UFOs, What They Are Not
Publication #227 January 200
UFOS, WHAT THEY ARE NOT
By C.A. HONEY
During a recent search across the web using only one keyword, “UFO,” I found that the sites under that title alone exceeded several hundred in number. Thousands of others appeared using the keyword “Flying Saucers.” I’m sure many other sites are listed under various keywords utilized by the myriads of other names ascribed to the things I describe as “Flying saucers,” “UFOs,” “spaceships,” and the like.
Hundreds of pages have been written supposedly giving factual details about what all these sightings actually are. In checking them out we find that in nearly all cases the writers are describing some other persons statements, from many different sources, without a shred of proof to back up their conclusions. Some of these conclusions are more fantastic than believing in spacecraft from other planets.
If the web page originated from a psychic source, a psychic interpretation would be given. If the web page was from a skeptic’s viewpoint no amount of detail could explain the sighting in a manner that would make it believable. If the web page originated from a minister, or some church group or cult, complete details would be given as if they were provable facts and that all their conclusions were “set in concrete” and should never be challenged.
To answer the questions, “Do UFOs actually exist? What are they?”- All agreed they actually exist, but all wandered off into discussions of definitions created by Hollywood and the various science fiction movies that have influenced all of us during the past 40 or 50 years.
After that their discussion continued along the vein of ancient sightings from hundreds of years ago to recent years, including sightings by famous men such as our former presidents or famous astronomers. After listing astronauts, FBI agents, pilots, radar specialists, policemen, and military personnel, they proceeded to discount about 90% of the sightings as having probable explanations without resorting to “little green men” around every corner.
Actually, I think all of us can agree that 95% to 97% of all reported sightings, and/or other UFO or abductee claims, have explanations other than an interplanetary source. I think nearly all people would agree that is a reasonable statement. One of the many explanations is to the effect that the sightings were of secret aircraft flown by the United States Air Force, or by another country, and therefore of an unusual physical design that was unidentified by the viewer because of its new and never before seen configuration.
While in this day and age such an explanation is at least a reasonable hypothesis, it certainly was not a reasonable explanation a few years ago. For one thing, no country would fly super secret vehicles openly in other areas of the world where they might fall into the hands of their enemies at any time. I am not talking about secret spy planes that were flown over Russia or other countries a few years ago. The planes, like the U2 for instance, were flown at extremely high altitudes and purposely were kept as secret as possible by such heights.
I am talking about sightings at low altitudes, in populated areas, sighted by dozens to hundreds of people at one time, and obviously not attempting to remain unknown. I don’t think any one would argue that point. In some instances hundreds of people were involved, and dozens of videos were filmed by witnesses in widely separated areas. Any person with any intelligence at all would not attempt to deny such sightings, or say that all those who witnessed it were victims of mass hallucinations.
Many of our technical people, scientists, astronomers, physicists, you name it, sincerely believe that it is impossible for UFOs to exist as real physical ships because of the astronomical distances between stars in space. In that they are correct. It is unlikely that ships are coming here from other star systems, but it certainly is not impossible. We cannot base our examination of these claims on strictly our own technical abilities at the present time. We don’t know what technical advantages they might have over us, but for the purpose of this paper let us assume it is true. We will assume that the argument is genuine.
The nearest star to earth is at least 25 trillion miles away, according to our best measurements, or guesses if you will. This means that at the speed of light, 300,000 kilometers per second, a one way trip would take over four years to reach us, and of course, that same length of time to return. That could be done as trips here on the earth back in prior centuries were sometimes years long before explorers reached their homeport again. But we are going to discard this explanation also.
Another claim that has no bearing in fact is that stated by Gordon Creighton of the British publication FLYING SAUCER REVIEW. He published the statement that “There seems to be no evidence yet that any of these craft or beings originate from outer space.” All kinds of evidence has existed for years that these ships could be from outer space, but no way has ever been found to prove it. In my own opinion I don’t believe they come from outer space either. That is, if you define outer space as outside our own planetary system.
