It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Does extraterrestrial life exist?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by plop
Resistance, i dont see anything in ur bible arguments that states there is no life elsewhere in the universe.


Those words aren't used "There is no life elsewhere in the universe." But we can figure that out from what it DOES say.

1. The earth was the first thing God created.
2. The sun, moon and stars were created on the fourth day. The reasons Scripture gives for their creation have nothing to do with putting life on them.


So if the earth was just one heavenly body among trillions upon trillions, no better, no worse, just here waiting for the lightning to strike the soup and make some DNA or whatever we hear is how it all happened -- well, the Bible doesn't say this at all. As we well know.




posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 07:52 AM
link   


Those words aren't used "There is no life elsewhere in the universe." But we can figure that out from what it DOES say.

1. The earth was the first thing God created.
2. The sun, moon and stars were created on the fourth day. The reasons Scripture gives for their creation have nothing to do with putting life on them.


What was the reason for the creation of mars? Or Neptune? Or all the extrasolar planets?

If im not mistaken, the bible says nothing about those. So u cannot conclude that they were created for another reason than putting life on them.


So if the earth was just one heavenly body among trillions upon trillions, no better, no worse, just here waiting for the lightning to strike the soup and make some DNA or whatever we hear is how it all happened -- well, the Bible doesn't say this at all. As we well know.


If god exists, he could have created life on billions of planets as easily as he did on earth.



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 08:46 AM
link   
By Resistance


Those words aren't used "There is no life elsewhere in the universe." But we can figure that out from what it DOES say.

1. The earth was the first thing God created.
2. The sun, moon and stars were created on the fourth day. The reasons Scripture gives for their creation have nothing to do with putting life on them.



Plop said:
What was the reason for the creation of mars? Or Neptune? Or all the extrasolar planets?

If im not mistaken, the bible says nothing about those. So u cannot conclude that they were created for another reason than putting life on them.

Resistance said:
Excuse me. They are uninhabitable. According to the Bible, they are just lights in the sky. And perhaps God put these other planets in our solalr system to show us how lucky we are, how much thought and care God took to create this Planet for us to live on. He might have put them there to serve as examples and proofs that things are not as the cosmologists say regarding the Big Bang, all that stuff, and their explanations for where we came from and where we're going.

God's not in a "sustainability mode." God has limitless creativity. God could have made a universe ten times the size he did, or bigger, and God's just not stingy with what he makes. As the Bible says, "The heavens declare the glory of God."

The the moon is the "lesser light" by night and the Sun the "greater light." The stars are for "times and seasons" and "to give light upon the earth."
Except possibly for Mars, even if we were able to get to these other planets we could not land on them. Their temperature, atmosphere, gravity, you name it -- would devour anything we tried to set down on these planetary bodies.

You've been watching too much Captain Kirk.

Resistance said:

So if the earth was just one heavenly body among trillions upon trillions, no better, no worse, just here waiting for the lightning to strike the soup and make some DNA or whatever we hear is how it all happened -- well, the Bible doesn't say this at all. As we well know.


Plop says: If god exists, he could have created life on billions of planets as easily as he did on earth.

He could have. But obviously he didn't. In order to have life you need oxygen and water. None of the planets have these.







[edit on 1-10-2005 by resistance]



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 09:02 AM
link   
resistance,
I sincerly apologise for my rude previois post as I was very drunk last night, and didn't know wtf I was typing.


maybe your right,
but I still disagre with the Bible as It makes no sence to me.

any thoughts why God made the universe/cosmos so big and empty?
and only concentreated on one planet?

and I don't want to hear "Because he can"

thanx

there are a lot of things in the universe that are pointless to be there,

could you agree that god created the seed (big bang) then left the universe to its own devises? that would make more sence. I could beleive that.


if god created life, at what point did God leave life to it own devises?
life seems to be on auto piolot with or without god, wich tells me life can spring up anywhere in the universe where its In a hospitable Zone.







[edit on 1-10-2005 by TrentReznor]

[edit on 1-10-2005 by TrentReznor]



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 09:19 AM
link   


He could have. But obviously he didn't. In order to have life you need oxygen and water. None of the planets have these.


