Jim Turner wrote:
>I'm curious, can you tell us what the primary evidence the astrophysicists
>used to support there belief of life on other planets? Did they use
>probability? If so was it based on the existence of a high number of
>planets, or was it more evolutionary?
Hugh Ross makes a good case for there being no other populated
planets in his book "Creation and Time". His arguement is based on the
fact that so many conditions are necessary for life to arise and thrive
that it is almost inconceivable for it to happen even once, let alone more
than once.
Mike Jaqua
Kalamazoo, MI
pmjaqua@pwinet.upj.com
*********************************
ALAN KEYES FOR PRESIDENT !!!!!!
*********************************