The conclusion of many of these scientists is stated as if they believed these “ships” or “beings” are possibly coming here from another dimension, or from a parallel universe. I only have one comment on this ridiculous idea. If it is impossible for them to believe that the ships and the “beings” flying them are as physical and as real as you or I, then why or how can they possibly believe in even wilder or ridiculous theories such as from a parallel universe or another dimension? These theories exist only in the realm of science fiction and no clue has ever been found to suggest they might even be remotely possible to exist. Why would a man of normal intelligence be willing to accept theories as possibly factual when they are “wilder” than the original idea that UFOs are interplanetary? Your guess is as good as mine on that one.
Then we come to one of the most ridiculous explanations ever offered. Even though it comes from people who are very closed minded, it is hard to believe that their ideas are genuine products of any serious thought. I am referring to the preachers, and leaders of various religious cults, who maintain they have all the answers. They believe that “flying saucers” are piloted by “demons” and led by Satan. Anyone not accepting their statements on this aspect is immediately insulted and said to be “a tool or instrument” of Satan and serious scientists are called “minions of Satan.”
They accept as proof of these ridiculous ideas, any “message” from people who claim to be in contact with “spirits” or the “dead” and or who are considered “channels” from “higher beings.” Those making such claims are accepted as legitimate without question or proof. The problem today is that the majority of citizens have been raised in an environment where such ideas are so common that most people accept them as fact and act upon them. Yet no proof at all exists as to their validity.
These cult leaders quote the bible as if it was unquestionably true even though it can be totally discredited as “inspired by God.” To make it worse, they give their own private interpretation of various verses as if they were some type of authority themselves. I wouldn’t object to this if they would consider my own quotations as equally “inspired by God,” but they refuse to even comment on any verse or verses that might go against their private interpretation. The bibles of the earth, Christian and pagan, and there are several different bibles, are valuable histories of ancient times, and are worth studying, but no one can rightly claim that their particular bible is the only one or the only version inspired by God Almighty.
Nearly all of these religious cults conclude that any UFO sighting that might prove genuine must therefore be of satanic origin. They refuse to accept the conclusion that it might be a legitimate vehicle from another planet, piloted by a human looking pilot.
One of the largest of these cults is named WATCHER and even says that the mainstream denominations, including the Roman Catholic Church, are deceived by Satan. They say this about the Catholic Church because it has a history going back to the writings of Cardinal Nicolo Cusano (1401-1464), who wrote that all stars in the sky might have planets harboring intelligent life, as we know it.
In the opinion of Monsignor Corrado Balducci, a high Vatican official, extraterrestrials can and do exist on other planets, they are probably more advanced than us, and just as claimed by the ancient Sumerian writings, man could have been fashioned from a pre-existing sentient being. That was enough to set the Watcher spokesman off on another tirade.
Instead of common sense, many of these organizations, or people leading the various “religious wacko cults,” use fallacious reasoning in applying their particular brand of nonsense to the “flying saucer” investigative endeavor.
This brings me to another point. Hundreds of UFO “investigative” groups exist all over the world in nearly all countries. I can only assume that many or most of those in foreign countries are exactly like those here in the United States.
By that I mean many are organized by teenagers, many still in high school, who approach the subject with the same tired old methods and conclusions that were used forty years ago. Nothing new has been added. While there is nothing wrong in young people forming clubs and being excited about the many reports, the problem is that the general public, through the media outlets, see these many groups as “spinning their wheels” over the same type of reports we have read about for many years. It fosters the idea that there is “really nothing to it after all,” or we would have some answers after all this time. At the same time the general public, not knowing the UFO group is a teenage function, attributes the statements from these groups as coming from legitimate investigators. Now it is much easier to dismiss the entire UFO situation as having no real basis in fact, because nothing concrete has been learned after all these years.
UFOs, and the pilots flying them, are not monsters as portrayed by science fiction writers or by Hollywood. If for arguments sake we assume that UFOs and their occupants are real and not a figment of overactive imaginations, then some facts would automatically become apparent.
The ships would have to be manufactured in factories that could process plastics, metals of various types, and control systems and propulsion systems that are strictly physical in nature. To do this, even if the factory was completely controlled by robotics, would require a designer to invent the techniques used, and workmen to design and built the robotics involved.
