LIFE ON OTHER PLANETS - Are We Alone in the Universe? - A group of scientists had studied a meteorite that had been found in the ice of Antarctica. It had been determined that this meteorite had originated on Mars by studying the gaseous content of glass-like components of the meteor. The gas composition matched very well the atmosphere of Mars. This conclusion seems reasonable. So, they presumed they had a meteor from Mars. Next, they looked for evidence of life on and in the crevices of the meteor. They found two types of molecules that can form as a result of life processes, carbonates and complex molecules called polyaromatic hydrocarbons or PAHs. They also found shapes in the rock that resembled those of known microfossils on Earth. Microfossils are fossils of one-celled organisms which are rather tricky to interpret. The NASA scientists felt the things just mentioned provided ample evidence to conclude that life once existed on Mars. The chemical signs could all be due to processes that have nothing to do with life, and the supposed microfossils are 100 times smaller than any such fossil found on Earth. Other groups that studied this same meteorite concluded that either the temperature of formation of the chemicals was far too high to allow life (over 700 degrees C) or that other chemical signals for life were absent. There are reasonable non-life explanations for each of the evidences presented, but we just think that they mean there is life on Mars.

..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Life On Other Planets

Are We Alone in the Universe?

A Biblical View of Aliens

 

The supposed existence of alien civilizations is based on evolutionary assumptions. The science fiction of Star Trek and the Star Wars begins with evolution. 

Evolutionists simply rationalize that since life evolved here with no outside interference, the universe must be pregnant with life. The odds overwhelmingly dictate that our planet is the only one suitable for life in the universe. And the chemistry on Earth also indicates that life is extremely hard to come by. The probability of life simply based on chance occurrences is admitted by many evolutionists to be remote indeed. We know of no natural processes that will lead automatically to the complexity of life. Life is not a product of chance or necessity. Life is a product of intelligence. Without Divine interference we are alone in the universe and without Christ we are – and should be – terrified. The gospel is as relevant as ever.  

Dr. Ray Bohlin

 

Dr. Ray Bohlin provides a Christian view on the probability and meaning of life on other planets. From a biblical perspective, what would it mean to find evidence of life beyond this earth?

Life on Mars?

There was great excitement in the media when a group of scientists from NASA announced they had found evidence of life on Mars.

Their evidence, an alleged Martian meteorite, was vaulted to center stage, and everyone from CNN to Nightline ran special programs with interviews and video footage of the scientists and their prized specimen.

President Clinton was so excited by the announcement that he praised the U.S. space program and took the opportunity to establish a bipartisan space summit headed up by Vice President Al Gore to study the future of U.S. space research. Aren’t we already doing that?

Anyway, clearly this announcement took the country by storm. Some of the scientists were embarrassingly gushing about how significant these findings were.

The media frenzy was prompted by the early release of an article from the journal Science, the premier scientific journal in the U.S.

The article was due out the following week, but Science decided to release it early because it had leaked out.

Here’s what the excitement was about. A group of scientists had studied a meteorite that had been found in the ice of Antarctica.

Previously, it had been determined that this meteorite had originated on Mars by studying the gaseous content of glass-like components of the meteor.

The gas composition matched very well the atmosphere of Mars. This conclusion seems reasonable.

So, they presumed they had a meteor from Mars. Next, they looked for evidence of life on and in the crevices of the meteor. They found two types of molecules that can form as a result of life processes, carbonates and complex molecules called polyaromatic hydrocarbons or PAHs.

They also found shapes in the rock that resembled those of known microfossils on Earth. Microfossils are fossils of one-celled organisms which are rather tricky to interpret.

Well, what does this mean? Obviously, the NASA scientists felt the things just mentioned provided ample evidence to conclude that life once existed on Mars.

However, the chemical signs could all be due to processes that have nothing to do with life, and the supposed microfossils are 100 times smaller than any such fossil found on Earth.

Other groups that studied this same meteorite concluded that either the temperature of formation of the chemicals was far too high to allow life (over 700 degrees C) or that other chemical signals for life were absent.

John Kerridge, a planetary scientist from the University of California at San Diego, said, “The conclusion is at best premature and more probably wrong.”

But listen to the concluding statement in the paper in Science:

Although there are alternative explanations for each of these phenomena taken individually, when they are considered collectively, particularly in view of their spatial association, we conclude that they are evidence for primitive life on Mars.

