The Rosetta space mission and the alien deception

I would say that this video needs no invitation as the video speaks for itself, but hell why not. In this video, I explain the motive behind the Rosetta space mission and the so called "scientific" reasons given for it in relation to the coming alien deception.

The Rosetta space mission and the alien deception :

a reply to: BlackManINC

Cannot watch the video on my device. Any transcript I can read?

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: BlackManINC

Cannot watch the video on my device. Any transcript I can read?

I'll see what I can do, but the video can be summed up like this. Since these "scientists" cannot provide any evidence for the materialistic explanation of the origin of life by a theory called abiogenesis on earth, they are now kicking the can down the road about life arriving on earth from space by means of panspermia. And as I show in the video, this is a theory that has long been discredited as it has been shown that there are far too many obstacles that panspermia has to overcome for it to be possible at all in the first place. They want you to believe this rubbish because they want you to believe that there is life on other planets.

a reply to: BlackManINC

I think there is high chances of life on other planets. Evolution seems to makes sure of it. No need for panspermia. The problem is, we cannot even pretend to know how the heck an alien life looks like exactly in the first place.

How do you look for something you cannot even imagine?

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: BlackManINC

There is life on other planets. Evolution makes sure of it. No need for panspermia. The problem is, we cannot even pretend to know how the heck an alien life looks like exactly in the first place.

You see folks, this is what counts as "science" to the evolutionist. I believe evolution is real, so that means there is life on other planets because I say so.

a reply to: BlackManINC

Evolution does exist.

This doesn't exclude the possibility of a "programmer" making sure that evolution exist in the first place...

Maybe some agent augments the probability of life forming out of simple molecules. Evolution is a mechanism, nothing more. We have yet to find the rest of the machine.

a reply to: BlackManINC
I can't watch your video right now, but since you seem so eager to deride real scientists, I'm sure you wouldn't mind outlining what your qualifications are? I'll be waiting. In the meantime, however, I think I'll stick with academia and currently accepted theory (not to mention logic and common sense) over some know-it-all on the internet. And just a friendly heads up: the motto here is 'Deny Ignorance'. Deny. Not 'Embrace'.

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: BlackManINC

Evolution does exist.

This doesn't exclude the possibility of a "programmer" making sure that evolution exist in the first place...

That's called guided evolution, which you are welcome to believe, just don't call it "science".

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
I can't watch your video right now, but since you seem so eager to deride real scientists, I'm sure you wouldn't mind outlining what your qualifications are?

In what universe are the two even related? What does it matter to the video? If only qualified "experts" were allowed to post on ATS, ATS would be a very small place.

And for the record, qualification is not a proof in favour of a theory. I saw alot of so-called "experts" make really dumb theories, and alot of so-called "normal" people make truly genius masterpieces.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
a reply to: BlackManINC
I can't watch your video right now, but since you seem so eager to deride real scientists, I'm sure you wouldn't mind outlining what your qualifications are? I'll be waiting. In the meantime, however, I think I'll stick with academia and currently accepted theory (not to mention logic and common sense) over some know-it-all on the internet. And just a friendly heads up: the motto here is 'Deny Ignorance'. Deny. Not 'Embrace'.

My qualifications are common sense, logic and research. I don't need a bunch of alphabets behind my name to understand basic science, which is what this is all about. People will believe anything as long as they call themselves "scientists", a word that has now become synonymous with the word "priest", because whatever they say is infallible. This is the typical response of someone who wants to appeal to authority because they can't address you on the evidence.

originally posted by: BlackManINC

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: BlackManINC

There is life on other planets. Evolution makes sure of it. No need for panspermia. The problem is, we cannot even pretend to know how the heck an alien life looks like exactly in the first place.

You see folks, this is what counts as "science" to the evolutionist. I believe evolution is real, so that means there is life on other planets because I say so.

Please, share with us how life works in the Universe.

I am interested in your version.

originally posted by: BlackManINC

EvoThat's called guided evolution, which you are welcome to believe, just don't call it "science".

