Tuesday, January 27, 2015


I have been commenting on Creationist websites for quite awhile now trying to expose their anti-Science view of reality.  In the article.... below my comments.....their anti-Science position is obvious BUT this is the first one where they also contradict their own Creationist Fundamental view of a 6000 year old Cosmos in contrast to an actual 13.5 billion year old inflation of space/time AND their expected support of the illusion of the political secular man made global warming position.........AS I HAVE SAID MANY MANY TIMES.....WHY DON'T THEY JUST CONCENTRATE ON THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST? I wonder..........IGNORANCE is not bliss but most believe it is......

It is interesting that Daniel Bakken attempts to use David Waltham and  Science to prove that Earth is the ONLY place in the Cosmos with intelligent life.  I realize his position is based on a Fundamental Interpretation of the Bible. The problem is that the Fundamental concept of God is anthropormorphic and does NOT support the God revealed in Jesus Christ and it seems his arguments are contradictive to the Fundamental belief of a "young" Earth and Creation and also opposes the popular belief in man made global warming.....which ironically is actually a good thing because man made global warming is a political issue, NOT Scientific. Waltham unwittingly supports some very real Science in his quest to prove Earth is the ONLY place in the Cosmos with Intelligent life and maybe even any life at all.  What Waltham and MOST Fundamental Christians don't realize is that the Bible is the GREATEST evidence that God's Creation is Cosmic.  In fact..the Bible reveals that there was a "struggle" in Heavenly realms way before Earth was formed between intelligent  "created" beings....those that chose to be their own "gods" and those that chose to "be with God."  The Book of Revelation even "quantifies" this history revealing that 1/3rd rejected God along with one of the most "perfect" of beings..Lucifer and 2/3rds remained with God.  The New Testament even reveals that we "struggle" against these "fallen rebels." (Ephesians 6:12)   Fundamentals are quick to claim these beings are "Angels" and the rebels "demons."  I suspect the confusion between these beings and Extraterrestrials is understanding what Heaven is and as a result they "separate" it from God's Cosmos. It gets more confusing when they claim "Angels" do not have free will like man does.  Well..they sure had free will to chose between God and themselves!  People have experienced ET's through out time....the Bible even tell us to "be "hospitable" to everyone we meet because we NEVER know when we are in the presence of an Angel." Fundamentals claim these ET's are DEMONS! YES....1/3rd of them are and they are the evil beings of Ephesians 6:12.  God's "gift" of Science has revealed that the Cosmos is more than the observable dimensions of space/time.....it has revealed mutiple dimensions (11 total) and even multiverses. Jesus told His Disciples that "In My Father's House there are many rooms." (John 14:2)  I suspext He was not referring to literal "rooms."   Jesus even told His Disciples that He had "flocks" in MANY "other" places.....again, I doubt He was talking this planet.  His acension into "Heaven" reveals the reality of the Cosmos because Acts 1:8-11 indicates He will return to our planet EXACTLY the SAME way He left 2000 years ago.  God's Laws are PERFECT because God is PERFECT and the claim He violates His own Laws is non-sequitur and indicates a misunderstanding of God's Word.

AND.....Bakken and Waltham's claim that there are no Earth like planets indicates they are expressing their opinions...not recent Cosmological discovery's of thousands of "Earth-like" extrasolar planets and more being discovered every day.  I wished Creationists would spend their time and resources on spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ INSTEAD of trying to disprove Scientific discovery. Frankly, I don't understand what their agenda is.  The Death, Burial and Resurrection of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins is ALL that we should be sharing with our fellow man.

Another point I would like to share..........

Ironically, Fundamental Christians are right about Intelligent Design in the Creation of Adam  but for the wrong reasons and Science is plain WRONG saying man was Created by Darwinian Natural Selection. (Actually..the mechanism used in Creation is irrelevant and does NOT prove or disprove the existence of God)  Adam and Eve were Created by God in His Image by Intelligent Design but understanding this mechanism as the method used by God requires that we understand the "Elohim".....the God revealed in the "flesh" as Jesus Christ. When you understand God revealed in Jesus, you realize that Science has discovered how God Created Adam and Science doesn't even know it! Fundamental Christianity's concept of Intelligent Design is by "magic"....the "supernatural."   God's "Intelligent Design" was through His PERFECT Laws......Recombinant DNA.  (This mechanism .. NOT recognized by Science ....explains the better than 95% common genome with Simian Primates AND more importantly..the fact there simply was no where near enough time for Natural Selection especially considering the fact that the only source of "new and natural" genetic codes is DNA mutation of which more than 99% are "lethal." Intelligent Design via rDNA is the only logical explanation....unless you insist on buying into the illusion of the supernatural!   That requires blind faith.....the God revealed to the Jews in the Old Testament and in the "flesh" in the New Testament requires the faith of a child...THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE between them!

