 years ago to remain relevant and get some attention and interview cash.
Not to mention that every theory he spouts has it rearing it's head 700,000,000 years from now.
He should just shut the fuck up.

Hawking is worth $20M. He can easily afford to pay someone $100,000 a year to feed him and wipe his ass for the next 20 years (a mere $2M total). IMHO, a more plausible theory is that his mind is going. He's 75 years old with a severe neurological disease. Genius or not, we all get old, frail and not-what-we-once-were.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Any alien species, assuming they exist, that are capable of interstellar or intergalactic travel would certainly be far more advanced than we are.

That makes perfect sense.

If that is true then they would have noticed that this planet was teeming with life long before they were capable of interstellar travel, long before the dinosaurs walked the earth, long before any human being ever developed the intelligence to wonder what a fart was.

It wasn't that long ago before the dinosaurs walked the earth. You only been led to believe it was 245 million years ago.
.

Secular Humanism Is a Malignant Mutation of Religion

Theists could use the theory that God accelerated the progress of time. What would take 245 million years according to the carbon dating of dinosaur bones would take far less time if time happened faster at the beginning. In fact, it did for awhile after the Big Bang. So, if as postmodern physics says, time is a dimension, then it can be compressed.

 

[hobelim]

The Bible states that God created the earth for us. That is all. I haven't seen any inconsistencies with this yet.

you are way way off man..

The bible states that God created heaven and earth and said, 'let there be light' when the world was without shape and void, which only means that divine law, like a light, was established in the midst of the darkness of a lawless planet which wasn't created for you anymore than it was created for a jellyfish.

Now, we get to the point where we disagree. I think we agree on what the Bible says, but it does state that earth was created for us in Genesis (my view). Now, this type of "geocentric" and "literal" thinking led us to interpret it to mean geocentrism which is way off, but these people did not back up their theory using science. That was one of the mistakes of Christian scientists using "God of the Gaps." Sir Francis Bacon warned us of that. (God of the Gaps was a warning by Christians to their scientists to not use God as an answer when they were stuck. Atheists usurped it for their own purposes when discussing the BBT.)

Does the Bible teach geocentrism?

I have more to say, but will stop here for your response.

The earth exists. To say that it was created for just 'us' is silly because as it exists it sustains all living things which suggests that if it was made for anything it was made for an amoeba as much as it was made for you.


What the bible states is that man was taken from the dust of the earth and formed into a living being to till the soil, which, if you think deeply enough, has nothing whatever to do with farming....