If God Isn’t God, Then Who or What Is God? Part One

In my opinion, all this Biblical nonsense boils down to a collection of myths and fairy tales for grownups. For those who really have the faith, I’m easy. But I think the concept of the Biblical God (and associated baggage) is the greatest con job ever fostered on the great unwashed. Unless, assuming that God or the gods (i.e. – Zeus, etc.) weren’t totally fabricated out of whole cloth, then maybe, just maybe, the gods, including God, are extraterrestrials.

I have argued that the concept of a supernatural, creator, all-knowing, all-powerful, God is philosophically flawed. But, there remains the question, if God isn’t really God, who is God? Well, IMHO, God isn’t God, since God is a flesh-and-blood extraterrestrial (ET)!

There are two variations to that possibility.

Here’s one of those variations. What if God were in reality a very ‘flesh-and-blood’ extraterrestrial computer programmer, a computer programmer who has written a software package called, say “Planet Earth”? Maybe it’s a computer or interactive video game – maybe a homework assignment for a smart extraterrestrial student.

Anyway, computer software easily explains all the Biblical miracles (virgin births; the resurrection, etc.); or anomalies (like where did all the rain come from vis-à-vis the Biblical Flood, and where did all that water eventually go; how did Jonah survive inside a large fish, etc.) or inconsistencies (like Cain’s wife; the discrepancies between Biblical time and geological time). Regarding the Biblical flood, no humans actually died; no animals suffered and drowned, and so on, because the humans and animals were never real to start with, just as you and I aren’t real, just part of – for want of a better analogy – a computer game simulation.

The logic goes something like this. Within the observable universe, the probability is high that other extraterrestrial civilizations, with a technology equal to or greater than our own exist. By parallel with our civilization, we can assume that other intelligent technological beings would have invented something akin to our computers, laptops, PCs, etc. The number of possible computer software programs is no doubt vastly greater than the number of actual technological civilizations in the observational universe. I mean Earthlings have one such civilization, yet we have tens of thousands of interactive computer software programs, much of it entertainment or educationally driven.  That’s a lot of virtual reality, with a lot more technological advances probably to come – think of those holodeck programs featured in Star Trek.  In any event, the ratio of actual realities to virtual realities is lopsided in the extreme and in favour of the virtual. So, the odds are equally as great that you, me, the entirety of our so-called reality, Planet Earth (and neighbourhood), is of the virtual kind. Thus, we have a creator (our extraterrestrial computer programmer), and I guess the word ‘God’ is as good as any for ‘our extraterrestrial father who art our simulator’. Perhaps our concept of ‘God’ is nothing more than a mythological version of some advanced, but hardly supernatural, extraterrestrial computer programmer! Now as long as ET doesn’t hit the delete key!

Again, to drive the point home, let’s suppose, for argument’s sake that in the real physical Universe, there exists some tens of thousands of extraterrestrial civilizations which have evolved technology our equal or better (even more advanced).  The odds are high that most would have invented computers – hardware and software.  Any one civilization, such as our own, have (to date) produced multi-thousands of computer programs, many of which simulate life forms – think of the hundreds, indeed thousands of computer/video games. No doubt these programs will grow, over time, ever more complex and lifelike.

If one advanced civilization produces multi-thousands of individual computer programs that simulate an actual, or imagined, reality, what are the odds that we aren’t one of those thousands vis-à-vis being that advanced civilization that actually exists? How could you know if you were real, or imaginary? I maintain there’s probably no obvious way of you knowing.

Even if there’s only a relatively few actual extraterrestrial civilizations, but untold number of created false realities – what odds we are one of the real ones and not one of the imaginary/simulated many?

Is the idea really so way out in left field that there’s not a snowball’s chance in hell that it could be right? We have to look to advances in our own terrestrial computing power to determine that. Computer generated simulations are already realistic enough that they are used to train astronauts, pilots and MDs and other humans in professional activities where mistakes in training, if done in real situations, could be disastrous.  Our cinema industry has already produced computer generated virtual reality films, bypassing real actors and real scenery. It’s entirely possible (legal issues aside) to bring back in a sense dead actors to star again in new productions. We’ve all been awed by computer generated special effects in films that are so realistic that if you didn’t actually know better, you’d swear were real.

