FOR your weekend contemplation, we bring you the view from the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) — truly the fountainhead of creationist wisdom. They have a strange new article at their website: Martian Lake Still Won’t Lead to Life. That’s a provocative title.
The creationists’ understanding of the cosmos must be awesome indeed for them to make such a forthright prediction. Here are a few excerpts, to which we added some bold font for emphasis:
Evolutionary belief holds as a central tenet that life emerged and developed “naturally,” even though mere natural laws of chemistry and physics are insufficient causes.
So many errors, so little time. Darwin’s theory of evolution is concerned with the emergence and proliferation of species over time. The existence of life on earth is obviously a requirement for evolution, but knowing the precise manner of life’s original emergence isn’t necessary for the theory. Similarly, the science of chemistry functions rather well without knowing the exact origin of matter. As for the alleged insufficiency of “mere” natural laws, that’s a declaration of faith. There’s no evidence to sustain it.
Okay, that was ICR’s first sentence. Let’s read on:
Liquid water is essential for life. Thus, evidence of water on Mars is intensely interesting to those desperate to find the conditions for life somewhere other than earth, since such a discovery would be seen as bolstering evolutionary belief.
“Desperate”? Is anyone out there desperate for such findings? If so, raise your hands. [Curmudgeon looks, but sees no hands.] Does anyone out there want to find life on Mars to “bolster” his evolutionary “belief”? If so, get ’em up. [Again, no hands.]
We’ll skip the next couple of paragraphs. If we bothered to quote them we’d feel obligated to verify or dispute their contents. That isn’t difficult, but for the article’s principal point such material isn’t necessary. Therefore, let’s get right to ICR’s inspiring conclusion:
Considering the scientific evidence from Mars, and especially considering the record of origins passed down to mankind from the Creator in the Bible, it is clear that life was, is, and will remain earth-dependent.
Your Curmudgeon is confused. Our understanding is that astronomers haven’t yet written off the possibility of finding some evidence of life on Mars, even if it’s now extinct. Besides, there’s more to the solar system than Mars, and there’s more to the universe than the solar system. So ICR’s prediction — which goes way beyond Mars — seems a bit premature.
As for scripture — the entire bible mentions the planets only once — in 2 Kings 23:5. According to the King James version:
And he put down the idolatrous priests, whom the kings of Judah had ordained to burn incense in the high places in the cities of Judah, and in the places round about Jerusalem; them also that burned incense unto Baal, to the sun, and to the moon, and to the planets, and to all the host of heaven.
The only thing we’re told about the planets is that it’s idolatrous to burn incense unto them — something we’d never dream of doing. We find no mention that the planets are lifeless, nor do we find any claim that life exists on earth alone. But if the creationists want to make such a prediction, and will let their creation “science” stand or fall on the discovery of extra-terrestrial life, that’s fine with us.
Copyright © 2009. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.