Evolution News and Views
Physics, Earth & Space NEWS

1.26.2015 7:37PM
Lucky Us: Turning the Copernican Principle on Its Head
Daniel Bakken January 26, 2015 11:27 AM | Permalink


Editor's note: As a series at ENV, we have been pleased to present "Exoplanets." Daniel Bakken is an engineer who teaches astronomy at the college level, and an entrepreneur in compound semiconductor crystal growth. In a series of articles he has critically examined recent claims about exoplanets beyond our solar system, asking whether our own planet Earth is a rarity, or common, in the cosmos.

As we have seen in this series, which concludes today, at present the idea that the Earth is the only abode of technology in the Milky Way galaxy appears increasingly likely.

exoplanet2.jpgThe possibility that this may support supernatural intervention by an intelligent designer, or even affirm a classic Christian concept of a Creator, is vehemently rejected by some in the scientific community. Yet these possibilities are suggested by sobering facts about the rarity of the Earth and its environment. Far from perpetuating the caricature of science versus faith, these results fit well with a theistic view of the universe. Those who reject such a view respond by pointing to the possibility of many universes, looking to chance to resolve the evident difficulties.

Thinkers unwilling to entertain theism as an explanation for life also seek to close the door on a traditional concept of God by portraying Christianity in particular as anti-intellectual and anti-science. A recent example is in the 2014 television series Cosmos, where significant airtime was devoted to the persecution by the Church of early scientists. Giordano Bruno, in particular, was held up as a scientific martyr. He was burned at the stake supposedly for proclaiming that there are planetary systems around other stars, and likely people on those planets. Yet in fact it was political motivations that resulted in his being put to death, a result that had nothing whatsoever to do with his views regarding other planets.1

Many scientists see Bruno as a kindred spirit, with his proclamations about life on other planets, and even feel that this pits them in a struggle with organized religion. Another scientific martyr, Galileo Galilei, likewise is seen as being crushed by religion for standing up for science. As with Bruno, however, Galileo's house arrest came not from his scientific views as much as his challenging the Catholic Church in interpreting Scripture. Instead of clerics refusing to look through the telescope to see the reality of the cosmos, it was in fact his own university colleagues who refused.2 Similarly today, many scientists are persuaded by philosophy, not science, to ignore the reality that the Earth is not a common planet, but a very special one, maybe even unique in the visible universe.

But some researchers have let the data lead them to another conclusion. As David Waltham says in his Prologue to Lucky Planet, entitled "A Tale of Two Planets," "Earth was blessed with incredible good fortune, giving it all the right properties to sustain a complex and beautiful biosphere. It may just be the luckiest planet in the visible Universe."3 He also goes on to say, "Earth is a precious jewel possessing a rare combination of qualities that happen to make it almost perfect for sustaining life,"4 and, "In my view, imaginatively populating our small corner of one galaxy with hundreds of advanced civilizations is just wishful thinking. The scientifically conservative position should be that life is rare and intelligence even more so."5

Many of his colleagues doubt his view, and will say the data are just too sparse to come to such a conclusion. Yet Waltham no longer has doubts that "[t]he evidence points toward Earth being a very peculiar place; perhaps the only highly habitable planet we will ever find."6 For him, "these ideas merely emphasized how wonderful our home is and how lucky we are to exist at all."7 He concludes that "we are probably effectively alone in the Universe,"8 and "we rarely stop to notice what an amazingly beautiful, unique, and, dare I say it, miraculous place it is."9

This Leads to a Prediction

Life doesn't have a long future on Earth, at least compared to its history. Barring nuclear war, giant asteroid collision with Earth, or a nearby supernova, what is the outlook? Compared to the past 4 billion years, biological activity on our planet is already on the wane.10 Due to the increase in the Sun's energy output, and the carbonate-silicate cycle that removes CO2 from the atmosphere to compensate, the level of CO2 is already very low for plants, and the amount and diversity of plant life is dropping due to the decline.11 In a few hundred million years, the Earth will not be able to sustain complex plants or, it is likely, humans either. The oceans will eventually boil away, and plate tectonics will end within about 500 million years.12 Looked at this way, biology is over 90 percent into its life span on Earth.