Well I have know Idea how you could possibly know this for a fact,
thats an Insaine thing to say.



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 09:50 AM
link   
Dear Trent Reznor -- You say I can't possibly know the other planets have no oxygen or water. Far as I know, scientists (who don't know all they say they know btw) claim the planets have atmospheres of ammonia and other such things. Some planets are so cold and have such gravity that you'd almost melt into the surface of the planet (like jupiter). The moon has no atmosphere at all (it's a vacuum) and NASA (who I don't believe one word of ANYTHING they say) have high hopes to find water at the bottom of craters they think never gets any sunlight. NASA wants us to think there's life on the other planets so we'll be willing to fork out more billions to them so they can go roaring around in their spaceships and have jobs. But it's just a political pipedream that's being used to the advantage of people who mean us no good (i.e. the Illuminati).



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 10:14 AM
link   
Yeah, I agree with you on the NASA thing.

however Scientists Havent found that many planets, and with the methods they use, can only detect Large bodys, and Have only seem to have found gas gients n brown dwafs,
With all that said, if we found a solarsystem 30lyears away with current tecnology, the chances are we would only see the large gas gients
using the wobble effect method, if we were in that solar system looking at our system we would not be able to detect earth, its much too small.

give it ten years and we will have the equipment to detect small rocky planets, and that will be so cool.

the universe is so uniform in structure, it would be impossable for there to be NO sol/systems like ours to exsist.

btw, not one scientist beleives all planets have corrosive atmospheres.

peace


[edit on 2-10-2005 by sanctum]



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 10:49 AM
link   
Trent Rezner -- Assuming there is another solar system out there exactly like ours, with an earth the same size, a moon, and a sun all the same -- that still would not mean there's any life on that other "earth" planet. Dead matter does not produce life. Life comes from life. Like produces like. That's just the way it is. All the wishful thinking in the world will not change that.

Unless God chooses to create another Planet Earth out there and PUT SOME LIFE on it there will BE NO LIFE. Period.

And based on my reading of Scripture, He has not done so and will not do so. In fact, at one time God regretted that He had created any life on THIS planet, and wiped out the entire earth in a flood -- all but Noah and his family and the two-by-two animals on the ark.

If God wants lots of human life, there's plenty of room right here on earth for lots and lots more people. You could put the entire world's population in the state of Texas and have parks, schools, homes, all you'd need. That would leave the entire rest of the planet for whoever else comes along.



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 11:50 AM
link   
atheism.about.com...



I saw a fascinating interview with Sir David Attenborough a few months ago, in which he said that whenever he encounters this view, he cites the example of this African parasitic worm that burrows into the human eyeball, and is responsible for hundreds of thousands of children going blind every year. This worm doesn't live in any other environment, except the human eyeball. He said he just cannot believe that a benevolent god would create a creature for the sole purpose of making children blind.



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrentReznor
atheism.about.com...



I saw a fascinating interview with Sir David Attenborough a few months ago, in which he said that whenever he encounters this view, he cites the example of this African parasitic worm that burrows into the human eyeball, and is responsible for hundreds of thousands of children going blind every year. This worm doesn't live in any other environment, except the human eyeball. He said he just cannot believe that a benevolent god would create a creature for the sole purpose of making children blind.


TR -- This is so off-topic I'll probably get us kicked off if I respond. So I won't let you take me down that road, even though I'd be glad to go there if I didn't want to get the thread shut down.

I don't know if ATS allows people to discuss those kinds of topics at all, actually. If they will, go ahead and start a new thread and I'll jump in. Should be good. I was only trying to answer the topic of this thread, Does extraterrestrial life exist? and based upon the Bible, I say the answer is no, and for the reasons I gave.



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by resistance
Excuse me. They are uninhabitable. According to the Bible, they are just lights in the sky.


Im afraid this may not be true. NASA has gone to mars to find out if life exists there(or once did). There was a martian meteor on earth which suggests so. It is known that life can exist inside nuclear reactors, aswell as in boiling water and tens of kilometers down in the ocean with incredible waterpressure that would make a human implode. Life can even survive tens of thousands of years, frozen in ice.

