Ken Ham Says There’s No Extraterrestrial Life

We’ve written before about Creationism & Life on Other Worlds, but today we have something special. Your Curmudgeon brings you an article written by Ken Ham with an unexpected title: Do I Believe in UFOs? Absolutely!

You know who Ken Ham is — he’s the impresario of imbecility, the authority on absurdity, the producer of poppycock, the tycoon of tomfoolery. Ol’ Hambo is the creationist entrepreneur behind the infamous Creation Museum — which has become the North American Mecca for the mindless. Ham also operates the creationist website Answers in Genesis (AIG), an excellent source of creation science, where today’s article is posted.

Okay, you know this will be an intellectual treat, so we won’t delay any further. Here are some excerpts from Hambo’s essay, with some bold font added for emphasis:

Occasionally at conferences, someone will ask, “Do you believe in UFOs?”

I usually answer, “Absolutely! Any flying object that can’t be identified is a UFO.” I then continue, “But do I believe in UFOs piloted by Vulcans, Klingons, or Cardassians? The answer is a definite no.” Sorry, Star Trek fans!

What a clever man, and what a brilliant title. Well, he’s got our attention. Now you’re all wondering: Why doesn’t Hambo believe in aliens? Let’s read on:

A number of leading evolutionists, like the late Dr. Carl Sagan, have popularized the idea that there must be intelligent life in outer space. From an evolutionary perspective, it would make sense to suggest such a possibility. People who believe this possibility contend that, if life evolved on earth by natural processes, intelligent life must exist somewhere else in the far reaches of space, given the size of the universe and the millions of possible planets.

One can postulate endlessly about possibilities of intelligent life in outer space, but I believe a Christian worldview, built on the Bible, rejects such a possibility. Here is why. During the six days of creation in Genesis 1, we learn that God created the earth first. On Day 4 He made the sun and the moon for the earth, and then “he made the stars also” (Genesis 1:16).

Sagan was obviously a fool. We continue:

From these passages of Scripture it would seem that the earth is very special — it is center stage. Everything else was made for purposes relating to the earth. For instance, the sun, moon, and stars were made “for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years” (Genesis 1:14).

Yup, that’s what it says. Here’s more:

Many other passages single out the earth as being special, made for humans to dwell on, and a focus of God’s attention, such as Isaiah 66:1: “Thus says the Lord, The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool.”


Such verses certainly imply that the earth is to be considered separate and special when compared with the rest of the universe, so they suggest that the earth alone was created for life. So far, based on man’s limited exploration of space and the solar system, this certainly holds true.

We cannot deny it. Moving along:

But there is a theological reason that I believe rules out the possibility of intelligent life in outer space. The Bible makes it clear in Romans 8:22 that the “whole creation groans” because of Adam’s sin. When Adam fell, the entire universe was affected. Not only this, but one day in the future, there will be “a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away” (Revelation 21:1).

Wow! Another excerpt:

Now here is the problem. If there are intelligent beings on other planets, then they would have been affected by the fall of Adam because the whole creation was affected. So these beings would have to die because death was the penalty for sin. One day their planet will be destroyed by fire during God’s final judgment, but they cannot have salvation because that blessing is given only to humans.


It wouldn’t make sense theologically for there to be other intelligent, physical beings who suffer because of Adam’s sin but cannot be saved.

Yet another powerful reason to deny the existence of aliens! This is amazing stuff, too much to copy here, so we’re skipping a lot. Let’s jump to near the end of the article:

Now, regarding animal life and plants, we cannot be so dogmatic because the Bible does not state whether life exists elsewhere in the universe. Based on the passages about the heavens and earth, however, I strongly suspect that life does not exist elsewhere.

If a great thinker like Ken Ham suspects that there’s nothing out there, that should be good enough for you.

Copyright © 2010. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

16 responses to “Ken Ham Says There’s No Extraterrestrial Life

  1. It wouldn’t make sense theologically for there to be other intelligent, physical beings who suffer because of Adam’s sin but cannot be saved.

    This argument is an old one in Christianity. It was used to argue against the existence of “antipodes”, humans on the other side of the world, and it was the cause of much dispute about the “Indians” that were discovered in various places not hinted at in the Bible.

  2. TomS says:

    It was used to argue against the existence of “antipodes”, humans on the other side of the world …

    These are big problems in creation science. But the scattering after the Tower of Babel probably accounts for it.

  3. HitchensMan

    How can anyone possibly dare to refute such ‘spot-on’ reasoning? Why when you call an Astronomer-Cosmologist like Dr. Carl Sagan an Evolutionist….. you obviously really know what you’re talking about, Right? Because of Ken Ham, I’m going to start throwing out all my science books, including the many Carl Sagan books I own…. because now I know……. they can’t possibly be right! What Carl Sagan actually said was, From a Cosmological point of view, not an Evolutionary point of View is: “The Universe is such a big place…. if there isn’t life out there someplace, it would be a terrible waste of Space!” Apparently this does not apply to Ken Ham though….. there’s a terrible waste of space between his ears! And no one is doing anything about it! [Edited] The Bronze Age men who wrote the ‘Babble’ had little knowledge, at all, of the Universe….. We now know, because of the Science which Ken Ham totally discards, that our Solar System was formed, first, from the collapse of a giant cloud of Gases…. first forming the Sun and then from the left over material the 9 Planets, (8) if you leave Pluto off, all the Asteroids, the Comets, the Moons and whatever else is out there. In other words…. the ‘Babble’ was dead wrong! Without there first being a Sun… there never would have been any Earth or any of the other Planets! Ken Ham is a raging advertisement for the Planet Uranus because that’s where his brains are stored!