Walk into any DVD store and you’ll find thousands of video (computer) games and/or simulations that you can run on your PC.  Most have ‘humans’ in various role-playing guises that are software generated and which you interact with. The reality factor is increasing by leaps and bounds. At what point will the software become complex enough that these simulated ‘beings’ are advanced enough to have self awareness? What happens when the software programming these virtual ‘humans’ becomes equal to the software (brains) that program us? What happens when the computer software complexity exceeds that of the human brain? Is this far-fetched? Methinks not. Now just replace our virtual ‘humans’ with ourselves, and maybe, just maybe, we’re the virtual reality in somebody (something) else’s actual reality.

If we, Planet Earth, and our observable universe are nothing but a simulation, that can explain (or at least rationally account for) any and all anomalies (miracles?) that you care to bring up. Software (be it of the wet-ware [brains] or of the computer variety) can create any sort of simulated reality – it doesn’t even have to be logical or explainable. Here are just a few examples off the top of my head.

Astronomy One: When considering things cosmological, it’s become apparent that astronomers only observe about 4% of the matter that should be present. That is, about 96% of the matter that should be present and detectable to account for the observed behaviour of our observable universe is missing! Now 1% might be understandable givens measurement uncertainty (error bars), but hardly 96%! So, cosmologists have postulated concepts which they have termed ‘dark matter’ and ‘dark energy’ to make up the deficit. However, nobody has the foggiest idea what exactly ‘dark matter’ and ‘dark energy’ actually is. Neither has actually been detected – obviously. Of course in an artificial simulated universe, one needs no correlation between cause (amount of matter) and effect (behaviour of the observable universe). In fact, it makes the programming that much simpler. By human analogy, I’m sure a detailed study of our video/computer games would show gross violations of the laws of physics. 

Astronomy Two: No astronomer can explain how galaxies form and stay formed, at least without incorporating ‘dark matter’. Yet we see them in lots of shapes and sizes. Maybe it’s as if our hypothetical simulator thought that these were sort of pretty and thus threw several billions of them into the background as decorative wallpaper.

Astronomy Three: Since the Big Bang was first documented by measuring the velocity of far away galaxies, there’s been reoccurring problems with the discovery that parts of the Universe have appeared to be older than the Universe itself (as implied by the Big Bang as documented by the velocities of galaxies) – which is a nonsense. Recalibrations have always rectified this situation, but there are still current unresolved issues here. Further, some distant objects appear to have a physical connection, yet separately each is moving at drastically different velocities. 

Physics One: Then we have the Theory of Relativity and Quantum Physics – both are accurate to a high degree of experimental precision, but they aren’t compatible with each other. Apparently, one (or both) of these theories must be wrong, or at best incomplete. That’s why the unification of the two (a theory of quantum gravity) is physics’ Holy Grail. However, that Holy Grail is proving as difficult to find as the Grail itself! But for the moment, it’s like the universe has two independent sets of laws, or software – one governing the very large; one the very small. This makes no natural or scientific sense. It’s beyond me how that can be if our reality is really reality, but easily explained if our reality is just someone’s simulation.

Physics Two: Within quantum physics there’s something called the wave-particle duality. That is, something can exhibit the properties of both a wave and a particle at the same time. There really is no entirely rational explanation for this, it just is.