Also, where in the bible does it say mars and the other planets are just 'lights in the sky'? If the bible indeed says so, then the bible is wrong. The planets are not just lights, they are actual planets.


The the moon is the "lesser light" by night and the Sun the "greater light." The stars are for "times and seasons" and "to give light upon the earth."
Except possibly for Mars, even if we were able to get to these other planets we could not land on them. Their temperature, atmosphere, gravity, you name it -- would devour anything we tried to set down on these planetary bodies.


Humans walked on the moon.



Plop says: If god exists, he could have created life on billions of planets as easily as he did on earth.


He could have. But obviously he didn't. In order to have life you need oxygen and water. None of the planets have these.


Im afraid u are inventing things now.

I can only conclude one thing from ur arguments:

Nowhere in the bible is there even a suggestion that there is no extra terrestrial life. All ur ideas seem to be based on misunderstandings of the bible.



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Plop -- I agree things can live in almost any conditions -- except perhaps extreme heat. You're entitled to your opinion that the Bible doesn't speak to this issue, or that it does but I'm not getting it right. That's your opinion. I guess if we all agreed there wouldn't be anything to talk about here, yes?

Thanks.



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 02:00 PM
link   
I think its fine if u say that the bible indicates ET doesnt exist, but i would just like to see where it says so. If it does state so somewhere, then i dont have any problem with that.

There are many Christians (and also muslims and people of all other religions) that think its possible that ET life exists (including the vatican i believe). They also are true to the bible.

It seems to me u base it on the fact that the bible omits to mention ET life.
But the bible omits many things. It omits supernova, dinosaurs, nonlocality, etc. It simply isnt a book that contains all information of the entire universe.



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 04:53 PM
link   
Back on topic,

I vote A + C

why,, I have seen in the last 3 months 2 Clearly intellegently controled objects, far out of the reach of human capabilaties, these were nuts n bolt things. so with all respect my mind is made up and I have no doubts whatsoeverand Nobody can take that away from me, its the best feeling in the world.

I got no proof whatsoever aswell, (damn camcorder batteries)


p.s. you can't have C without A


(resistance, no, these were not flying angels.)







[edit on 1-10-2005 by TrentReznor]



posted on Oct, 1 2005 @ 05:07 PM
link   
Since the Universe is infinite, there must be an infinite number of planets which support life identical to us.

Sadly there are also an infinite number of planets which cannot support any form of life at all.

My guess and its only a guess is that on the balance of probabilities, there are countless planets support human or near human life.

The question really is whether any of these civilisations have visited us .....I think the answer is no.

It would be great if they hade done mind you



posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by plop
I think its fine if u say that the bible indicates ET doesnt exist, but i would just like to see where it says so. If it does state so somewhere, then i dont have any problem with that.


I think I explained how I draw the logical conclusion. We actually only have one eye-witness to the creation of the Universe. The witness to that event is the one who did it and who wrote the Bible. (Holy men of old wrote as they were moved by the Holy Ghost). So God, the one who created everything also told us how he did it. Since "Mother Nature" doesn't have a Bible to tell us how SHE did it, I'm the only one with any definitive, authoritative record of an event that we all acknowledge did happen.

God said he made the earth first, the sun, moon and stars on the fourth day. The stars were like an afterthought. i.e. ,"and he made the stars also. Gen. 1:16)

Another thing to consider is this. Not only did God create the earth first and THEN the rest of what we see up in the sky, but also God will DESTROY everything we see in the sky, and earth will be the LAST thing to go. (as per Revelation, and other scriptures that talk of rolling up the heavens like a scroll.) So that should tell you something too. By using your brain and reading what God says about Creation and putting two and two together, we can figure out answers without having them specifically told, like a list of Q&As.



There are many Christians (and also muslims and people of all other religions) that think its possible that ET life exists (including the vatican i believe). They also are true to the bible.


What do you mean by "true to the Bible?" They obviously don't believe the account God gave of how he created everything. We all know the Vatican believes in evolution, but who ever thought they were Christian in the first place?


It seems to me u base it on the fact that the bible omits to mention ET life.
But the bible omits many things. It omits supernova, dinosaurs, nonlocality, etc. It simply isnt a book that contains all information of the entire universe.


