I was watching a program on the Travel Channel the other night called Expedition Unknown. Usually it is very informative and knowledgeable in its presentation. Most often it deals with paleontology and therefore is very forensic in dealing with any evidence. The conclusions set forth can often be considered logical. But, sometimes they are not very logical. That is where an inquiring mind is most helpful.
The program in question was one in which they sought to answer the question “Could there be extraterrestrial life?” Before the program was finished they had progressed to “Is there extraterrestrial life?” The difference in the two questions and the addition of the second question implies that there could be extraterrestrial life. Is that good science, or not?
Why ask the question?
In this particular episode the host had the honor of talking with astronauts who were on the International Space Station. One of their stated objectives is to determine if there is other life in the universe. The host asked the leader of the program if she believed that there was other life “out there”. Naturally, the answer was, “Yes”. The reasoning was that there were so many stars with solar systems in so many galaxies. As is known there are billions of galaxies each having billions of stars with potentially billions of orbiting objects, so called planets.
So, with that understanding, the leader of the mission responded in the affirmative. But, even with the stated information about the universe, is that enough to conclude that there should be life “out there”?
Before one can even begin to determine if there is extraterrestrial life one must understand terrestrial life. What is necessary for terrestrial life (that is life on Earth)?
Typically, most scientists believe that if you can find water, you can find life. There are objects in our Solar System which seem to have water, usually in the frozen form, and therefore, some scientists believe that life could develop there. But, is water enough to bring about life? Yes, life, as we know it, must have water. But, it cannot be frozen and it cannot be steam.
There are a few animals and plants that can endure freezing for a time and then be thawed and continue to live, but that is because they have a special antifreeze solution which protects their cells during the frozen period. That sounds designed to me.
But water is by no means the only thing that must be present. There are over twenty other necessary elements, minerals and conditions which must be just right or life would not be possible. If any one of these conditions is missing, there can be no life.
So, when you hear someone say that they believe life might be discovered someplace just because they believe water is present, don’t get too excited, because they have only found one step. There are many more to go.
Because this person is a scientist, and a scientist on the International Space Station, should we take them as an authority in the area of if extraterrestrial life could exist “out there”? Quite often an agenda is promoted by using someone who is supposedly an authority. It is true that a person with advanced degrees has a great amount of knowledge. But what if that knowledge is incorrect or just down right false? Does that make them an authority?
Appealing to “Authority” is not proof of truth. All truth is founded in logic. We know that all scientific laws are logically founded and can be tested and have been tested many times and found to be logical.
The reasoning which promotes the search for extraterrestrial life is grounded in the “science” of evolution. Evolutionists believe that if life evolved on Earth, then surely with all the possible worlds in the universe it could evolve elsewhere as well. So, can evolutionary science be considered a good reason to believe in extraterrestrial life.
If we were to start at Charles Darwin’s “Origin of Species” and look at all the predictions of evolution and how many of them have proven wrong, you would without a doubt throw the concept in the trash heap. Rarely has a prediction of evolutionary foundation proven true. But, do you hear of that? If you have a chance to read of new discoveries in science or even in space studies and read how “surprised” they were to find out certain things. Why do they use the term “surprised”? They were surprised because evolution predicted the opposite or something else. Do you hear them say that evolution was proven wrong or falsified? Of course not.
The logic of finding life “out there”
What does it take to have a living cell? Scientific studies have shown the least complicated living cell is a virus. It has 256 proteins within its single cell. What is a protein? A protein is a living machine which carries on the processes which are necessary for life in the biological realm. If you know just a little about biological life, you know that DNA contains the information by which proteins are assembled. The complicated thing about that is that DNA is made up of proteins and the DNA contains the information necessary to build the proteins. (Which came first, the egg or the chicken?)
Now, you must understand that a virus must have a living host to survive. A living host must have over a hundred more proteins to be able to sustain its life.
Proteins are made of amino acids. Living things as we know them use 20 of the more than a hundred known amino acids. Of those 20, only the left-handed amino acids are used. Yes, they come in left and right-handed versions. The amino acids used in building any given protein are assembled in a specific order, then are folded in a specific configuration and then connected to other protein machines to carry out the given process.
The possibility of assembling the proteins for life
What are the possibilities of such an assembly taking place? This assembly would have to take place if there would be extraterrestrial life as we know it. Using the 256 proteins of a virus, which is the simplest living form we know. The odds of this occurring is 1 in 10>110. That is one chance in 10 followed by 110 zeros. I have no idea what that number would be. To give you some idea of how that relates to our universe, there are only 10>80 atoms in the known universe. That is “atoms”.
To add a little more understanding, if that is comprehensible, to assemble the proteins necessary for a self-sustaining life form the chances are 1 in 10>400. I believe you see the point that I am proving.
These figures are based on the laws of probability. It is not guess work but true scientific analysis.
How any real scientist could conclude that there could be extraterrestrial life is a stretch of the scientific facts that we know to be established. That is why it is important in today’s society that we approach everything that is presented as fact or news or even science, with a critical mindset. By critical, I do not mean to criticize, but to ask pertinent questions and hear the opposing view to see if it may make sense.
Check all views and see which carries with logic. If it is not logical, it probably is not true. If the world view is constantly being surprised by new findings, then it is probably not true. If it cannot stand up under scrutiny then it is probably not true. If it cannot be falsified, then it definitely is not scientific.
I question the scientist on the space station. In answering the question, “Is there extraterrestrial life?” if she had said that we do not know and the odds are almost none existent, then I would have thought that she might be truly approaching it with an open mind. But, it is evident that their belief is grounded in evolution mindset not scientific logic, so they will continue to spend much money on a guaranteed failure. And that failure is grounded in scientific logic.
Let me know what you think about this subject. Leave a comment in the space below. Thank you.