Physics Three: Within General Relativity Theory, if there is anything unintuitive it is the fact that in the entire Universe, it is the speed of light that is absolute or fixed, not something like space or time. It’s unintuitive that all other bits and pieces in motion can be added or subtracted. So, if you are in a train that is moving at say 100 km/hour and you throw a ball at 10 km/hour in the direction at which the train is moving, to an observer outside the train, your ball is travelling at 110 km/hour. If you throw the ball towards the rear of the train, an outside observer will measure the ball as moving at 90 km/hour. If on the other hand, you shine a flashlight in the train, an outside observer will see the velocity of the resulting light beam moving at the speed of light – not the speed of plight PLUS the velocity of the train, or the speed of light MINUS the velocity of the train if you shine the flashlight towards the rear, but at the speed of light! That’s nuts, but it’s scientifically nuts and been proven again and again in any experiment you care to devise. I suggest here that a really natural universe wouldn’t have that property, and that this weird absolute in physics has been imposed on us by someone (something) else. 

Physics Four: In our Universe, there should be equal amounts of matter and antimatter, but there’s not. Our antimatter has gone walkabout. While there is one viable physics explanation for this, when considering a simulated universe, it would be easy to program out the antimatter quota which makes for a less complex universe; less complex software that one needs for the simulation. Or, perhaps our simulator hadn’t realized the simulation of physical laws would have predicted antimatter hence never bothered to program it in from the get-go. 

To be continued…

Origins and Ultimate Questions: Part Two

Who are we; where did we come from; what is my purpose in life; why is there something rather than nothing, etc. has probably been pondered by most of us at one time or another. One universal blanket answer is God (or in earlier times, the gods). A rival answer is that the abstract concept of Mother Nature can equally explain all, even if sometimes in the negative – the Universe and you have no ultimate purpose. It, you and I just are.

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

The Origin of Humans: Did God Create Man (and Woman)?

To religious fundamentalists, it’s a no-brainer that God created man – in His image. Now if there were no fossils of manlike hominoid beings; if there were not any current living beings that shared our basic body plan (such as many of the primates do – apes, monkeys, chimpanzees, etc.); if humans were so unique that they stood out like a lone red sports car in a field of black & white model-T’s, or like a lone pineapple in a basketful of tomatoes, then ascribing a very unique origin to humankind would be a plausible hypothesis, of which God or gods might have appealing logic (albeit not proven). 

Alas, that’s not the case whether in terms of the fossil evidence or of body plans and fundamental biochemistry similarities between us and the other primates. We’re just another model-T or tomato (and some would argue rotten tomato at that).

Creation myths trying to explain human origins are, across the board, pretty wild and absurd in light of modern understandings that deal with life, our Universe, and everything. The fictional origin of Frankenstein’s monster (Frankenstein was the name of the scientist, not the name of the creation) makes more sense than breathing some sort of vital essence into dust (and does your basic pile of dust contain all the necessary chemical ingredients to make up and sustain a living human? If so, put some dust on your menu). And that bit about Adam’s rib – well, let me say that the Loch Ness Monster has way more credibility.

Darwin and those following him, those evolutionary biologists and physical anthropologists, have easily accounted for the broad-brush origin and rise of our modern human species.

The Origins of Faith & Belief vs. Blind Faith & Belief:

Do we have faith and belief in a God or gods because there really are gods or God, or maybe we’re hard-wired to believe in some sort of larger-than-life supreme being(s) regardless of evidence and the reality of such beings?

Many children have invisible, make-believe friends and have no trouble accepting Santa, the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny. Of course, kids have usually Mom and Dad, or an adult family of some sort to look after them, so they already have a sort of larger-than-life supreme being(s) in their life.

But when they grow up to adulthood, well, as adults, wouldn’t it be nice if someone or something more adult than ourselves, larger-than-life, were looking after us the way Mom and Dad did when we had our childhood? Someone who would pat us on the back with eternal life (we don’t really want to die) if we’re good men and women (as opposed to when we were boys and girls).  And so it’s easy and desirable to believe that and have faith.

