31in31 - May 8th - "In Response to Dan's Comments"

In the "UFO" blog entry entitled "31in31 - May 7th - "The Letter U" " Steely Dan left a comment of which I would like to highlight. If you haven't read the original post, it's the one right below this one, or just click here.

Dan's Comment in it's entirety:

I think they made a movie about this kind of thing from the Left Coast city of Hollywood. Men-in-Black or something?I am open to the idea of life beyond our current knowledge, other planets etc. And I find no reason that this should conflict with my Christian faith. The idea that it
could has always baffled me (am I missing something?). Nor did the movie Contact (similar subject) shake my world view. It would indeed be a waste of space and extremely arrogant to think we are alone in God's Creation.That being said, the idea of any goverment being able to keep contact with aliens a secret makes the coffee come out of my nose. We couldn't keep a BJ in the most secure room on the planet (the Oval) secret, but this is has been hush hush for years?In addition, I find the prevailing theory that increased sightings of ETUFO's is further evidence of abnormal "global warming" (err, "climate change", is the new good-for-all-seasons term, I guess) to be hilarious. Great post Alex. I think it is a great topic. In fact any topic that asks us to reconcile our faith with scientific facts is fantastic for us as believers.

First off thanks for the great comment, this is what I always hope to see when I post something of this nature. If you don't mind, and I sincerely hope you don't, I would like to take a few lines out and discuss a little.

Dan writes:

"I am open to the idea of life beyond our current knowledge, other planets etc.
And I find no reason that this should conflict with my Christian faith. The idea
that it could has always baffled me (am I missing something?)." Nor did the movie Contact (similar subject) shake my world view. It would indeed be a waste of space and extremely arrogant to think we are alone in God's Creation.

I find it interesting that you immediately went into a faith defensive posture with this, almost as a guilty party admits to NOT participating in a crime prior to even being questioned. What baffles me is how people belonging to a Structured Religious Belief System can honestly believe we are not alone in this universe and NOT have it shake a foundation. No where in the bible does it make mention of life on other planets. Does this mean that the other planets have their own bibles which make no mention of what happened on this planet we call earth? I would like to know just how you can have absolutely no reason of conflict on this?

Dan writes:

"That being said, the idea of any goverment [sic] being able to keep contact with aliens a secret makes the coffee come out of my nose. We couldn't keep a BJ in the most secure room on the planet (the Oval) secret, but this is has been hush hush for
years?"

This comment surprised me a little. Conspiracy theories aside, do you actually think the governments of the world cannot keep secrets of any grade equal to or higher than a sexual act? I would disagree one hundred and sixty nine percent. First of all, the people of North America (notice I'm not American bashing here, but tempted to) are addicted to sex and smut to very high degrees, making these very hard secrets to keep. (Linda Tripp) I hope you had some degree of tongue-in-cheekedness with this comment. Through vehicles of misinformation and strict compartmentalization, governments are not only good at keeping secrets, they wrote the book on it.
Now take possible secrets about ET; Many many government employees have purportedly exposed this secret, but they are quickly labelled as quacks, and due to the unfortunate nature of the material not being sexually interesting enough and highly unbelievable in a country which stamps "In God We Trust" on their coins. They are not taken seriously by the general public, the public which looks side to side to check the reaction of others before coming to their own "opinion". Apparently eye witness testimony doesn't mean much until it's thrown on the television screen above the "CNN" channel marker without the typical smirk of bias on the face of the anchor.

Dan writes:

"In addition, I find the prevailing theory that increased sightings of ETUFO's is further evidence of abnormal "global warming" (err, "climate change", is the new good-for-all-seasons term, I guess) to be hilarious."

Well although I would almost certainly agree with what you say here, it really has nothing to do with what I was talking about. (I do find it interesting however, that you mention the term "climate change" is replacing "global warming". Justifiably so, as it has been recently found through ocean temperature mapping projects there has been a cooling rather than a warming. )
Those people that are of the belief that the "earth is in danger" are of the belief that humans are dying at record rates through disease and hunger, not to mention the wars and genocides occurring everyday, killing untold thousands, justified and motivated by race and religion. Perhaps stating the "earth is in danger" is not correct. It should be replaced with "humanity is in danger"

Dan writes:

I think it is a great topic. In fact any topic that asks us to reconcile our faith with scientific facts is fantastic for us as believers.

Why it is fantastic for believers to have to reconcile faith with scientific facts? It is certainly not an easy thing for the Christian community to find congruency with science, never has. Take evolution as an example. This was a major shake up for the Christian community in it's day, science proving the earth's age as being somewhat more than 6000 years old. The reconciliation of this concept was not fantastic by any stretch. Now the generally accepted and adopted belief amongst Christians is an extremely confusing hybrid "evo-creationism" leaving the remainder of the literal Christians reconciling things such as 100 million year old dinosaurs bones as "put there by God to test our faith".
That being said, I am unsure which definition of "fantastic" you were meaning to use here, was it "extravagantly fanciful; marvelous" or "imaginary or groundless in not being based on reality; foolish or irrational"? OK OK, I'm a little tongue in cheek here, I realize the definition is the first, based on the fact that you think of it as a "great topic" to which I would agree wholeheartedly.

Dan, Feel free to comment, or better yet feel free to quote me on your blog and we can have a back and forth. And anyone else out there with thoughts on this topic, feel free to comment or quote me on your blogs. Just remember to be respectful.

AS

Update - Dan's Response to THIS post is located here (Http://strangershereourselves.blogspot.com)

BTW, welcome back to your blog.. I still hope the key fit! ;-)