This leads us one step further. It requires arms with fingers that can reach out and grasp objects. Non-human looking beings with only claws instead of hands, fingers, feet, toes, or the many other human attributes, would be unable to create or operate such necessary mechanical devices that would be required in their factories. The humanoid form is a necessity for intelligent life to build and operate ships, interplanetary or not.
Then we come to the main argument. My comments to follow will surprise a lot of readers who automatically assume that because I have shown that religion and God in anthropomorphic form is a creation of mankind, has to mean that I am an atheist. That is also not true.
In my writings on philosophy, as found in my latest books and publications, I have made a point of showing how God is actually defined in the scriptures as a “FORCE,” not a person, and is very real with immutable laws governing us all.
I believe that God and the laws of God are fixed, and not subject to change according to the whims of religious groups who claim to know all the answers. Whether you are religious or not, it is logical to believe that God, regardless of the actual nature, will not have one set of rules or laws for our planetary system, and another and different set of rules for another system.
It is also logical to assume that human kind has existed without a foreseeable beginning for infinite past time and will continue into the infinite future. When we think of the trillions and trillions of star systems that exist throughout infinite space, it is illogical to not believe that additional trillions of inhabitable worlds exist there also. This possibility brings up another question that seems to bother many religious groups and which should be considered also. Basically it is this:
The National Institute For Discovery Science released a report entitled The Alexander UFO Religious Crisis Survey – The Impact of UFOs and Their Occupants on Religion. The report was generated by Victoria Alexander, with the help of her husband, John B. Alexander. It was sent to 1,000 ministers and priests and asked them to respond to questions in regard to what they believed would be the result if irrefutable proof of intelligent life in the universe was found. What would be the effect on religious thought in the United States? About 77% of those receiving the survey failed to respond.
One thought that an intelligent race might exist in outer space and never underwent a fall from grace, as did Adam and Eve. One respondent wrote, “There is considerable disparity between my opinions and those of my congregation who are largely very biased and generally uneducated.” While some thought the questions asked in the survey were of no value, others thought it raised other questions not asked. For example, some said that another race might not have undergone the “fall” and therefore would need no redemption. Others thought that if redemption was necessary, God would provide them a way. Still others wondered - if each planet needed a redeemer, would Jesus be required to go to each of these planets and be crucified for their sins. I am not making this up.
Most answers showed that instead of being objective and considering the actual questions asked, the respondents injected their own personal ingrained beliefs and refused to consider the questions without modifying them to conform to their personal belief system.
For example this response: “I believe this kind of survey is a hypothetical exercise in futility. You could well ask if religious beliefs would be affected if we found out people were being reincarnated into watermelons, or some other such nonsense.” How would you like to have a minister of your church exhibit such ignorance of what is going on around us every day?
Another said, “Your questions assume past religion is entirely based on a system of belief without tangible evidence or experience. Believe more is debatable, experience is unshakable.” Nothing of the sort was assumed. Past religion is based on belief without tangible evidence, and experience such as that described by the believers is something that also has no tangible evidence to support it. Anyone can report an experience of “revelation” or some miraculous happening that has occurred, but to anyone except the person who experienced it, it is merely hearsay. Assuming a “revelation” did occur, it certainly does not prove that God was behind it. People who use certain drugs often have “revelations.”
With UFO evidence or “flying Saucer” experiences reported, we have thousands of photos showing physical vehicles, including photos taken by the gun cameras of USAF fighter planes. We have radar reports than cannot be explained away as “temperature inversions” or other such nonsense. We have sightings by hundreds of eyewitnesses who all saw the same thing at the same time. In many instances they were separated by many miles so mass hallucination, an excuse often used by skeptics to explain mass sightings, cannot be used. This is tangible evidence, not depending upon anyone’s belief system.
Some respondents did know the truth about this subject. Here are a few excerpts: “Faith has nothing to do with reason. Should there be extraterrestrial life, then it would have also to have been created by God.” Another said, …it is my belief that the Universe is well inhabited with obedient and holy intelligent people. This one world (Earth) according to the Bible is the only one in the problem of sin and rebellion.”
