We’ve previously described the positions of the major creationist websites on the existence of extra-terrestrial life (see Mars Landing Sunday — Creationist Nightmare?). But we haven’t yet seen their reactions to NASA’s successful landing on Mars.
Now we have the first reaction. It’s from Answers in Genesis (AIG), one of the major sources of young-earth creationist wisdom. AIG is the online creationist ministry of Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the Australian entrepreneur who has become the ayatollah of Appalachia.
AIG’s post is The Curious Case of Martian Mania. Their condescending title suggests that there’s something wrong with anyone who’s excited over NASA’s accomplishment. The article explains to their faithful, brain-dead followers that there’s nothing to fear from anything that the new Martian rover may discover. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us:
With the successful on-target Mars landing of the robotic rover dubbed Curiosity, a normally staid group of engineers and scientists erupted with joy on Sunday evening as a fruit of their labor was achieved. People watching from around the world vicariously shared in the excitement — and still are as the videos of the tense moments before touchdown are re-watched.
How ridiculous that anyone would have such a reaction! AIG continues:
Curiosity is essentially a roving laboratory. Its mission: to search for evidence life could have once existed on Mars. While the feats demanded by landing Curiosity are an early rehearsal for those required for a possible manned mission in the 2030s, the quest to find evidence for life is at the heart of the present mission.
And creation scientists like those at AIG know what a foolish mission it is! Then they give us some excerpts from one of their earlier articles on the Mars mission:
Though no Mars lander has ever found any evidence of life, past or present, NASA researchers are hopeful.
Silly scientists! Let’s read on:
Of course, the presence of small organic molecules would not prove life ever existed on Mars. Organic molecules, thought to be the products of spontaneous chemical reactions, have been found in meteorites. … The researchers believe that larger organic molecules — those with ten or more carbon atoms — would be more suggestive of a biological origin but would also be more likely to have broken down over time.
It’s a fool’s mission! NASA should devote their resources to searching for something real, like Noah’s Ark! AIG continues:
[T]he researchers suggest the rover explore “young” craters — those they believe to be less than 10 million years old. … The idea of course is that the surface inside a fresher crater has had less time exposed to cosmic radiation than an undisturbed nearby older surface.
That makes sense, doesn’t it? Not to AIG. Here’s more:
The methods of estimating the dates of events on Mars are as subject to unverifiable assumptions as methods from estimating the age of the earth — and even more so, actually, since there has been no radiometric dating of material ever performed on actual Martian samples.
AIG uses that argument to dismiss evidence for an old Earth, so it’s no problem for them to dismiss the same kind of evidence on Mars. Moving along:
Regardless of age, it does make sense that any organic molecules beneath the surface would have experienced less total exposure to radiation than undisturbed landscapes. Yet the presence of organic molecules does not prove life exists or ever existed on Mars.
See? Evidence means nothing to those people. Another excerpt:
While the Bible does not say that God didn’t create life on other planets, the Bible does tell us God created all life on earth during the first six days of Creation week about 6,000 years ago.
Yes, we know. On with the article:
However, evolutionists generally think that life could have evolved anywhere conditions are right. They therefore believe that finding life’s footprint on Mars would confirm life evolved there just as they believe it did on earth.
And that’s the creationists’ greatest fear. But they’re ready for it:
However, no mechanism has ever been observed on earth or anywhere else whereby life could randomly emerge from non-living elements.
So far that’s true, and the creationists know they’re living on borrowed time. Until that happens, they’ve got to fend off the possibility that life may be found elsewhere. Here’s how they plan to handle it:
And if life were ever to be found on Mars, knowing it was there would not prove how it got there. Assuming it was not a contaminant from earth, its existence would just be a testimony to the fact that God can create life anyplace He chooses.
That’s weak — very weak — but it’s the best they can do. Hey — no one ever said that denying reality was easy.
Copyright © 2012. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.