And, you clearly have a lot invested in your beliefs, and that is why logic, science, and reason aren’t convincing you otherwise.

Take a sip.

I’m gonna keep this short, because I feel like we could go ’round and ’round until the Earth explodes.

You mean until Jesus comes back.

Again, bible versus mean very little, and aren’t useful in discussions about space and the universe. You can’t use the bible as evidence to suggest that there are no aliens out there, it just lacks relevancy.

Actually, I used Bible verses to respond to your statements about how the Bible understood science, not proof of Alien existence one way or another, it’s not in there. 

As for the radio waves thing, I know very well that radio waves is what we are looking for, and that they cut through space better than anything. What I’m pointing out (and upon rereading my post I realize I did not word this correctly) is your claim that the lack of radio signals from outer space concludes that there are no aliens out there. This kind of conclusion would never even be considered among the people who actually conduct this research, in fact, jumping to conclusions like that is of no use to any intelligent persons.

Take another sip. I actually only think the radio waves thing only presents a problem for evolutionists. If you don’t believe in a Universe Billions of years old, you can simply conclude they haven’t arrived yet.

I believe that assuming there aren’t is immensely stupid, since I don’t believe in mystic religion.

Take another sip. 

For you, you have your faith, which prevents you from keeping your mind open and aiding in the progression of human knowledge. And honestly, I think thats pretty dangerous.

Maybe, if human knowledge works hard enough, it can blow up Earth. Regardless, I didn’t reach this conclusion about aliens based on the Bible, but reading of science and the requirements for life.

Your "proof" for Christ rising is nothing of the kind. You provide no evidence, only an argument put forth by a fabulous writer. I really hope you aren’t this quick to jump to conclusions. You must be much more careful about what you blindly believe. You are no more credible or reliable than one of those alien abductees on TV if you keep presenting conclusions like this.

Well, Mister E, all we can present here is arguments. There’s no way to present actual evidence, other than sharing the testimony that’s been provided. It’s credible and it’s been well-established. 

What if I told you that Christ’s’ body has been found, or that the disciples hid it to legitimize their religion. You wouldn’t be able to refute or even argue that, and so easily has your basis for believing in Christianity been demolished.

Uh, yeah. First of all, the body hasn’t been found. Secondly, the disciples hiding it (actually stealing it away) presents a very serious problems. Ten of the Apostles were martyrs, one suffered loss of everything else.

If they’d stolen the body, that would mean they died for a lie, but not just that, they died for a lie they knew to be false. Many men in history have died for false things: Nazism, Communism, etc. But none of them have thought things were false and died for them anyway when they could save themselves by fessing up. 

Given that they’d ran off and left him to die in the first place, it seems very improbable that they’d risk their lives in the manner and that all 10 of them would die like this. If he wasn’t risen and didn’t appear in a vision to Saul of Tarsus, what explains the man’s conversion from persecutor of the Church to its greatest apostle? Seems hard to figure, given the high cost he paid.

We never found Hitler’s body, did he ascend to heaven? Maybe he descended to hell.

Actually Hitler’s remains were found in 1945 by the KGB. Even if they weren’t, it’d be a faulty analogy. Christ’s body was not missing at the time of his death. We knew where it was. It was only after burial, that Christ’s body disappeared from a guarded tomb after the body had been buried.

This is actually a poorly developed myth that a creationist put together and got all the other creationists to believe it. The formation of galaxies, planets, and life actually expelled more energy, and follows the laws of entropy very well. Evolution is the sum of order leading to chaos. So, I’m sorry to say but you’ve been fooled. If I were you I’d stop using that as an argument, doesn’t help you, it only hurts you.

Actually, when you get a direct answer, it can’t help but help me, as I examined your answer to Shaun:

But your real question is, what happened that sparked life on Earth 4 billion years ago? The Elements combined to form amino acids, which in turn somehow produced protein synthesis and DNA. We don’t know how yet, but thats the best theory we have based on facts and evidence.

If that’s the best we have, that "somehow" it happened, you wonder why folks don’t buy this. That’s total bowl. Basically, evolution has this for origins of life:

1. ???????

2. Amino Acids

3. ???????

4. Life on Earth Results

You then went on to write to Shaun:

I know what you’re going to say next: "Well god must have done it then". There is no evidence or facts to support that, and does not hold up as a plausible explanation, only a scape goat for something we don’t yet know.