Some made no attempt to answer any of the survey questions, and in general, made fun of the survey itself. Such as, “This survey competes with a similar one I am working on. ‘If donkeys could fly, how would this effect religious attitudes?’ But since donkeys don’t fly, nobody has answered my survey with any seriousness.” I wish I had this minister’s address and name so I could enlighten him on just how ignorant and downright stupid he sounds. Yet this person is in a position of authority, giving advice and counseling to his congregation. God help them.
To illustrate the ignorance of some ministers who are supposed to be better educated in the scriptures than anyone else, I present the following quote: “However, it might be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than a UFO advocate to change stated opinions.” I am not a minister but I learned over 40 years ago that the word “camel,” as used by the minister in the quote above, was a mistranslation of the original scripture use of a word meaning “rope.” The fact that a minister believes that the verse actually meant “camel” illustrates perfectly his lack of independent serious study. The verse also illustrates my opinion that even if the original scriptures were “inspired by God and were infallible Truth,” the translations made by mere men are certainly not inspired and are subject to change and reinterpretation at any time.
For the benefit of those wishing to read more about the survey, it can be downloaded at <http://www.nidsci.org/articles/alexander/response_analysis.html>.
For the remainder of this publication I am going to concentrate on statements made by Raymond T. Exum, Crystal Lake Church of Christ, Crystal Lake, Illinois. It was dated February 17, 1995, when it appeared on the Internet. I also wish to state that I have never heard of Mr. Exum before, and the article on the Internet does not give a title to him. I can only assume he is the pastor of the church he represents, and contrary to the Biblical statement forbidding it, I will follow the usual procedure and call him Reverend. If he is not Reverend Exum, then I apologize for using the title throughout the rest of this article.
His article on the Internet was given the title of FLYING SAUCERS AND THE BIBLE. He starts off with mis-statements in his second paragraph where he says, “The first actual recorded sighting of a flying saucer was on June 24, 1947”…then continues on to describe Kenneth Arnold’s sighting near Mount Rainier in the state of Washington.
Anyone following this subject for very long knows that sightings were made hundreds of times going back hundreds of years. This mistake on his part is obviously not very serious or really important. I merely show it to illustrate the ignorance of Reverend Exum about the subject he is attempting to teach to those in his church.
He, however, claims all kinds of experience with the subject. Quoting: I’ll tell you when it comes to UFO’s, I can speak from experience because in the 1960’s I was caught up in this movement. I read everything that was available on the subject and if anybody disagreed, I would argue with them for hours at a time that flying saucers did exist. I know the kind of thinking that is involved in this movement, which says that flying saucers do exist. I’m out of that movement now. Nevertheless, I know the kind of background people bring to the subject when they say that there are such things as flying saucers.
He goes on to describe what he terms as “close encounters.” He defines six different types of encounters: (1) Close encounter of the first kind when a UFO is sighted within a range of 500 feet. (2) Close encounter of the second kind where a saucer leaves damage behind, such as broken trees, burned marks, or other physical markings of some sort. (3) The third kind where occupants are supposedly sighted on an unidentified flying object. (4) The 4th kind where people are supposedly kidnapped and taken aboard a UFO. (5) The fifth kind involves a conversation a person has with an occupant of a UFO. And finally, (6) Supposedly a sighting in which the aliens kill somebody from the Earth.
Next he criticizes anyone who says his or her belief is from the Bible or backed up by the Bible. Quoting him again, “There are some people who say that when Elijah was taken up into heaven, that the chariot of fire and the horses of fire was a flying saucer from another planet. Well, if you know anything about the Bible, you know that that is a foolish theory. That was not an alien spacecraft that picked up Elijah and took him to heaven.”
He goes on to mention Ezekiel and says that while he doesn’t have time to discuss it “it was not an Unidentified Flying Object. That was a vehicle that God used in heaven.” He doesn’t have time to give us any proof of his statements, but he is sure any viewpoint except his own is false. He doesn’t say what the vehicle actually was that took Elijah up, but he is sure it wasn’t a UFO. As for myself, I don’t think chariots made out of fire or horses of fire, for that matter, were anything except a metaphor used to describe the way the “vehicle” looked. We all know that “flying saucers” glow like a fireball when under full power, and anybody that thinks horses can fly, whether made of fire or not, is to my way of thinking not to bright themselves. The only foolish theory was the one proposed by Reverend Exum.
