Answers in Genesis and Proxima Centauri b

You already know that Proxima Centauri Has Planet in Habitable Zone. A day after we posted that we gave you the reaction of the Discovery Institute: Proxima b Is the Big Test. They say that if there’s no life on Proxima b, then Darwinism is doomed! Then we gave you some Baptist Reactions to Proxima b Discovery.

Now we bring you what you’ve all been waiting for — the reaction from Answers in Genesis (AIG) — the creationist ministry of Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the Australian entrepreneur who has become the ayatollah of Appalachia. Their new post is Proxima Centauri b: An Earth-Like Planet?

It was written by Danny Faulkner. Here’s AIG’s biographical information about him. They say he taught physics and astronomy until he joined AIG. His undergraduate degree is from Bob Jones University. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis. It begins well enough:

A little more than two decades ago, astronomers discovered the first known exoplanets, planets orbiting other stars. The current exoplanet tally is about 3,500, but that number is sure to grow. The impetus for the search for exoplanets is to find planets on which life is possible. The vast majority of extrasolar planet discoveries clearly are hostile to life. However, from time to time there are reports of the discovery of a possible earth-like planet. This is the situation of Proxima Centauri b, announced on August 24, 2016.

We know all that, but it’s good to see that even AIG’s creation scientists are willing to accept at least that much of reality. Then Danny provides some basic information about how it’s decided that a planet is in its star’s habitable zone and the conditions we think are necessary for life. That material comprises the bulk of Danny’s post. It may dazzle AIG’s drooling readers, but it’s basic astronomy, so we’ll skip it.

Things don’t get interesting until near the end. Danny says:

Evolutionists understandably are excited each time an extrasolar planet, such as Proxima Centauri b, shows any possibility of being earth-like.

Yes, and at the same time, the creationist descend into panic mode. They immediately start thinking: What if life on Earth isn’t unique after all? If that were true, then their fragile worldview — which is entirely based on that of the pre-scientific Mesopotamian civilization of 3,000 years ago, will be wrong! Oh the horror! After regaining his composure, Danny tells us:

In their worldview, there is nothing special about the earth, because if the earth is special, that suggests design. Therefore, the vast majority of evolutionists assume that there must be many earth-like planets, with life abounding in many places.

Actually, a number of Earth-like extra-solar planets wouldn’t suggest design, but rather, the universality of the laws of nature. But Danny prefers to think that we’re desperately trying to avoid evidence of design. He continues:

However, it doesn’t take very long to realize that each of these supposed earth-like planets have severe problems that reveal that they are anything but earth-like.

Then why were they created? Danny doesn’t worry about that, and he explains why:

What do biblical creationists expect? In the creation account of Genesis 1, we see God taking great care to create a world for man’s habitation. This is explicitly restated in Isaiah 45:18.

We had to look up that Isaiah reference. Here it is, King James version, of course:

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.

Which brings us to the end of Danny’s post:

From this we conclude that the earth truly is unique and that there are no earth-like planets. We find that the best science available agrees with this.

The matter is now settled. Although there appear to be millions of extra-solar planets out there in our galaxy alone, none are like Earth. That’s the final word from AIG, so you know it’s The Truth.

Copyright © 2016. 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

8 responses to “Answers in Genesis and Proxima Centauri b

  1. “What do biblical creationists expect? In the creation account of Genesis 1, we see God taking great care to create a world for man’s habitation.”
    What prevents his deity from creating other worlds for other beings? If his deity can take any shape or form, humanoid or otherwise (which would scare the pants off creationists no doubt), why can’t other habitable planets have been created to suit other creatures? Why must they all be in earth-like in form and habitability? Such inhabitants might utter something like it was said in Xssolt 140:21. Better yet, these Dxyntign inhabitants might simply recognize it was not a deity but simply basic natural processes that created them. Nah, too scary a proposition for creationists, for then we wouldn’t be unique.

  2. In their worldview, there is nothing special about the earth, because if the earth is special, that suggests design.

    I think most “evolutionists,” and other people in general, think the earth is very special. Therefore we should take care of it.

    Whether or not it is unique is another question.

  3. What I find ironic is that apologists frequently say things like: “How does the atheist know that there is no god? Have they examined the entire universe?”

    Yet they have no problem saying that there are no other earth-like planets anywhere in the universe. And they know that how?

  4. Those people are nuts when it comes to observable things in nature that go against their worldview. See how one such deals with pics of galaxies colliding:

  5. In the creation account of Genesis 1, we see God taking great care to create a world for man’s habitation.

    Then why is so much of it — indeed, a growing proportion — uninhabitable by humans?

  6. Actually, there’s a fundamentalist explanation for that: all of nature was corrupted by the sin of Adam and Eve, and the world is growing worse as it approaches The End, when the whole universe we know will be destroyed and replaced by a new heaven and a new earth inhabited by immortal fundamentalist Christians. Ugh.

  7. In the creation account of Genesis 1, we see God taking great care to create a world for man’s habitation.
    And despite the great care, it turns out that it takes intervention contrary to the laws of nature (for example, the laws of probability) for there to be life on Earth. Even the omniscient and omnipotent designer couldn’t come up with a competent design for life, but had to resort to miracles.

  8. The gaps are getting tinier. First the Earth, yea, us! Then, uh-oh, goes around the Sun. Oh, well. Then the Sun is just a star in the galaxy. Oops! Then the galaxy is one of billions of galaxies. Yikes! And, now, it seems that part of stellar formation is a cluster of planets, quite possibly around every star. OMG we are so screwed!

    This is where the Disco Tute’s vaunted expertise in probability should come into play. Given what is now known and speculated about planets and their formation, what is the actual probability distribution of rocky planets within a “habitable zone” or whatever zone you want?

    I won’t hold my breath, even though it’s mostly nitrogen. With trace burrito.