You are welcome to stay safely inside your box. You sem very confident about your knowledge of every life forms in the universe, I would not want to break your confidence.

originally posted by: wdkirk

originally posted by: BlackManINC

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: BlackManINC

There is life on other planets. Evolution makes sure of it. No need for panspermia. The problem is, we cannot even pretend to know how the heck an alien life looks like exactly in the first place.

You see folks, this is what counts as "science" to the evolutionist. I believe evolution is real, so that means there is life on other planets because I say so.

Please, share with us how life works in the Universe.

I am interested in your version.

There are only two versions for how life arrives in this world, it was either designed or it evolved, and there is nothing at all that is new or scientific about evolution because it never started off as a scientific theory in the first place. It did not start with Darwin or any "scientist", the idea is as old as written history. Watch the video and my version of how I believe life arrived will become crystal clear.

a reply to: BlackManINC

How does it feel to pretend to know everything?

You call that scientific? You are simply shooting guesses about something we know nothing about.

"There are only two way for life to appear". Even I am not that arrogant.

a reply to: BlackManINC

Watch the video and my version of how I believe life arrived will become crystal clear.

Did you produce this video?

originally posted by: swanne
In what universe are the two even related? What does it matter to the video? If only qualified "experts" were allowed to post on ATS, ATS would be a very small place.

And for the record, qualification is not a proof in favour of a theory. I saw alot of so-called "experts" make really dumb theories, and alot of so-called "normal" people make truly genius masterpieces.

It doesn't matter to the video. Nor was I claiming or even insinuating that only 'experts' be allowed to post. That would be ridiculous, so please don't put words in my mouth. I agree with everything else you said.

Judging by the OP's tone and the fact that they claim the panspermia hypothesis to be discredited (it isn't), I strongly suspect that they have no formal education or research experience in abiogenesis, cosmology, or directed panspermia, yet they talk about actual scientists in said fields in a derogatory tone, and call prevailing hypotheses 'rubbish'. I'm curious what makes them feel as if they know better than the people who have spent their lives actually researching such things.

originally posted by: BlackManINC
There are only two versions for how life arrives in this world, it was either designed or it evolved,

Your fallacy is: Denying the antecedent

en.wikipedia.org...

and there is nothing at all that is new or scientific about evolution

I suggest you read up on the topic before further making a fool of yourself.

en.wikipedia.org...

because it never started off as a scientific theory in the first place.

Correct. It started off as a hypothesis.

en.wikipedia.org...


I know learning is hard but your life would be more enriched for it. Give it a shot sometime.

a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

Fair enough, I sincerely apologize for my harshness, you make a very good point indeed.

Many thanks for your clarification.

A star for you mate.

a reply to: BlackManINC

I explain...

So that's your voice over before William Cooper?...

& you called them "heathens"?...



This video does nothing to prove there isn't life on other Planets...


If anything the self-assured tone made me adamant there is life out there...

originally posted by: BlackManINC

There are only two versions for how life arrives in this world, it was either designed or it evolved

Completely misunderstanding and misrepresenting Evolutionary Theory by attempting to pigeon hole it in this context. Neither abiogenesis nor panspermia have anything to do with evolution. Biological evolution is a study of how organisms changed and evolved over time AFTER life originated on earth. The origins of life are in now way part of the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis. Perhaps some more research and a better understanding of what you claim to be debunking is in order.

and there is nothing at all that is new or scientific about evolution because it never started off as a scientific theory in the first place. It did not start with Darwin or any "scientist", the idea is as old as written history.

While its true that concepts such as common decent can be traced as far back as Pre-Socratic Greek philosophers like Anaximander and further postulated on by Aristotle who was the first to conceptualize species, it is completely untrue that there is nothing new or scientific about evolution. It may have been postulated earlier in history(though unlike your claim, not as far back as the beginning of written history) but Darwin was the first person to put it into scientific context and terms. It is scientific and despite the protestations of many, evolution is a fact.

Watch the video and my version of how I believe life arrived will become crystal clear.

Some people can't view the videos depending on how they are visiting ATS. its on you to provide a good summary and description of the video. Even more so, telling people to watch a video to understand "your version" of how life began instead of just explaining what you think is a bit suspect, in my opinion.