When discussing the ship which picked up Ezekiel and carried him to the cities mentioned, it is obvious that it was a genuine mechanical vehicle and flown by “messengers” from God. Ezekiel was given instructions as to what he should say to the various people he was instructed to visit. So I can agree with Reverend Exum when he says, “That was a vehicle that God used in heaven.” It doesn’t mean, however, that it was not a vehicle we commonly call an “Adamski type flying saucer.”
If you want to consider uninformed and downright stupid statements then consider this next point brought up by Reverend Exum. Quoting again: “The real reason that people believe in UFO’s is because of the theory of evolution.” Then he wanders off the subject by saying that if evolution took place on Earth, then “the size of the universe would demand that it is taking place someplace else in the universe.” He feels that if evolution took place here on Earth then it must have also occurred on other planets. After all, there are billions of stars that could probably have planets around them. If that is so, then if evolution is true, they would have intelligent life there also, and could easily be more advanced than us. He further states: “If you believe in evolution, it is almost mandatory that you believe in intelligent life elsewhere in the universe.”
That last statement is total nonsense. Logical thinking says that God would not create billions and billions of galaxies, with billions of stars and millions of planets around them, and then pick out only one small insignificant “spec of dust” at the center of only one particular galaxy, that we have named The Milky Way. Around this small insignificant star we call our sun, we have a planet with human life.
Reverend Exum apparently thinks God would create all these galaxies on some kind of a whim and wouldn’t consider placing inhabitants on any of the billions of other planets that have existed for billions of years. If Reverend Exum believes that God spoke and created the Earth 6,000 years ago, then what does he believe about the date of creation of all the galaxies we have observed and mapped? Does he think they were also spoken into existence out of nothing only 6,000 years?
Or does he believe that even though billions of years ago the galaxies were brought into existence, God was so lazy that he only created intelligent life 6,000 years ago?
How about the idea that all throughout the galaxies are intelligent civilizations inhabited by angels who did not participate in the rebellion against God? If so, wouldn’t they have to look perfectly human since God created intelligent beings on Earth in His own image and his own likeness? After all God is supposed to be the same yesterday, today and forever.
The good Reverend also says that many UFO sightings “seem to have spiritual dimensions. They somehow seem to be connected to the occult world. In other words, many of the sightings involve things which cannot literally take place in the real world.”
Then he really shows his ignorance of the true facts in regard to “flying saucers.” He considers it a relation to the occult world that UFO’s have been tracked at very great speeds, stopping instantaneously, or making right hand turns of 90 degrees at great speeds. He considers that vehicles are doing these things that literally cannot take place in reality. Such a statement really betrays his stupidity and ignorance as to how these vehicles maneuver and what their motive power really is.
He reads about UFO sightings where a lot of seemingly impossible speeds with instantaneous stops and shape changes occur, and decides that such things cannot be possible. Therefore, he attributes such UFO sightings to occult or satanic sources. This is a ridiculous viewpoint showing extreme ignorance.
I have said many times, if you want electrical wiring repaired, go to an electrician, not to a plumber. If you want to know about UFOs go to an authority on UFOs, not to a preacher, an astronomer, or any other so-called expert in non-related fields of education.
I don’t know of any gentle way to say this, but the good Reverend then states absolute falsehoods as if they were facts. Example: He says No radar has ever picked up a UFO approaching Earth from outer space. That has never occurred. That is a lie. Reports have come in regarding such incidents for years. In fact some of the first reports I became aware of occurred back in the early 1950s. Even more reports have come in about our tracking UFOs as they left our Earth to go back into space. This was another instance where Reverend Exum’s claim to having so much knowledge and experience about flying saucers is just not true.