In plain English, there are reasonable non-life explanations for each of the evidences presented, but we just think that they mean there is life on Mars.

The evidence is very equivocal and was challenged by many other scientists, but the media did not report that as fully.

But maybe they are right! In fact, there is one simple explanation that is consistently ignored by media and scientists alike.

If there really is, or has been, life on Mars, what could that possibly mean for evolution, and more importantly, does it somehow refute creation? We’ll look at that next.

What Would Life on Mars Mean?

Because of the recent announcement of signs of life on Mars, many people were encouraged in their belief that we are not alone in the universe.

These signs are far from certain and probably wrong, but if it’s true, what would these results mean to evolutionists?

Moreover, is there any reason for Christians to fear confirmation of life on Mars?

Let us assume, then, for the moment that the evidence from this Martian meteorite is legitimate evidence for life on Mars – life that at some point in the past actually existed on Mars. What would it mean?

For evolutionists the evidence is perceived as confirmation that life actually arises from non-life by purely chemical processes.

In addition, evolutionists draw the conclusion that life must be able to evolve very easily since it did so on two adjacent planets in the same solar system.

Therefore, even though origin of life research is actually at a standstill, such a discovery seemingly confirms the notion that some chemical evolution scenario must work. I will address this assumption later.

On the other hand, some have stated that if there is life on Mars, creationism has been dealt a death blow.

They rationalize that since (1) we now know that life can evolve just about anywhere, and (2) the Bible never speaks of life anywhere but on Earth, the Bible is, therefore, unreliable.

Besides, they reason, why would God create life on a planet with no humans?

However, since the Bible is absolutely silent on the subject of extra-terrestrial life, we can make no predictions about its possibility.

God is certainly free to create life on planets other than Earth if He chooses.

Getting back to the evolutionists’ glee at the possibility of life evolving on other planets, the real question is whether this is the proper conclusion if life is indeed found on Mars?

The simple answer, inexplicably avoided by the media, is NO!

The simplest answer to the possible discovery of life on Mars is that the so-called “Martian life” actually came from Earth!

Think about it this way. The meteorite that was found is supposed to have existed on Mars previously. How did it get to Earth?

Well, it is hypothesized that a large meteorite crashed into Mars throwing up lots of debris into space, some of which finds its way to Earth and at least a few of which are found by Earthlings.

If you are thinking with me, you now realize that the same scenario could have been played out on Earth.

Evolutionists suggest that the Earth was under heavy meteor bombardment until at least 3.8 billion years ago – about the time they say life appeared on Earth.

Christian astronomer Hugh Ross states it this way:

Meteorites large enough to make a crater greater than 60 miles across will cause Earth rocks to escape Earth’s gravity.

Out of 1,000 such rocks ejected, 291 strike Venus, 20 go to Mercury, 17 hit Mars, 14 make it to Jupiter, and 1 goes all the way to Saturn. Traveling the distance with these rocks will be many varieties of Earth life.

Ross also documents that many forms of microscopic life are quite capable of surviving such a journey.

All this is quite well known in the scientific community, but I have not seen it mentioned once in any public discussion.

I believe the reason is that the possibility of life having evolved on Mars is too juicy to pass up.

The Improbability of Life Elsewhere in the Universe

I would like to address the amazing optimism of so many that the universe is teeming with life.

No doubt this is fueled by the tremendous success of such science fiction works as Star Wars and Star Trek which eloquently present the reasonableness of a universe pregnant with intelligent life forms.

Inherent within this optimism is the evolutionary assumption that if life evolved here, certainly we should not arrogantly suppose that life could not have evolved elsewhere in the universe.

And if life in general exists in the universe, then, of course, there must be intelligent life out there as well.

This is the basic assumption of the SETI program, the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence.

This is the program, now privately funded instead of federally funded, that searches space for radio waves emanating from another planet that would indicate the presence of intelligent life.

But is such a hope realistic? Is there a justifiable reason for suspecting that planets suitable to life exist elsewhere in the universe?

Over the last two decades scientists have begun tabulating many characteristics of our universe, galaxy, solar system, and planet that appear to have been finely-tuned for life to exist.

Christian astronomer and apologist, Dr. Hugh Ross documents all these characteristics in his book Creator and the Cosmos, and is constantly updating them.

In the book’s third edition (2001), Ross documents 35 characteristics of the universe and 66 characteristics of our galaxy, solar system, and planet that are finely-tuned for life to exist.