I have no issue with those who have a belief or a faith in a God or gods or this or that religion – god knows there’s enough of them on the market to pick and choose from.  However, what I do have issues with are those who have an absolute blind faith or blind belief in, whatever, like kids have a blind faith in the existence of Santa, and for a similar reason. Kids are trusting of adults, their parents and family and will swallow the story – at least until old enough to think through the logic for themselves. Adults too, starting as children, are trusting of authority figures or people they trust – priests, their parents (again), teachers, friends, books, etc. authored by those apparently in the know – who told you it (a God or gods or brand of religion) was so, and so you swallow their version without any critical thought, hook, line and sinker, because unlike Santa, the logic doesn’t reveal itself quite so easily to be as absurd. It’s easier to be told what to think, than to actually think for yourself.

So, for those who still have faith and belief after they have thought for themselves through the issues, well again, I have no difficulty with that. For those of you who believe and have faith because it was rammed down your throat, and because it satisfies that hard-wired area of your brain that wants a larger-than-life figure to be their invisible, make-believe guardian, well, maybe that’s why religious figures refer to their subjects as their flock – sheep one and all.  

The Ultimate Questions (and Answers):

Is there one? I know that it (‘life, the universe and everything’) was asked in “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” and that the answer was ‘42’, but I don’t think we’ll count that as philosophically meaningful. I also think we need to exclude personal reflections or personal ultimate questions like ‘who am I’ or ‘where am I going’ or ‘what is my purpose in life’, etc. Ultimately, when it comes to personal reflections, only you can ask and answer such questions yourself using whatever tools you have at your disposal.

Is there any preordained point or preconceived purpose to the Universe? That is do we have any implication that the ever evolving and expanding Universe has a goal or seeks to achieve something? Does the Universe possess some sort of special (undefined but natural) force or quality such that its origin and evolution has an ultimate unique meaning? Or does it just exist with no more purpose than say a cosmic ray has? This question is probably somewhat outside the realm of physics and cosmology, but that sure hasn’t stopped physicists and cosmologists from putting in their two cents worth! Anyway, here’s my two cents.

Well I think we can all agree that the fundamental particles (electrons, quarks, etc.) that make up all the matter and transmit all the forces, and the atoms they in turn make up, and the molecules that atoms form by linking up and bonding with other atoms, even the most complex of them, merely obey various natural physical and chemical ‘laws’ (they are very law abiding), having no choice in the matter given that they have no independent free will or decision making abilities or the ways and means of emitting emotions. They have no intellect, cannot comprehend themselves, far less anything else.

We’d all probably agree that all the macro non-organic things that particles and forces, atoms and molecules make up, like stars (and groups of stars like galaxies) and planets and associated debris likewise obey natural ‘laws’ and also have no intellect or ability to emote. In other words, the Sun and the Moon don’t know you, have no means of knowing you, they can’t deduce you exist and therefore can hardly care that you exist (or don’t exist or cease to exist for that matter). Since there was an era in the history of the Universe when only that sort of stuff existed, the sort of stuff we agree was never intellectual and emotive, one can hardly imagine the Universe then, all this collection of stuff, in a pre-life era, having any purpose or objective or goal, or agenda (or whatever other synonymous word you have in mind).

At this point, one question raises its head and requires an answer, and that is where did all the natural ‘laws’ that rule the Universe (and all that it contains) come from? Well, the way I see it, there are X number of fundamental particles – the ultimate building blocks from which all else flows – like quarks and electrons. Each type of fundamental particle has an intrinsic value to a number of properties, values unique to it and it alone. These properties are mass, and spin and charge, and the like. All of these fundamental particles, the bits and pieces of the Universe, interact with other bits and pieces. Anytime bit A interacts with piece B, you’ll get a result, AB. You’ll always get AB. If bit A interacts with particle C, you’ll get result AC and not, say, AB. And so on and so on. We interpret AB and AC, etc. as ‘laws’ because specific results occur in a consistent manner whenever specific bits and pieces interact. And so on up the scale it goes. Two atoms of hydrogen interact with one atom of oxygen, giving water – not, say table salt now and then. If the reverse were true, if two atoms of hydrogen plus one atom of oxygen sometimes yielded table salt, or if A + B sometimes gave AC, or BC or XYZ, then the stuff of the Universe would be unstable at best and hence we’d have a Universe not exactly conducive to life, and so we wouldn’t be around to ask the question in the first place.

