Comments on: Vatican: ET is A-OK. AiG: ET Sucks. You choose.

By: Tom Hamilton

Tom Hamilton — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 11:27:08 +0000

if you were God, would you tell folk of early civilizations that plastic exists? That other life on other planets exist?
The complete details of evolution as Darwin discovered them?

I wouldn’t. I think they had enough poblems to be getting on with, without shoving eons of development down their throats!

If God taught the ancients to be modern overnight there would be no point in Christs visit to earth at all, as God would not have allowed humans to own their own future, he would become a dictator in a way…

I think we expect too much from the Bible. The part that matters to me is the life of Christ.

By: sarah

sarah — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 02:33:03 +0000

hi! loved the posting…
i am a Christian and i completely believe in extraterrestrial life! and evolution! i’m not one of the normal, gold-embossed-leather-bound-Bible-toting Christians, though, so i guess i don’t fit into the dynamic you describe?
many Christians have no idea, really, what it means to be a Christian. they’re not into the loving each other and helping out the less fortunate, more into cloistering themselves with other small-minded people who they are comfortable around, and yelling at others who don’t agree, or looking down their nose at people with tattoos, out of wedlock kids, etc… these are not really the best people to have any kind of a scientific debate with.

By: ginkgo100

ginkgo100 — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 18:07:48 +0000

For an (apparent) agnostic, you make a pretty convincing case for Catholicism! Or at least, that between Catholicism and Fundamentalist Protestantism, Catholicism is the better choice. I love being Catholic in part because I am not restricted from believing in such plainly demonstrable phenomena as Darwinian evolution as well as from speculating on astrobiology.

I am quite happy to have found your blog and anticipate much good reading here!

By: Martin R

Martin R — Sat, 17 May 2008 17:12:59 +0000

That reasoning from Isaiah 45:18 is a jaw-droppingly false syllogism. Here’s their argument:

1. Everything in the Bible is true.
2. The Bible says that the Earth was made to be inhabited.
3. Earth is not the only planet in the universe.

ergo

4. Earth is the only inhabited planet in the universe. QED.

By: SLC

SLC — Thu, 15 May 2008 12:33:44 +0000

Prof. Jason Rosenhouses’ blog has a whackjob troll calling himself Jon S who is an example of such an extremist YEC. Among other things (example: Mr. Jon S asserts that Tyrannosaurs were once vegetarians!), Mr. Jon S is absolutely convinced that no life exists elsewhere in the universe. When challenged on this claim with the observation that Jupiters’ moon Europa, which apparently has a liquid ocean underneath a thick ice cap, may have life, he confidently asserts that it does not. It would be interesting to see the contortions such nutcases would resort to if Europa were found to have living organisms in its liquid moon-wide ocean! I can sadly predict that AIG would propose a cockamamie explanation and would not go out of business if such a finding were made.

By: Thomas

Thomas — Wed, 14 May 2008 18:00:56 +0000

What’s most infuriating is that there is a valid biblical interpretation that runs directly counter to AiG’s supposition. According to the bible, the Abrahamian god changed the covenant with mankind several times, most notably in the gospels. Why an eternal, unchanging deity might tweak the rules from time to time is explained through the change in people. Times changed, circumstances changed, and so the requirements put on us by God changed.

Modern astronomy, cosmology and theoretical xenobiology were left out of the bible because the messianic Jews of eighteen hundred years ago didn’t have the grounding in which to understand them. There may well come a time when the Word on the subject will change. If God can change his mind once then he can certainly change it again.

Personally, I think that it’s all poppycock but it bears showing that AiG’s anticritical, self-serving, politically motivated interpretation of scripture isn’t the only available. They’re hypocrites even among their own kind.

By: Blake Stacey

Blake Stacey — Wed, 14 May 2008 16:50:18 +0000

AiG’s argument is that “extraterrestrial life doesn’t exist, because Genesis doesn’t mention it.”

AiG puts America’s status in jeopardy. Terrorists!

By: Crazyharp81602

Crazyharp81602 — Wed, 14 May 2008 16:21:11 +0000

It’s just like saying “Dinosaurs did not exist because Genesis didn’t mention them.”;”Caveman (or Apeman) did not exist because Genesis didn’t mention them.”;”The Grand Canyon didn’t exist because Genesis didn’t mention them”; “The Koala didn’t exist because Genesis didn’t mention them.”; etc, etc, and yet turn around and deliberately contradict this by shoehorn them all into the Bible in one form or another and say simply, “The answers’ in Genesis. God created them.” or “The answers’ in Genesis. The Flood formed them.” Now how idiotic and pathetic can AiG get?