Some examples include the size, temperature, and brightness of our sun, the size, chemical composition, and stable orbit of Earth.

The fact that we have one moon and not none or two or three.

The distance of the Earth from the sun, the tilt of the earth’s axis, the speed of the earth’s rotation, the time it takes Earth to orbit the sun.

If any of these factors were different by even a few percent, the ability of Earth to sustain life would be severely compromised.

Recently it has been noted that even the presence of Jupiter and Saturn serve to stabilize the orbit of Earth.

Without these two large planets present exactly where they are, the Earth would be knocked out of its present near circular orbit into an elliptical one causing higher temperature differences between seasons and subjecting Earth to greater meteor interference.

Neither condition is hospitable to the continuing presence of life.

Ross has further calculated the probabilities of all these factors coming together by natural processes alone to be 1 x 10^-166; that’s a decimal point followed by 165 zeroes and then a one.

A very liberal estimate of how many planets there may be, though we have only documented less than 100, is 10²² or 10 billion trillion planets, one for every star in the universe.

Combining these two probabilities tells us that there are 10^-144 planets in the entire universe that could support life.

Obviously, this is far less than one; therefore, by natural processes alone, we shouldn’t even be here – let alone some kind of alien life form.

So, unless God created life elsewhere, we are alone, and for the materialistic evolutionist, this is a frightening thought.

Problems with Chemical Evolution on Earth

The statistics given above mean that we are really alone in the universe and that there is no hope of finding intelligent civilizations as in the television program Star Trek. 

While it means there is no one out there to threaten our survival, there is also no one out there to save us from our own mistakes.

This observation highlights why I believe the scientific community and the media became so excited about the possibilities of life on Mars.

Efforts to determine how life could have evolved from non-living matter have been so fraught with problems that it makes the possibility of life elsewhere extremely remote.

But if it could be proved that life evolved elsewhere, then it would demonstrate that life springs up rather easily, and we just haven’t found the right trick here on Earth to prove it. But this just leapfrogs the problem.

But is the evolution of life from non-living chemicals really that impossible?

The difficulties fall into three categories, the Chemical Problem, the Thermodynamic Problem, and the Informational Problem.

These issues are presented comprehensively in a book by Thaxton, Bradley, and Olsen titled The Mystery of Life’s Origin and in a chapter in the edited volume by J. P. Moreland, The Creation Hypothesis.

Chemical Problems are illustrated by the difficulty in synthesizing even the simplest building block molecules necessary for life from inorganic precursors.

Amino acids, sugars, and the bases for the important nucleotide molecules that make up DNA and RNA were all thought to be easily synthesized in an early Earth atmosphere of ammonia, methane, water vapor, and hydrogen.

But further experiments showed this scenario to be unrealistic.

Ammonia and methane would have been short-lived in this atmosphere; the multiple energy sources available would have destroyed the necessary molecules and water would have broken apart into hydrogen and oxygen.

The oxygen was scrupulously avoided in all prebiotic scenarios because it would have poisoned all the necessary reactions.

Thermodynamic Problems arise from the difficulty in assembling all these complex molecules that would have been floating around in some prebiotic soup into a highly organized and complex cell.

To accomplish the task of achieving specified complexity in life’s molecules such as DNA and proteins, the availability of raw energy for millions of years is not enough.

All systems where specified complexity is produced from simple components requires an energy conversion mechanism to channel the energy in the right direction to accomplish the necessary work.

Without photosynthesis, there is no such mechanism in the prebiotic Earth.

The Informational Problem shows that there is no way to account for the origin of the genetic code, which is a language, without intelligent input.

Informational codes require intelligent preprogramming. No evolutionary mechanism can accomplish this. Life requires intelligence.

So, you can see why evolutionists would get excited about the possibility of finding evolved life elsewhere.

It’s because life is seemingly impossible to evolve here. So, if it did happen elsewhere, maybe our experiments are just missing something.

Independence Day, The Movie

In the movie Independence Day, an alien battle force swoops down on Earth with the intention of destroying the human race, sucking the planet dry of all available resources and then moving on to some other unlucky civilization in the galaxy.

But those indomitable humans aided by good old American ingenuity outsmart those dull-witted aliens and Earth is saved.

The story has been told many times, but perhaps never as well or never with such great special effects. The movie was a huge success.