I wouldn't say the Bible omits ET life at all. You can read the Bible and see what importance God puts on the stars. According to God, the stars are less important than our sun and moon, which He created BEFORE he made the stars. God considers the stars less important than Earth's grass, trees, and plants "after their kind." God considers an apple growing on earth to be more important than the stars. Otherwise, God would have created the stars FIRST, THEN the planets, THEN separated the water from the dry land and created all the plants "after their kind." And what purpose did God say he created the stars FOR? "to give light upon the earth, to divide the day from the night, for signs, seans and days and years." (Gen. 1:14)

So I think there's a whole lot of information there from the ONE WHO SHOULD KNOW.



[edit on 2-10-2005 by resistance]



posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by resistance
God said he made the earth first, the sun, moon and stars on the fourth day. The stars were like an afterthought. i.e. ,"and he made the stars also. Gen. 1:16)


So u think the word 'also' means that the stars were an afterthought.
This is just ur own interpretation of the bible.


By using your brain and reading what God says about Creation and putting two and two together, we can figure out answers without having them specifically told, like a list of Q&As.


Thats called interpreting the bible. People can do it in thousands of different ways.



What do you mean by "true to the Bible?" They obviously don't believe the account God gave of how he created everything. We all know the Vatican believes in evolution, but who ever thought they were Christian in the first place?


True to the bible, means that they believe the bible is true. Even people who take the bible literally do not necessarilly believe that it says anything about ET life.



I wouldn't say the Bible omits ET life at all. You can read the Bible and see what importance God puts on the stars. According to God, the stars are less important than our sun and moon, which He created BEFORE he made the stars. God considers the stars less important than Earth's grass, trees, and plants "after their kind." God considers an apple growing on earth to be more important than the stars. Otherwise, God would have created the stars FIRST, THEN the planets, THEN separated the water from the dry land and created all the plants "after their kind." And what purpose did God say he created the stars FOR? "to give light upon the earth, to divide the day from the night, for signs, seans and days and years." (Gen. 1:14)


Simply because something happened BEFORE something else, does not make it more important. For instance god must have made oxygen before humans, or else humans would suffocate. Does that make oxygen more important than humans?

Even if it does, it still says nothing at all about ET life. So what if aliens are less important?



posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrentReznor
Back on topic,

I vote A + C

why,, I have seen in the last 3 months 2 Clearly intellegently controled objects, far out of the reach of human capabilaties, these were nuts n bolt things. so with all respect my mind is made up and I have no doubts whatsoeverand Nobody can take that away from me, its the best feeling in the world.

I got no proof whatsoever aswell, (damn camcorder batteries)


p.s. you can't have C without A


(resistance, no, these were not flying angels.)







[edit on 1-10-2005 by TrentReznor]


You've got me really curious. Will you share what you saw?



posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 06:29 PM
link   
Plop, I misspoke myself above. I didn't mean to say there is no oxygen or water on any planet in the universe. I don't know that to be the case. There may be.
I suppose it's possible there's even life on a planet "out there" but if there is it's because God decided to create all these creatures -- maybe another Garden of Eden without humans. Put humans in the Garden, give them free will, and they will mess up again.

But the main reason I think not is because it's plain from Scripture that Earth is the center of everything, and even when God destroys the universe he will do so BEFORE he destroys the earth. So the earth is the first to be created and the last to be destroyed. That should tell you something.



posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by resistance
Plop, I misspoke myself above. I didn't mean to say there is no oxygen or water on any planet in the universe.I don't know that to be the case. There may be.

There was water on mars, as well as solidified carbon dioxide. So both exist off earth.
Mars fact sheet from nasa


The rest is just arguing semantics, that have been covered over and over, and I would hate to see this poll hijacked over it. However, I just have to add, the earth is not the center of universe, nor it's own solar system (I find it very hard to believe that this is even being serious).

I voted D. Not only have we seen several intelligent species in the leading up to Homo sapiens as well as other intelligent though perhaps not intellectual species such dolphins, We have had two intellectual speices co-existing in the neanderthals and the early Homo sapiens.

[edit on 2-10-2005 by silentlonewolf]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join