Another falsehood is in his report on UFOs. He says that another fact proving saucers are not real and physical is that “they never talk about any kind of special breathing apparatus for the occupant. Now we know that that cannot be if they’re from another planet. They would have to have something to adapt themselves to our atmosphere, but you don’t read about the respiration devices and so forth.” I wonder if the Reverend has ever been on an intercontinental or cross-country flight where the plane flew far above the breathable air region here about our Earth? The plane is pressurized and the air inside is breathable and comfortable no matter how high it goes in altitude. All the legitimate information I have had access too, and I have a lot of it, portrays the atmosphere of other inhabited planets as having breathable atmosphere similar to Earth. I am not talking about planets of our own solar system where breathable atmosphere is apparently not there, with the exception of certain low altitude areas of Mars, and perhaps even in the bottoms of deep craters on our own Moon. I am sure that if the inhabitants of the outpost on Mars wanted to explore any area of any planet, they would take whatever steps were necessary for their survival.
His next point, and it is invalid also, is that “no two sightings have ever described the same aircraft. They’re always different. That’s very strange, is it not? If these are intelligent creatures from another planet and they’re coming here, you’d think that they would standardize the type of craft that they come here with. They’re always different, which again is very strange.” He could not be more wrong, and this shows once again that he is relatively uneducated in the facts about the visitors to this planet and the craft they use to get here. Here are the facts:
The domed saucer, commonly referred to as the “Adamski type saucer,” has been definitely established as a real physical ship and has been photographed in various areas of the world. Scientific analysis as detailed in my publication #205, has firmly established that the photographs show real objects, not models, and this viewpoint is confirmed over and over again.
These Adamski type vehicles are small and are usually carried to a planets vicinity in a huge “mother ship” that usually stays in orbit around a planet while the smaller craft are launched for any exploratory purposes. The reason the craft, of all sizes, appear to be so different is because the force field around them causes the air to ionize and glow depending upon the strength of the force field at any given instance. There is nothing strange about it at all. The shape changes with changes in direction or in a change in the amount of actual power being utilized to accomplish the maneuver.
While the huge “cigar shaped” ships seldom if ever land on a planet, they have been photographed many times and measured as to length and size. United States government employees have measured some of the smaller ones, as well over 1,500 feet in length. When hovering in a stationary position they certainly look entirely physical. When they start to move they ionize the air making it glow in various colors and the shape varies accordingly. There’s nothing strange about it at all.
At this point, on page 6 of his 8-page article, Reverend Exum departs from any reasonable argument intended to support his views on UFOs. For example, he now asks the reader to look at Hebrews Chapter 7 and verse 27. He states, “This one verse proves that there’s no such thing in reality as an Unidentified Flying Object.” I looked up this verse in both The King James Version and the Moffatt version of the New Testament. There is absolutely nothing, and I emphasize the word nothing, in the entire verse, and the verses before and after verse 27, in context or out of context, that says anything that could even be remotely said to refer to Unidentified Flying Objects or those flying them. Who knows what he is talking about? I doubt if he even knows.
He then brings up the same tired old argument that no intelligent life could possibly exist on any other planets anywhere, because if it did Jesus would have to go to each planet, be crucified on each planet for their sins, and then repeat this over and over as he went to planet after planet.
I repeat, I don’t know if his particular church is part of a denomination called Church of Christ, or if that was just the name of his particular church. But I do know that most denominations teach that only mankind of Earth was ever involved in the “fall of man” and if any intelligent people lived on any other planet, they would not need redemption, because they didn’t experience such a “fall of man” of their own.
He continues with utter nonsense and thinks he is right. Speaking of believers that UFOs and their pilots are coming here from other planets, he says: “How have they rejected God? They have rejected God by believing the theory of evolution.” To him, any person who believes there might be other inhabited worlds has to be a believer in the theory of evolution. This is nonsense again. If, as stated in the ancient writings, and some that were condensed into the first chapters of Genesis, humanoid beings came to this planet about 450,000 years ago and brought about all the events that resulted in modern mankind, then how is that believing in evolution. In using the word “evolution” I am referring to it as the same word, and with the same meaning, as when Reverend Exum used it. The word “evolution” has a lot of different meanings, depending upon the context and use in a sentence.
In reality, modern man and the civilization around him, has evolved greatly in the last few thousand years. That type of evolution is real without doubt and anyone who doesn’t think so must be totally ignorant of all the changes and advancement made by mankind over the last several thousand years.