  4. Ken Ham should go full geocentrist.

  5. James F says: “Ken Ham should go full geocentrist.”

    But … then he’d lose his credibility.

  6. ShotMonkeys

    Well, he does touch on the point that I think fuels a lot of the anti-evolution mentality…

    Basically, the idea that the Earth of all places, and human beings in particular are so special as to be at the center of all things is just so far out of proportion with the scale and scope of the universe. It is similar to what Feynman said about the beliefs of religion as being “too local, too provincial.” For the creationist, however, this is a comforting thought… that of all the things that God is said to have created, somehow, the affairs of our lives as individuals is the big deal. Yeah, God _could_ concern himself with the impending inflation of the sun when it goes red giant…. but no, the elephant in the room is whether or not you are gay or straight.

    This sort of sends the message to the ego that “I’m special”, and die-hard creationists can’t let their ego be damaged by the impression that we’re one more creature in the massive fight for survival. The emotive value of that self-elevation is basically considered by them to be greater than the logic and reason which can potentially lead you to realities that may be hard to take in. And they can claim that it’s not their own wishful thinking by applying their celestial “talk to the hand” showing “It’s not ME who’s saying that… It’s GOD!!!”

    I’d wager that if evolution somehow excluded human beings, there would never have been any religious reactionary measures against it. There probably wouldn’t even have been a Scopes trial, let alone a Dover trial.

  7. Ken Ham – a present day living, walking, talking, and writing example of 14th century man. I think he’s a good archeological study; saves on all the field trips and digging.

  8. It’s probably a good thing that the universe is so big yet empty. How else could it contain something as big as Ham’s ego? And similarly, contain so little in it…

  9. Gabriel Hanna

    I do agree with Ham–and Isaac Asimov–on what constitutes a UFO.

    I used be a TA for a course on extraterrestrial life. The upshot is that on Earth life is found in all kinds of places–on the sea floor vents, and there are bacteria that live deep in basalt–where a hundred years ago no one would have thought it could be. It could very well be common in the universe.

    As for alien civilizations, it wouldn’t surprise me if there were none. Life is chemistry, and chemistry is the same everywhere, but the evolution of intelligence is something we know almost nothing about.

  10. Gabriel Hanna says:

    As for alien civilizations, it wouldn’t surprise me if there were none.

    For most of its history, even Earth had none. Intelligence is a natural (although not inevitable) development, but it takes a load of time, and it requires a planet with long periods when there are no catastrophic collisions, etc. Technology is the next step, and for most of Earth’s brief period of having intelligence, there was no technological society. The “norm” for intelligent life elsewhere could be something like Babylonia for millions of years.

    Lotta guesswork, virtually no data. [That describes our attempts to estimate the existence of alien civilizations.]

  11. retiredsciguy

    SC: “Technology is the next step, and for most of Earth’s brief period of having intelligence, there was no technological society.”

    And let’s keep in mind that technology requires hands, or at least some efficient way to manipulate things around us. Porpoises are highly intelligent, but they are not capable of developing technology — no hands.

    My own personal guess, for what it’s worth, is that given the vastness of the universe, there’s probably a lot of life out there, but technological societies of intelligent life are rare. The planet harboring intelligence needs to have some mechanism that acts as a governor to ensure long periods of stability, moderating the planetary climate enough so that organisms have the time to adapt to change through evolution.

    Earth and the moon are essentially a double-planet system, with the moon being large enough to stabilize the degree of tilt of the earth’s axis over long periods of time. That, and the earth being the right distance from the sun, and the sun itself being stable and long-lived (and not a double star), all contribute to what must be a rare set of circumstances in the universe.

    Now, there’s no way to know if these rare circumstances are required for intelligent, technological life to exist. However, it can be argued that such life would be much less likely without these conditions.

    But back to Ken Ham’s arguments. The man is so deeply invested in his defense of his literal interpretation of the bible that nothing — nothing — he says regarding science should be given much weight.

  12. Here’s a list of all the evidence we have for the existence of intelligent extraterrestrial life:

    OK, hope that cleared things up.

  13. Gabriel Hanna

    The “norm” for intelligent life elsewhere could be something like Babylonia for millions of years. Lotta guesswork, virtually no data.

    A base slander on the Babylonians, I might point out.

    If you can read a clock, thank a Babylonian.

  14. Gabriel Hanna says: “A base slander on the Babylonians …”

    This is a tough crowd. But to clarify, when I said “Lotta guesswork, virtually no data.” I was referring to our attempts to estimate the existence of alien civilizations. I wasn’t speaking of the Babylonians in that sentence. I’ll go back and edit my comment to make that clear.

  15. Gabriel Hanna

    SC, I thought you were saying that the Babylonians didn’t have technology. They had quite a lot, and they (and the Sumerians before them) were arguably the first civilization.

    If you’d said “millions of years of being hunter-gatherers” I’d not have quibbled. Because that is, of course, true, and we still have them today.

  16. Gabriel Hanna says:

    SC, I thought you were saying that the Babylonians didn’t have technology.

    I didn’t word it well. I was thinking of our technology — electronics, etc. We’re sending signals out to the whole galaxy, and we’re also listening for alien signals. However, if there’s intelligent life out there, but their technology stays at the Babylonian level (or Egyptian, Athenian, etc.), we’d probably never be able to detect them.