Given the naturalistic hypothesis of evolution, nothing other than a big rock that has, "Hey, this is God" will ever be considered evidence for a designer or God. The assumption that everything results from a naturalistic cause leads to a point where when evidence shows up indicating a designer, that is put aside because the pre-supposition of naturalistic causes does not allow for design.

Only that the British never said that George Washington was the true George Washington. Your comparison isn’t valid because the British never tried to claim that George didn’t exist. On other hand, you’ve told me that all other religions are wrong. The Jews don’t think Jesus was the messiah, you do, sooooo how do I know you’re right and they’re wrong?

Well, no one with a knowledge of history will say Christ didn’t exist. There are enough accounts from Josephus, the Talmud, etc. to indicate he did live and die. 

What is the reason? There’s only one reason to believe and that is that He is risen. No faith has survived what Christianity has survived. There were countless people who claimed to be the Messiah in Jesus’ day, yet all are pretty much forgotten vapors. What seperated Jesus from a thousand men who came claiming to be the chosen one? The evidence is there for those who will examine it.

No one seriously considers the idea that we didn’t evolve. Creation is a fun idea that people like to fantasize about, but no one actually believes it to be true. There just isn’t room for it anymore, we know too much about what really happened, end of story.

You can take a sip. It’s not an ad hominem, but another fallacy, an ad populum:

An argumentum ad populum (Latin: "appeal to the people"), in logic, is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or all people believe it; it alleges that "If many believe so, it is

Not only is it an Populum, it’s an untrue fallacy at that, according to an MSNBC poll:

48% believe man was created in his present form, only 13% believe man evolved without any guidance from God. Sorry E, the people don’t agree.

There are bacteria on Earth that prosper next to hydrothermal vents on the ocean floor, living in conditions of harsh sulfides and temperatures upwards of 200 degrees F.

And indeed, there may be bacteria on other planets, but that’s not intelligent life.

Water is essential for life, but there are so many other factors. In each solar system, there’s a habital zone. Too far away, you freeze, too close you burn up. There’s the position of your solar system in the galaxy. Too close or too far away from the center and it will not support life. You need large planets surrounding you to take hits from the debris. The crust of a planet comes into play, it has to be the right composition. You have to have the right type of sun and the right size moon to control gravitation. 

All told the odds of there being intelligent life on another plan is 10 to the power of 15 which is enough to make me conclude there’s no intelligent life in our galaxy. One hundred billion star systems v. odds of 1 in a 1,000 trillion of the presence of intelligent life. 

While I would never speak for the Universe (it’s a big place, so the 1 in a 1,000 trillion could come true out there.) The odds are mind boggling that you’d have 2 planets, let alone 12 or 15 or several hundred and given the vastness of our own galaxy, it really doesn’t matter if there’s intelligent life somewhere else, we’ll never see them.

Sorry buddy, your god creating life thing just doesn’t work.

I think it does and what I find revealing about this conversation is that the alien life thing really seems to be your substitute for God. You’ve argued for intelligent life that breathes helium or nitrogen when we’ve never found such a creature. Despite SETI’s work for decades, we really have no proof of aliens, but you believe "they’re out there." With the main argument that they could be if physics and life as we know it were entirely different in some other part of the galaxy.

There, now we’re even. 

You support the psychological torture of homosexuals by constantly berating that they are diseased and wrong.

I don’t constantly that, only on weekends and holidays. In all seriousness, there is a point and that is to not have our society support dysfunction. 

You support the death penalty which is cruelty, 

No, it isn’t. It’s justice.

you support wars and violence, death, killing,

So did FDR, I’d love to hear you rant against him and the soldiers who landed on D-day

You say animals aren’t superior to men, but you seem to support better treatment of animals than men by other men.

Tell me, Mister E, do you want to go out and shoot the polar bear? Are you the type of sicko who will go out and shoot a baby polar bear to get your jollies? Is that the type of polar-bear killing creep you are? Huh? If then you should let it go. /counter Mr. E off.

The fact is that if a bear viciously killed a man, it should be killed. If an animal is a threat to national security (say terrorists have made them carriers of a biological weapon)  than human life and society should be protected.

Your inability to tell the difference between innocent and guilty life, senseless killing that devalues, and necessary killing that defends it is neurotic at best.

Even if it was so, Utah is fairly exceptional with a population that’s around 70 + % Mormon, and not all those are conservatives or Republicans.