But, to get back to the meaning of the word as used by Reverend Exum, while absolute proof of evolution cannot be found, neither can absolute proof be found for “Creationism” theories. Evolution does have a lot of circumstantial evidence and logic tending to back it up, while I’ve yet to see any from the Creationists side of the controversy. Neither side of the controversy can supply any intelligent argument as to where the very first atom came from when before that nothing existed.
I’m going to close this portion of the argument with this statement: Reverend Exum drifts off into talking about the occult again, including ghosts believed in by people back in the 1800’s, and other related subjects. “All of these things, including flying saucers, are delusions fostered by Satan to make it clear (??) to the bystander that these people are going to be lost. In other words, if you are a flying saucer believer, a believer in the occult, or a believer in ghosts, and related subjects, you will go to hell.
The Reverend concludes, “UFO’s do not exist in reality. The Bible teaches that. The Bible teaches that Jesus Christ died once for all here upon the planet Earth and that rules out life in outer space.”
I don’t have any idea as to the I.Q. of Reverend Exum, but it must be fairly low since the Bible teaches no such thing. How can he ask us to look up the verses, knowing that we will not see in them what he imagines they are saying? Why should he expect us to believe everything he says without any logical proof whatsoever to believe his conclusions? It reminds me of the old creationist argument of past years, called the Watch in the Desert. It is so full of holes that it would be stupid to consider it as evidence of anything. Basically that argument is this:
Suppose you were walking out in the desert and came upon a watch. Would you immediately assume that it spontaneously assembled itself without a maker? Of course not. Why then should you assume something as intricate in design as an animal or a human being also spontaneously assembled itself? Both had to have a creator. To the creationist, that is basically the whole argument and explains everything. To me it explains nothing. Let’s do a little more assuming.
Let’s assume we do find a watch in the desert. It is bright and shiny and is keeping perfect time. One thing we do know is that that watch did not evolve into what you hold in your hand. It went through many stages of development before it became the timepiece you hold before you. Primitive time keeping devices were developed over many years and improvements were added as time went on. First mechanical, then electrical, then solar powered, and many other such improvements over the years.
These various old timepieces are displayed in museums, just as animal fossils are displayed, and might be classed as fossils also to keep the analogy the same. Use your head and answer me one question. Are we to assume that the intricate animal of today was created in the exact form as we observe now, without any improvement or change over the centuries?
R. J. Higgins explains it this way on his Internet site: “All presently living animals are started off with bits of already-living matter created by their parents. Nonliving chemicals don’t spontaneously assemble, don’t create orderly, complex molecules out of simple elements…Don’t they? If the creationist gets to this point, he has revealed his basic ignorance of simple chemistry. Elements and simple molecules combine SPONTANEOUSLY all the time to form more complex molecules. When was the last time you found any loose hydrogen on the Earth, or fluorine? All of it has SPONTANEOUSLY combined with other elements to form more complex molecules. If you turn some loose, it won’t stay uncombined for long. Carbon atoms, especially, have a tendency to form spontaneously into all kinds of complex molecules, which in turn often combine to form very complicated polymers and mega-molecules. Some of these combinations are even SELF-REPLICATING if the raw materials are available. As a matter of fact, one of the basic criteria used in modern biology to distinguish living from nonliving complex systems, is that truly living systems are CAPABLE OF EVOLVING as they reproduce.
Just the fact we can find many manmade objects that obviously did NOT create themselves and had to have a creator, has absolutely nothing to do with proving that animals were created in their present form. Once again we need to use a little common sense.
However, remember this, a Creator could have arranged the very first combination of molecules into something tangible. He also could be the Creator of the evolutionary principle and directed it ever since the original creation. Evolution, if it exists as believed by many today, could be the way God keeps improving his original creation. Another basic question still exists:
If nothing existed before the very first atom was created, where did it come from, since the creation of atoms or molecules could not spontaneously occur if only one first came into existence all by itself? It does not answer the question to say that God spoke and it was so, since we cannot explain where God came from. For some one to say that God always existed and had no beginning is not an explanation. I could just as easily say that all matter always existed and had no beginning or creation. Both ideas are humanly incomprehensible.
This page was last updated on: 1/21/2011
Website designed and created by TJ Elias - Houston, Texas
Copyright© 1996-2011 - TJ Elias