This is curious because humanity seems to have entered the picture at the most opportune moment -- and just in time. What if intelligence and technology hadn't arisen in Earth's habitability time window? Waltham in Lucky Planet asks "So, how do we explain the remarkable coincidence that the timescale for the emergence of intelligence is almost the same as the timescale for habitability?"13 Researchers Carter and Watson have dubbed this idea the anthropic inequality14 and it seems surprising, if it is not for some purpose.

This leads to a prediction. If the Earth is indeed special in its ability to support advanced technological life, and if there is indeed a purpose behind this, future research should continue to show more evidence of uniqueness. If there is no purpose that has guided the existence of the Earth, and its life, then it is likely that the pace of discovery of factors revealing the rarity of the Earth and its life should diminish as research continues. For now, however, it appears that this pace is quickening, and shows signs of increasing into the future if recent history is a guide.

With respect to the Earth, if we were to follow the Copernican principle to its conclusion, we should find ourselves in many ways a typical example of a technological civilization in the cosmos. If we are, indeed, a common example of intelligent, civilized life, then statistically we should expect to find ourselves in a typical environment where that kind of life is possible. As an example, if technological civilizations like ours were possible around a red dwarf, or in a dwarf galaxy, then we should find ourselves in one of those environments, since they are much more common than the one we find ourselves in. Since we find ourselves in an environment that is not typical, but atypical, as I have shown in this series, then it follows that technological civilizations likely require atypical conditions.

The many required -- and rare -- parameters that technological civilizations apparently need effectively stand the Copernican principle on its head. The mediocrity principle, which has been assumed for so long to apply to the Earth, is refuted by the actual data of other planets and environments. It fails with respect to Earth, and by extension the Copernican principle also fails.

An interesting point about what we've learned about habitability suggests that if advanced civilizations are out there, they would quickly discover the same restrictions on habitability in the galaxy and universe as we have. This has an effect of accentuating Fermi's paradox15, in that it greatly reduces the places to visit, colonize, or at least communicate with in the galaxy. Instead of the whole galaxy, just the galactic habitable zone is available, and within that, only G type stars, of a certain metallicity, and so forth need be considered. Any significantly more advanced alien civilization could, and likely would, either colonize or communicate with all potential life sites in our galaxy in far less than the 50 million years I mentioned previously. Fermi's paradox, then, is even more potent in accentuating our apparent loneliness in the galaxy.


Having examined some of the data from astrobiology and the study of known exoplanets, what are the probabilities that other planets have the capacity to harbor complex intelligent life that can develop technology? The answer is far more complex than we used to imagine, encompassing the entire history of the universe, which then includes focusing down the galactic environment, the galaxy's history, star formation, planet formation, life's requirements, and requirements for advanced technology like available metal ores and free oxygen. At each scale the interactions must be within a narrow range, and statistically modeled, with input from actual data.

As Guillermo Gonzalez states in "Setting the Stage for Habitable Planets," a paper in the journal Life, to answer the question of the probability of other planets harboring life, we "must incorporate the complete history of the universe, including galaxy, star, and planet formation and evolution."16 Further, "cosmology is not irrelevant to the formation and continued existence of habitable planets."17 And, "Change one aspect of a habitable planetary system to make it non-habitable, and it might not be possible to make it habitable again with a single change to a different parameter."18

The view that there may be something or Someone purposeful behind life has also been explored by Gonzalez in The Privileged Planet, co-written with Jay Richards, where they reveal an even deeper connection between the rarity of habitability and the factors that make scientific discovery possible. They make a cumulative case, one that requires unpacking, supported by the new research showing just how special our planet is, and how that relates to our ability to do science.

Given the positive evidence from the current state of this research, and the negative evidence from the search for extraterrestrial life, the most satisfying answer to Fermi's paradox is that we are alone, and that there is a supernatural reason we are here. Someone decided that life should exist in this universe and made sure that Earth received all the proper protection and environmental benefits it needed to become the home of humankind. The Earth's uniqueness brings to mind what the prophet Isaiah recorded thousands of years ago:

    For thus says the Lord -- Who created the heavens, God Himself, Who formed the Earth and made it, Who established it and did not create it to be a worthless waste; He formed it to be inhabited -- I am the Lord, and there is no one else.20


Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home