At some stage however, by the laws of probability, sheer chance, by accident (no preconceived purpose or goal involved) a small part of our stuff, under the general natural ‘laws’ inherent in physics and chemistry, became organized enough, complex enough, to qualify as something we’d all agree on as ‘life’. Say a proto-cell, even a microbe. The question now is, does a microbe emote or have an intellect. No. It has however achieved purpose – survival and reproduction and things of that ilk. So, now a tiny part of the Universe has a purpose, but the microbe certainly didn’t absorb or learn this concept of purpose from the wider outside Universe since the wider outside Universe doesn’t have this concept as part of it’s makeup in the first place. 

Ultimately microbes evolve and life got even more complex, complex enough that traits such as intellect and emotion took on some form of reality. But again, it was inherited from what came before. So, does the Universe have a purpose? No. Do some parts of the Universe express a purpose, or intellect or ability to emote? Yes. But it’s not a universal one as different bits have (to a greater or lesser degree) somewhat different purposes, intellects and emotions. An electron is an electron is an electron, but an octopus (having a purpose, intellect and ability to emote) isn’t a cockatoo which isn’t a human both of which also have purposes, intellects and emotions. Even one human obviously differs from another human with respect to these traits. Question: does the fact that terrestrial life in general or humans in particular, exist, impart some sort of higher meaning or purpose to the Universe at large? Not on your Nellie!

Let’s take a simple case and assume that life is confined to Planet Earth (although the argument holds even if extraterrestrial life exists). Let’s further assume that an uncaring, un-intellectual,  asteroid, with no goal or purpose to its existence apart from the fact that it just is, slams into our planet and all life goes kaput! Or perhaps our uncaring Sun goes nova, achieving the same result. Then the Universe is totally back to square one – an assorted collection of primitive stuff with no laudable purpose, no intellect, no ability to emote – no agenda, hidden or otherwise. My conclusion is that life (high or low) is an unplanned for occurrence in a Universe that has no purpose – the Universe just is, in all its uncaring glory.

Thusly I will say again however that there is no purpose to the Universe – it just is, a given, totally inanimate like it or lump it. You are an irrelevancy as far as the Universe is concerned – not that it has a consciousness where the concept of concerned could even arise. So, the Universe, as far as we all are concerned, is impartial, uncaring, has no mercy for those foolish enough to put themselves in harms way, and ultimately doesn’t give a stuff about you, your existence, your suffering. In fact, if Planet Earth and all it contained were to disappear down a Black Hole this instant, the Universe would go on its merry way, no more noticing the loss than you notice the flaking off of a dead skin cell.  

Apart from that, I’d wager if you asked 1000 ordinary people, even 1000 philosophers, religious leaders, scientists, etc. about an ultimate question, you’d probably get 500 different answers! Therefore, I doubt that there is any such thing as an ultimate question (and therefore no ultimate answer), certainly nothing that’s going to enlighten us about ‘just who is this God person anyway?’ – And no, I don’t consider that to be an ultimate question. But we need a place to start with some sort of ultimate question, like, where did our Universe (including us) come from?  And so I refer back to the beginning of this little exercise!

Origins and Ultimate Questions: Part One

Who are we; where did we come from; what is my purpose in life; why is there something rather than nothing, etc. has probably been pondered by most of us at one time or another. One universal blanket answer is God (or in earlier times, the gods). A rival answer is that the abstract concept of Mother Nature can equally explain all, even if sometimes in the negative – the Universe and you have no ultimate purpose. It, you and I just are.

Cosmological Origins & Considerations: Did God create the Universe?

To be honest, cosmologists have no need of a God Hypothesis to explain the origin of our Universe, be it the standard model of the Big Bang event or a variation thereof (and there are cosmologists who don’t buy into the standard model) and you won’t find any mention of the God Hypothesis as a plausible possibility in their textbooks and given in university lecture halls.