But why are we continually fascinated by the possibility of alien cultures?

The movie gave the clear impression that there must be great numbers of intelligent civilizations out there in the universe. This notion has become widely accepted in our culture.

Few recognize that the supposed existence of alien civilizations is based on evolutionary assumptions.

The science fiction of Star Trek and the Star Wars begins with evolution.

As I’ve stated earlier, evolutionists simply rationalize that since life evolved here with no outside interference, the universe must be pregnant with life.

Astronomer Carl Sagan put it this way after he had reviewed the so-called success of early Earth chemical evolution experiments:

Nothing in such experiments is unique to the earth. The initial gases, and the energy sources, are common throughout the Cosmos.

Chemical reactions like those in our laboratory vessels may be responsible for the organic matter in interstellar space and the amino acids found in meteorites.

Some similar chemistry must have occurred on a billion other worlds in the Milky Way Galaxy. The molecules of life fill the Cosmos.

Sagan strongly suggests that the probabilities and chemistry of the universe dictate that life is ubiquitous in the galaxy.

But as I stated earlier, the odds overwhelmingly dictate that our planet is the only one suitable for life in the universe.

And the chemistry on Earth also indicates that life is extremely hard to come by.

The probability of life simply based on chance occurrences is admitted by many evolutionists to be remote indeed.

Many are now suggesting that life is inevitable because there are yet undiscovered laws of nature that automatically lead to complex life forms.

In other words, the deck of cards is fixed. Listen to Nobel Laureate and biochemist, Christian de Duve:

We are being dealt thirteen spades not once but thousands of times in succession! This is utterly impossible, unless the deck is doctored. What this doctoring implies with respect to the assembly of the first cell is that most of the steps involved must have had a very high likelihood of taking place under the prevailing conditions. Make them even moderately improbable and the process must abort, however many times it is initiated, because of the very number of successive steps involved. In other words, contrary to Monod’s affirmation, the universe was–and presumably still is–pregnant with life.

The only problem with de Duve’s suggestion is that we know of no natural processes that will lead automatically to the complexity of life.

Everything we know of life leads to the opposite conclusion. Life is not a product of chance or necessity. Life is a product of intelligence.

Without Divine interference we are alone in the universe and without Christ we are – and should be – terrified. The gospel is as relevant as ever.

Raymond G. Bohlin is Vice President of Vision Outreach with Probe Ministries. Dr. Bohlin was born and raised in Chicago, IL and is a graduate of the University of Illinois (B.S., zoology, 1971-1975), the University of North Texas (M.S., population genetics, 1977-1980), and the University of Texas at Dallas (M.S., Ph.D., molecular and cell biology, 1984-1991). He has been with Probe Ministries since 1975 and has lectured and debated on dozens of college and university campuses. He has addressed issues in the creation/evolution debate as well as other science-related issues such as the environment, genetic engineering, medical ethics, and sexually transmitted diseases. Dr. Bohlin was named a Research Fellow of the Discovery Institute’s Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture in 1997, 2000 and 2012. He and his wife Sue, an associate speaker and Webmistress for Probe Ministries as well as a professional calligrapher and Christian speaker, live in Plano, Texas, a suburb of Dallas, and they have two grown sons. He can be reached via e-mail at rbohlin@probe.org.

Probe Ministries is a non-profit ministry whose mission is to assist the church in renewing the minds of believers with a Christian worldview and to equip the church to engage the world for Christ. Probe fulfills this mission through our Mind Games conferences for youth and adults, our 3-minute daily radio program, and our extensive Web site at www.probe.org.

https://probe.org/are-we-alone-in-the-universe-2/

You might also like:

Conditions Required For Life To Exist

CLICK HERE . . . to view . . . 

https://puricare.blogspot.com/2020/11/conditions-required-for-life-to-exist.html

.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Water Is So Essential for Life

CLICK HERE . . . to view . . . 

https://puricare.blogspot.com/2020/09/water-is-so-essential-for-life-water-is.html

.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Do Aliens Exist?

