It’s a rarity for a religious outfit to make a clear, verifiable prediction, and when they do they always end up looking silly (see Unfulfilled religious predictions).
Well, we’ve got a great prediction for you today. It comes from the granddaddy of all creationist outfits — the Institute for Creation Research (ICR). They’re the fountainhead of young-earth creationist wisdom. The article in which they make their prediction is Another ‘Goldilocks’ Planet Stirs ET Hopes . Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us and their footnote references omitted:
Astronomers using NASA’s $600-million Kepler telescope — launched in 2009 — examined “2,326 potential planets in its first 16 months of operation.” Of those, Reuters reported that the researchers confirmed that “10 are roughly Earth-size and reside in their host stars’ habitable zones.” One is named Kepler-22b, and its radius is about 2.4 times that of earth.
This is the Reuters article they’re talking about: Planet found orbiting habitable zone of sun-like star. The last time we wrote about this subject was Even More Extra-Solar Planets. Continuing with ICR’s article:
“If Kepler-22b has a surface and a cushion of atmosphere similar to Earth’s, it would be about 72 degrees Fahrenheit,” according to Reuters. And if the planet has a rocky surface, rather than gas like most extrasolar planets, then it might hold liquid water near the surface.
That doesn’t impress the creation scientists at ICR. Let’s read on:
But even if this were verified, which is not currently possible, liquid water would be only one of hundreds of conditions required for life. Given enough outer space objects to investigate, it makes sense that at least some of them would inhabit the habitable zone. So, why all the excitement over this particular planet?
The answer is the possibility of “intelligent aliens.”
Aha! Now we’re getting somewhere. And as you’ll see, ICR isn’t necessarily worried about “intelligent” life out there — it’s any life at all. We continue:
Funding from the U.S. Air Force recently put the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) program back in operation. Now, SETI will focus its Allen Telescope Array on NASA’s Kepler discoveries. SETI director Jill Tarter told Reuters, “As soon as we find a different, a separate, an independent example of life somewhere else, we’re going to know that it’s ubiquitous throughout the universe.”
Yes, that’s right. But the prospect is deeply troubling to ICR. They say:
And that would essentially vindicate evolution and nullify creation.
Oh no! That would be horrible! Wait — ICR even has a scripture quote to support what they say:
This is because the Bible describes only the earth as being habitable: “For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.” [Isaiah 45:18]
They even have more authority:
Extraterrestrial life would also contradict the Bible’s claim that “Christ died once for all” to pay for the sins of humanity (Hebrews 10:10), since to be fair, He would have to die as many times as there are planets inhabited with intelligent life.
It looks like the SETI project, if it’s successful, would disprove ICR’s primitive interpretation of scripture. But in case you’re in doubt, at the end of their article is ICR’s bold prediction:
If the Bible is right, there should be no life that originated in outer space. If, instead, naturalistic theories are correct, then life should also have evolved elsewhere in the universe. So far, nobody is out there, and Kepler-22b looks just like one of “the worlds [that] were framed by the word of God.”
So there you are, dear reader. You read what ICR said — if life is found elsewhere in the universe, then ICR is wrong and evolution is true. It’s SETI vs ICR. (Actually, it’s reality vs ICR.) Place your bets, ladies and gentlemen.
See also: AIG Accepts Possibility of Alien Life.
Copyright © 2011. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
I won’t get into whether or not this is what the Bible actually says, or means, or whatever. That’s never been important, especially to the IDers. Still, I’m not a poker player, but I imagine that this is the “all in” play. They’ve flat-out said that the Bible can be wrong. Not that that would change anything on their end if life were found elsewhere. If life were found, they’d find some way to placate their funders to keep the $$$ flowing.
I see it as a no risk statement. Certainly not in the writer’s
lifetime.
Warp speeds are still fictional…right? No chance of humans ever
traveling to such distant places. We just don’t live that long.
No chance of humans ever
traveling to such distant places. We just don’t live that long.
We don’t have to travel to a distant star to see what elements it is made of, and we don’t need to travel to a distant star to see if it has an oxygen atmosphere and water.
The ICR can make the claim with respect to planets around other stars because it will be many years before we develop the technological means to isolate the spectra of an earth-sized planet at those distances.
However, there are possibilities much closer to home. Mars also orbits at the edge of the Sun’s habitable zone – it is just too small to have retained its atmosphere. However, it had an atmosphere and liquid water during its early history, and we may find water and hardy microbes living under the surface today, or perhaps trace fossils of prior life.
Europa has an ocean of water under its surface ice, Ganymede has a layer of warm ice (at least – possibly slushy water) under its surface ice, Enceladus has geysers of liquid water containing complex hydrocarbons, and some people consider even Titan to be a possible habitat for exotic forms of life.
ICR is making a very foolish bet. They would be wiser to limit their claim to intelligent life, which may in fact be extremely rare and which we may never detect – at least within the evolutionary lifetime of the ICR’s particular religious belief.
Second try: This has been the ICR’s position ffor a long time. I recall reading this more than 10 years ago, probably through talkorigins. I wondered to myself at the time what their response would be when (not ‘if’) life was found on Mars. And what if the Mars indigens’ DNA-equivalent were completely different from our DNA? Would they try to redefine life to exclude the newcomers?
So apparently omnipotence doesn’t cover the possibility of dying once for each planet with life – or at least intelligent life. It’s good to know that even omnipotence has it’s limits.
@Bob Carroll: “Would they try to redefine life to exclude the newcomers?”
There is a great science fiction series touring the solar system by Ben Bova where life is found on multiple other bodies including Mars, the atmosphere of Jupiter, even on Venus. On Mars they actually find the remains of an extinct civilization. The religious conservatives back on Earth insist that everything that’s been found could be ‘interpreted’ as being produced by non-biological processes. Interesting take on the problem.
The fundies will not give up. They will insist on their narrow views to their dying breaths, especially if there is any possibility of continued monetary benefit.
Tomato Addict says:
“So apparently omnipotence doesn’t cover the possibility of dying once for each planet with life – or at least intelligent life. It’s good to know that even omnipotence has it’s limits.”
Yeah, that was kind of my reaction. That, and their use of ” to be fair,” gave me this image of god as a kind of harried but (omni?)patient father-figure (Ward Cleaver?), surrounded by hundreds of clamoring alien life forms, saying “Ok, Gleeglegorp, you guys are next, Jesus is on his way; put your hand down, m25ntthrp#, ya’ll are on the list; yes, I SEE you, puppeteer, here’s a Moses to keep you occupied for a while.”
Tomato Addict says:
That limitation is strange. The sin of Adam & Eve affected the entire universe, presumably instantaneously. (Jason Lisle argues that starlight can arrive at earth instantaneously, but he doesn’t deal with the speed of “The Curse” working the same way in reverse.) Anyway, if Original Sin can mess up the whole universe in one instant, then surely all life can be saved in an instant too.
A strange limitation, but it dodges the necessity of apologizing to the rest of the universe for having committed the original sin. (“Um, sorry we kinda messed things up. Our bad.”)
Someone really ought to ask Jason Lisle to address this issue, if only for the sheer entertainment value of it all.
I, personally, just want to see what they write in an attempt to back-pedal and state that what they wrote was correct and that they “didn’t mean it that way”.