I paraphrased the title to be able to fit it in, the full quote is:
Quote:
" The search for extraterrestrial life is really driven by man’s rebellion against God in a desperate attempt to supposedly prove evolution!"
From
Ken Ham's blog, he starts by saying:
Quote:
I’m shocked at the countless hundreds of millions of dollars that have been spent over the years in the desperate and fruitless search for extraterrestrial life.
Extraterrestrial life, not extraterrestrial intelligence, but I'll come back to that in a second..
I think the article is riddled with errors and bad logic, but most of that aside, I'm curious about whether or not anyone here agrees with his conclusion that there can't be any intelligent aliens because they wouldn't be the sons of Adam. He says "
And I do believe there can’t be other intelligent beings in outer space because of the meaning of the gospel.", then presents an argument that seems to go something like this:
P1) The Bible makes it clear that Adam’s sin affected the whole universe
P2) This means that any intelligent aliens would also be affected by Adam’s sin but because they are not Adam’s descendants, they can’t have salvation
P3) Jesus died for our salvation
C) Since intelligent aliens couldn't be saved, there cannot be any intelligent aliens.
Whilst he's relying on this argument to show that searching for what he called 'extraterrestrial life', in the first paragraph, is a waste of money, he seems to be missing the point that extra terrestrial life doesn't have to be intelligent to show that life could evolve elsewhere than Earth. Such life could be bacteriological, of the type that we envisage might exist in places like Europa or Enceladus. So, there could be aliens, but those aliens would not be intelligent, like bacteria on Earth aren't intelligent and also won't be saved, proving (or at least providing more evidence for) the evolutionary hypothesis that life will occur wherever the conditions are right for it, but without disproving Ham's hypothesis that intelligent aliens wouldn't be saved. I don't think they're even inconsistent positions to hold.
I think that halfway through his article he forgot that he was talking about Extraterrestrial life and started talking about extraterrestrial intelligence. Doh.
I do agree with one thing he said though, that "
The answers to life’s questions will not be found in imaginary aliens" or anything else that's imaginary, I'd imagine.