CLICK HERE . . . to view . . . 

https://puricarechronicles.blogspot.com/2020/06/do-aliens-exist-theres-not-even-hint-of.html

.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Life from Outer Space

CLICK HERE . . . to view . . . 

https://puricarechronicles.blogspot.com/2019/05/life-from-outer-space-many-people-are.html

.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Threat From Above

CLICK HERE . . . to view . . . 

https://puricarechronicles.blogspot.com/2019/10/threat-from-above-space-weapons-and.html

................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 

Life In The Universe

CLICK HERE . . . to view . . . 

https://puricarechronicles.blogspot.com/2019/02/habitable-zones-life-in-universe-bible.html

 

THE STARDUST TRAIL - The underlying reason for space research is to explain the origin of the stars and planets without God having been involved. The ultimate hope is to find evidence of extraterrestrial life somewhere, for that would prove that life could evolve anywhere — not just on Earth. There is a lot of extraterrestrial life, of course - the Bible calls them angels! But the astro-scientists will not find any angels with their telescopes or space probes - neither will they find any other humans or humanoids out there. Physical life was specially created, and Earth was created uniquely to support that life - the stars were created for other purposes, not yet revealed - Big Bang cosmologists believe that our human bodies are essentially "stardust," composed of elements generated long ago in exploding stars which disbursed their dust into space. The trail began some 15 billion years ago in the primeval Big Bang, which first produced simple chemical elements, then eventually stars and galaxies and planets and people through aeons of evolution. This idea is not scientific. Scientists have never observed stars or planets evolve, so such ideas are essentially based on naturalistic speculation supported mostly by esoteric mathematics, so they are not scientific. The truth is that we don't understand star formation. There have been various theories of the evolution of the planets and their satellites, as well as the comets and asteroids.

..............................................................................................................................................

The Stardust Trail
.

The underlying reason for space research is to explain the origin of the stars and planets without God having been involved. The ultimate hope is to find evidence of extraterrestrial life somewhere, for that would prove that life could evolve anywhere — not just on Earth. There is a lot of extraterrestrial life, of course - the Bible calls them angels! But the astro-scientists will not find any angels with their telescopes or space probes - neither will they find any other humans or humanoids out there. Physical life was specially created, and Earth was created uniquely to support that life - the stars were created for other purposes, not yet revealed

BY HENRY M. MORRIS, PH.D.  

Big Bang cosmologists believe that our human bodies are essentially "stardust," composed of elements generated long ago in exploding stars which disbursed their dust into space.

The trail began some 15 billion years ago in the primeval Big Bang, which first produced simple chemical elements, then eventually stars and galaxies and planets and people through aeons of evolution.

This idea is not scientific.

Scientists have never observed stars or planets evolve, so such ideas are essentially based on naturalistic speculation supported mostly by esoteric mathematics, so they are not scientific, by definition.

As far as the stars are concerned, Abraham Loeb (of the Harvard University Center for Astrophysics) has frankly acknowledged that scientists do not know how they formed.

The truth is that we don't understand star formation at a fundamental level.

The most favored theory at present is that the Big Bang explosion generated the simple elements hydrogen and helium, which eventually coalesced into the first simple stars.

These stars, known as Type-3 Stars, did not include any complex elements.

The latter had to be generated when some of this first group of stars exploded as supernovas.

From the resulting stardust evolved more complex stars and eventually planets and people.

The problem is that, out of the billions upon billions of stars in the observable universe, there do not seem to be any Type-3 Stars at all.

The first generation of stars likely formed when the universe was only a few million years old (though these Population III stars have not yet been identified).

It seems like we should see plenty of them if they ever existed, since all the other stars supposedly keep coming from them.

Be that as it may, we are more interested in our sun with its solar system.

There have been various theories of the evolution of the planets and their satellites, as well as the comets and asteroids.

Most of these theories have encountered insuperable obstacles, so that the current theory (of last resort, actually) is a set of catastrophic theories based on multiple impacts of various rock bodies.

The moon (to take a "close to home" example) is said to have originated in a gigantic impact on Earth.

Many models have been proposed for the formation of the Moon, but no one has succeeded in showing the formation satisfactorily.

The popular "giant impact" model states that a Mars-sized protoplanet hit the proto-Earth and generated a circumterrestrial debris disk from which the Moon accreted.

While this theory may have fewer problems than others, it appears extremely imaginative and quite incapable of proof. Furthermore, it does encounter one serious difficulty.

However, no reasonable means to rid the Earth/Moon system of the excess angular momentum has yet been proposed.

One scientist in this field seems about ready to give up hope that the origin of the moon can ever be explained, not to mention the other planets and satellites.

All in all, developing a theory of lunar origins that could make sense of data obtained from the Apollo lunar landing programme proved very difficult.

