Welcome to Carbonfiber Q&A, where you can ask questions and receive answers from other members of the community.

Creationism via Aliens? Is this argument logically sound?

0 votes
"Let's take a step back, take a breath, and take a step back in without any bias. Only what we have on the table in front of us.

Just because something is complicated, doesn't necessarily mean it was manufactured in all situations. Throwing one's hands into the air and going, "It's just too complicated! It had to have been engineered!" isn't a credible argument not because it sounds ridiculous (because both sides sound equally insane to the either, that argument is moot), but because it lacks any recordable or observable evidence. At the very least, people have done some research upon DNA structures, and have found many recordable similarities between the generations of species on this planet- both alive and extinct. But now, this leads to what I am about to propose. Why not both Creation and Evolution?

Now we discuss the idea of creation after taking a step back. It's argument: many of the internal workings of life (DNA structure, amino acids, cell structure, molecular bonds) are deemed far too complex to result from a natural state of "trial and error" throughout a billion or more years. The point of view is that our initial creation is deemed impossible to have come from lifeless protons and neutrons. If one would see this as concrete evidence and it was universally accepted that we were in-fact, engineered, could one not rule out the philosophy that our heavily disputed beginning as a "single-celled organism" was in fact, of alien creation? Let's analyze this idea. First, there are two facts to keep in mind when considering this train of thought. #1: We are here, and we are made of Carbon atoms- the fourth most common material found throughout the Universe (Proven). #2: Although our general make-up is complicated, our basic building blocks (Carbon atoms) can be easily found and manipulated (we are able to do this now: Carbon Steel, Carbon Fiber, Glassy Carbon, etc.)

Now picture the infinite Universe as a whole, and imagine that the microscopic pin-prick of light that is our own swirling Milky Way Galaxy is zoomed into your full field of view. As our galaxy zooms to incomprehensible proportions, your gaze is forced to focus on the insignificant pixel that is our very own solar system. By now you are enveloped in the infinite that is our Galaxy and look down to see a blue speck of dust orbiting around a ball of fire the size of a city. To say that we are alone in the universe is a naive statement when considering that the most basic of parts that make us up are readily available to the infinity of the even greater infinity that is the Universe. Undoubtedly, we are not alone, or the most advanced of all the Universe's childeren. In modern times, we have already experimented with DNA splicing (goat's that excreet spider's web, square watermelons, etc.). We homo-sapiens have only been around for approximately 10,000 years (proven through carbon-dating), yet we can already re-engineer any species genome. Consider if an alien species had only a 5 million year head-start over the human race(not very long considering the Universe is approximately 15 billion years old), would they not be able to create original life itself? Perhaps Earth's original single celled organism? In only the course of 141 years after Humanity's discovery of the DNA chain, we have accomplished astonishing feats of genetic manipulation.

This train of thought cannot prove, but states through scientific inference, comparison, and observation of already established facts that we as earthlings were created not by a deity, but by another, far more advanced species, and left to evolve on our own from our original, insignificant ancestry. This is nothing more than a spur of philosophy, yet as an outsider could tell, both the "God" explanation and my explanation are both quite far-fetched. Although this is the case, when looking at each philosophy side by side and considering their staying true to the known laws of physics, and the current accepted evidences of the Universe, my case proves more feasible than the God Theory."

What is your opinion on this? I'm not looking for a fight, only input. Granted, it is a relatively short (considering) train of thought, how do you see it holding up on a purely philosophical level?
asked Mar 30, 2012 by carbonfiber (405 points)

1 Answer