Jump to content


Photo

Prometheus: Will The Neo-Darwinians Turn To The E.t. Theory After All?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
13 replies to this topic

#1 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2184 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 62
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 07 November 2012 - 05:50 PM

After viewing the new movie 'Prometheus' it occurred to me that the strict rationalist, neo-Darwinian theory of evolution, being the utter failure that it is in answering ultimate questions, may bring many of that persuasion into the fold of the E.T. theory...that being that space aliens or beings from another dimension 'planted' life here aeons ago and (a la 2011 a Space Odyssey) we are merely the product of extra-terrestrial genius after all.

What think ye, my brethren? Will the neo-evo's like Richard Dawkins, P.Z. Meyers, & Ed Babinski's of our world come into that reality (kicking and screaming every inch of the way, no doubt) or will their movment die off to the likes of Chris Carter's (X-Files) & Steven Speilberg's of the E.T. ideology? Just consider that any theory of origins is better than "God did it" in the minds of our fiercest enemies on the scientific left.

I say that, if the Lord tarries, the old dogs will die off and the newer, younger ones will come to the E.T. theory as the failure of neo-theo becomes more and more evident an unsatisfactory theory.

Posted Image Consider also that those who promoted this idea: i.e. Arthur C. Clarke, Stanley Kubrick, Carl Sagan (in revealed in 'Contact'), and Gene Roddenberry were strong atheists and evolutionists but they all thought fondly of the idea that Extra-terrestrials were involved in our distant past. P.S. sorry for the typos. I had real technical problems just trying to correct them.
  • gilbo12345 likes this

#2 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5794 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 09 November 2012 - 07:21 AM

Yeah I thought about this when I watched the movie too, though I am appreciative that its not anti-God :D

#3 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2184 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 62
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 09 November 2012 - 08:52 AM

Yeah I thought about this when I watched the movie too, though I am appreciative that its not anti-God Posted Image


Thanks. But I will suggest here that it would be just as evil for skeptics of scripture to believe that visiting 'E.T.'s' are 'god's' and worship them as it is for atheists to deny the existence of God. I personally think that atheism, as a movement, will come to an end before the coming terrible tribulation is even half over.

Best wishes.

#4 Jesse

Jesse

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 20
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Connecticut

Posted 10 November 2012 - 10:27 PM

I agree. I thought the same when I watched Prometheus.

*sigh* I guess they are going to try even harder to find alien life...

#5 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5794 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 10 November 2012 - 10:29 PM

Wouldn't the search for alien life be unscientific since we have no "evidence" of them... I find it ironic that one claims God as unscientific for the same reasons.

#6 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2184 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 62
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 11 November 2012 - 05:16 PM

Wouldn't the search for alien life be unscientific since we have no "evidence" of them... I find it ironic that one claims God as unscientific for the same reasons.


That depends on who you talk to I suppose. But the tide against E.T. intervention/involvment began to turn about 2 to 3 decades ago.

We will see what happens.

#7 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5794 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 11 November 2012 - 06:00 PM

That depends on who you talk to I suppose. But the tide against E.T. intervention/involvment began to turn about 2 to 3 decades ago.

We will see what happens.


I just think its a matter of favourites ;)

#8 agnophilo123

agnophilo123

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 26
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Ohio

Posted 12 November 2012 - 07:40 AM

It's a sci-fi movie, relax.

#9 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5794 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 12 November 2012 - 08:42 AM

It's a sci-fi movie, relax.


Movies and other media are powerful ways to get ideas across to the public, however as I said, I'm just thankful it wasn't "in your face" anti-God. I don't mind stuff with anti-god stuff in it, but when it gets preachy then I get annoyed.

#10 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2184 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 62
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 13 November 2012 - 07:02 AM

It's a sci-fi movie, relax.


You need to get unrelaxed and deal with it. Since there is no evidence for slow and gradual naturalisitic evolution then what is left to the skeptic except the E.T. theory that was brought to the public by (gasp!) scientist Carl Sagan, atheist Arthur C. Clarke, Stanley Kubrick, Steven Speilberg, and Gene Roddenberry? I assure you that in the end of things that theory will be preferable to "God did it"(wink).

#11 agnophilo123

agnophilo123

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 26
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Ohio

Posted 13 November 2012 - 07:48 AM

Movies and other media are powerful ways to get ideas across to the public, however as I said, I'm just thankful it wasn't "in your face" anti-God. I don't mind stuff with anti-god stuff in it, but when it gets preachy then I get annoyed.

Here for once, I actually agree with you. I liked the movie "saved" because it had a secular perspective but wasn't preachy or out to make either "side" out to be good or bad.

#12 agnophilo123

agnophilo123

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 26
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Ohio

Posted 13 November 2012 - 07:52 AM

You need to get unrelaxed and deal with it. Since there is no evidence for slow and gradual naturalisitic evolution then what is left to the skeptic except the E.T. theory that was brought to the public by (gasp!) scientist Carl Sagan, atheist Arthur C. Clarke, Stanley Kubrick, Steven Speilberg, and Gene Roddenberry? I assure you that in the end of things that theory will be preferable to "God did it"(wink).

You need to get unrelaxed and deal with it. Since there is no evidence for slow and gradual naturalisitic evolution then what is left to the skeptic except the E.T. theory that was brought to the public by (gasp!) scientist Carl Sagan, atheist Arthur C. Clarke, Stanley Kubrick, Steven Speilberg, and Gene Roddenberry? I assure you that in the end of things that theory will be preferable to "God did it"(wink).

Actually it is preferrable, but not because of bias against the notion of a "god", but because an evolved "designer" could, itself, have an explanation. And clearly an explanation that goes all the way to the beginning of biological complexity is preferrable to one that does not, at least in terms of how much it explains. Emotionally though many people will still want to believe in a god that dotes over them and will send them to paradise. ET is logically simpler than a deity, and abiogenesis is simpler than ET. So while there is no proof of any of the above my money's on abiogenesis. And there actually is evidence to support abiogenesis, though it's not conclusive at this time.

#13 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2184 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 62
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 13 November 2012 - 07:58 AM

Actually it is preferrable, but not because of bias against the notion of a "god", but because an evolved "designer" could, itself, have an explanation. And clearly an explanation that goes all the way to the beginning of biological complexity is preferrable to one that does not, at least in terms of how much it explains. Emotionally though many people will still want to believe in a god that dotes over them and will send them to paradise. ET is logically simpler than a deity, and abiogenesis is simpler than ET. So while there is no proof of any of the above my money's on abiogenesis. And there actually is evidence to support abiogenesis, though it's not conclusive at this time.


"clearly an explanation that goes all the way to the beginning of biological complexity."

Give an example of that biological complexity...of life generating from non-living matter by mere natural processes.

#14 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5794 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 13 November 2012 - 08:33 AM

"clearly an explanation that goes all the way to the beginning of biological complexity."

Give an example of that biological complexity...of life generating from non-living matter by mere natural processes.


Gets popcorn Posted Image
  • Bonedigger likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users