So much so, in fact, that when I took a class on our planetary system from Irvin Shapiro two decades ago, he joked that the best explanation was observational error — the moon did not exist.

The comets orbiting the sun present another problem. These bodies lose considerable mass at every pass around the sun. They cannot survive many orbits, and thus cannot be very old.

To get around this problem, evolutionists assume there is a vast cloud of hibernating comets out near the edge of the solar system, which releases new comets every so often.

This imaginary cloud is called the "Oort Cloud," named after the astronomer who proposed it. The problem is that there is no observational evidence such a cloud exists at all.

We have never actually "seen" the Oort Cloud . . .

We infer the existence and properties of the Oort Cloud . . . from . . . the steady trickle of long-period comets into the planetary system.

The underlying reason for space research is to explain the origin of the stars and planets without God having been involved.

The ultimate hope is to find evidence of extraterrestrial life somewhere, for that would prove, they say, that life could evolve anywhere — not just on Earth.

One hope is to locate some type of nonrandom radio signals from the stars.

Very elaborate radio telescopes have been built and monitored for years hoping to catch them. But this effort has been a waste of much money.

. . . scientists are systematically scrutinizing a thousand nearby sun-like stars for the faint signal that would betray intelligent habitation.

So far, they have found nothing — not a single extraterrestrial peep. . . we are, to our knowledge, still alone in a vast cosmos.

Nevertheless, NASA is still hoping to find some evidence of extraterrestrial life — if not human life on some far-off planet, then at least microbial life on a nearby planet.

The only candidate remaining in the solar system is Mars.

Although Mars seems to be devoid of any life at all, they still are searching for evidence that it used to be there.

Two years ago, NASA generated global publicity by announcing they had found such evidence — a Martian rock with fossilized bacteria that had somehow traveled to Earth and landed in Antarctica.

This claim has been well debunked by now.

Eighteen months after David S. McKay and his colleagues . . . raised eyebrows with their claim . . . the team has made few converts . . . its critics have published dozens of new observations they believe make that theory increasingly improbable. . . .

On the other hand, this sensational claim of Martian life has been immensely successful in one sense.

Scientists now working on . . . the possibility of extraterrestrial life are funded at levels that two years ago would have been unimaginable.

Had NASA's publicity machine not turned McKay's paper into a global media event, this largesse would never have been granted.

What is NASA up to? Two years ago, the agency thought it had discovered life on Mars and set the world ablaze with talk of a Universe populated by aliens.

Now it has discovered water on the moon and the world is already planning holidays at lunar resorts. . . .

But we should not be cynical. NASA needs periodic blazes of publicity to keep the U.S. Congress interested in funding space exploration.

The most recent NASA project has been the widely publicized adventure of sending an ex-senator and ex-astronaut (now 77 years old) back on a space mission, ostensibly to research the effects of space travel on the aging process.

The public-relations boost for NASA has again been enormous.

There is a lot of extraterrestrial life, of course. The Bible calls them angels!

These are specially created beings "sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation" (Hebrews 1:14).

But the astro-scientists will not find any angels with their telescopes or space probes. Neither will they find any other humans or humanoids out there.

Physical life was specially created, and Earth was created uniquely to support that life.

The stars were created for other purposes, not yet revealed.

"The heaven, even the heavens, are the LORD'S: but the earth hath He given to the children of men" (Psalm 115:16).

Evolutionary scientists would be well advised to "hit the sawdust trail" that leads to Christ and forget about the imaginary stardust trail that they think led to life.

* Dr. Morris is Founder and President Emeritus of ICR.

The Institute for Creation Research (ICR) wants people to know that God’s Word can be trusted in everything it speaks about—from how and why we were made, to how the universe was formed, to how we can know God and receive all He has planned for us.

After 50 years of ministry, ICR remains a leader in scientific research within the context of biblical creation. Founded by Dr. Henry Morris in 1970, ICR exists to conduct scientific research within the realms of origins and Earth history, and then to educate the public both formally and informally through professional training programs, through conferences and seminars around the country, and through books, magazines, and media presentations.

https://www.icr.org/article/stardust-trail/

You might also like:

Stardust 
Nat King Cole
.

CLICK HERE . . . to view complete playlist . . . 

https://puricarechronicles.blogspot.com/2019/01/stardust-nat-king-cole-and-now-purple.html