Still, ‘In the beginning’ - that’s a good place to start, although I actually prefer the phrase ‘once upon a time’ for reasons that will become apparent. The standard cosmological model outlining the origin or our Universe via the Big Bang event is, well let me just say I don’t accept a word of it and I won’t go into massive detail about it. It’s very easy to get hold of any number of popular accounts that detail the standard Big Bang scenario. However, in extreme briefness, the standard Big Bang event postulates the origin of all matter where no matter existed before; the creation of all energy, where no energy existed previously; the creation of time itself where previously there was no time; and lastly the creation of space where before-the-fact there was no space. To add insult to our intelligence, the Big Bang was also a quantum event, so you are forced to believe that the entire contents of our Universe were once crammed into a space the size of an atom or less. Sure it was! In fact there’s so much philosophical baggage for the standard Big Bang scenario to have to lug around that even the standard Biblical account is slightly, ever so slightly, more believable, but only just – barely just.

In proposing an alternative scenario, I can’t really throw the Big Bang baby out along with the philosophical bathwater, because there’s too much real observational evidence in support of some sort of Big Bang event. My alternative just postulates that the Big Bang event happened in pre-existing space and time, and that the matter and energy of our Universe is just a recycling of the contents of a previous universe that, in the reverse of our expanding Universe, contracted until it all came together in a Big Crunch so warping the fabric of space and time that it ended up spewing the contents out in what we see as our Universe. Oh, the transition from a previous Big Crunch universe to our Big Bang Universe was a macro event, not a micro (quantum) one.

Anyway, either our Universe had a beginning (the Big Bang), and will have (based on current cosmological observations) an ultimate, albeit long drawn out termination (a Heat Death or Big Rip), or the Universe is infinitely cyclic (Big Crunch – Big Bang – expansion – contraction – Big Crunch – Big Bang – etc.).

In the former case, what’s the point of God creating and ruling over a Universe that’s ultimately going to spend an eternity in a very cold and dead state, or for there to be a Heaven (or Hell) that exists within such an ultimately dreary Universe? The realm of God, of Heaven and Hell, has ultimately got to be part of our Universe and subject to the same sort of fate as the Universe overall will share.

In the latter case, with infinitely cyclic universes, there is no need for a creator God at all. Or, maybe God, over an eternity, has created lots of various universes, one after the other, for His amusement, and perhaps like a kid tired of a new toy, abandoned it (or destroyed it via a Big Crunch) after a time. Our Universe could be but the latest in this series of amusements, sort of like a child playing with a doll house and dolls for a while. Perhaps God is akin to a child and we are toys to be played with and manipulated. God can sure throw tantrums like a spoiled brat! [Recall the original ‘Star Trek’ episode ‘Squire of Gothos’ for an illustration of what I’m on about – the episode illustrates a very similar idea.] Regardless, perhaps this is yet another interesting variation of the cyclic or oscillating universe scenario where there are lots of universes in turn, but supernaturally, not naturally created. However, I’d ultimately have to argue that if Mother Nature can create one universe, Mother Nature can create more than one universe. And while God can create as many universes as He likes, what’s the logical point of doing so? Isn’t our Universe a big enough playground for Him? 

The Origin of Life on Earth (or Elsewhere): Did God Create Life?

The upshot is that those biologists and biochemists who study the origin of life, whether an origin indigenous to our planet, or one arriving from the depths of outer space via a panspermia scenario, have not required resorting to supernatural explanations for the creation of life. You won’t find the phrase ‘and then a miracle occurred’ in the textbooks between discussions that link pre-biology with biology.

Life, even microbial life, is still very, very complex (try making a microbe from scratch if you doubt it). The fact that life arose from scratch on Earth within a very, very short span of geological time after the planet formed is a bit suspect IMHO. But what if Earth were seeded by microbial life forms already in existence from space (or deliberately seeded by extraterrestrials as the Nobel Prize winner Francis Crick has proposed)? Now I realize that just puts off the origin of life question to another time(s) and place(s). However, given the vastness of the cosmos is far greater than that of our finite globe, and given that the cosmos existed for vastly longer periods of time before our sun, solar system and home planet came into existence, such additional time and space easily turns the improbable into a near certainty. And once established somewhere, life could spread throughout that time and space, until it reached us.

Earth arose billions of years after our Universe and our galaxy had evolved, ample time for life to have arisen elsewhere, and seed the early Earth. This is the concept of panspermia. We know that comets, meteors, and the cosmic dust within outer space are chock-o-block full of complex organic molecules. We know that simple terrestrial life can survive the outer space environment if suitably shielded – and it doesn’t take much to do the shielding. We know that surface bits from planets and their moons can be ejected into space, carry a cargo of microbes, and land on another planet, even eons later with the microbes still viable. Of course 99.999% of all such microbial life will be doomed to forever wander in space or crash onto a cold, surface of a planet with no atmosphere or water, or plunge into a star, etc. But, sheer numbers, like terrestrial plant seeds, will insure that now and again some microbes will land on a hospitable abode and be fruitful and multiple and evolve. The interesting bit is that if then, then now. And thus panspermia will be happening today. Certainly some meteorites which have impacted Earth have inside them ‘organized elements’ suggestive of microbial structures – the Murchison Meteorite from Australia is one such stone. The problem is terrestrial contamination as there are often lengthy time periods between their fall and their discovery. As an aside, if Fred Hoyle & Chandra Wickramasinghe are correct (and I believe they are), microbes (bacteria and viruses) impacting Earth today are largely responsible for some select and various disease epidemics or pandemics, past, present, and no doubt future.

Further readings:

Crick, Francis; Life Itself: Its Origin and Nature; Simon and Schuster, New York; 1981: 

Davies, Paul; The Fifth Miracle: The Search for the Origin of Life;

Allen Lane, Ringwood, Victoria

; 1998:

Hoyle, Fred & Wickramasinghe, Chandra; Lifecloud: The Origin of Life in the Universe; J.M. Dent  & Sons Ltd, London; 1978:

Hoyle, Fred & Wickramasinghe, Chandra; Diseases from Space; J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd, London; 1979

Ponnamperuma, Cyril (Editor); Comets and the Origin of Life; D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland; 1981:

Seargent, David A. J.; Genesis Stone? The Murchison Meteorite and the Beginnings of Life; Karagi Publications, The Entrance, NSW: 1991:

To be continued…

Polytheism, Monotheism, Extraterrestrial Theism or No Theism?

Is there one God, many gods, extraterrestrial ‘gods’, or no gods? Nothing is set in concrete and everything is grist for the speculative mill.

For the majority of mankind, for the majority of time, polytheism has been the be-all-and-and-all of explaining life, the universe and everything. Lots of phenomena; lots of things to explain; lots of divisions of labour resulting in lots of gods required to explain all.

Then some bright spark comes along and suggests that all these different roles can be in fact rolled into one. So because one God, is easier to come to terms with than dozens of gods, well, make it so, or so be it.

But, does than shift ultimately mean that one God is better than many gods? Are there in fact other gods and God, or other gods but not God?

Well, according to all things Biblical, God’s Commandments verify the existence of other gods

My quick summation goes as follows:

“I am the Lord your God” [Translated, ‘I’m top dog’.]

“Do not have any other gods before me” [Translated: ‘that’s because I am top dog’.]

“You shall not make for yourself an idol [presumably of other gods], whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. [The latter might be the Greek Poseidon, or Roman Neptune, for example.]

“You shall not bow down to them or worship them [presumably those other gods]; for I the Lord your God [He repeats Himself here] am a jealous God [top dogs tend to be wary and even envious of lesser dogs least they gang up on Him] … punishing … those who reject me”.

An analogy strikes me as if there were a group of school kids (gods) all playing relatively nicely among themselves, when the school bully (God) enters, chases them away and spoils everything for everybody!

Or, it’s as if the General (God) is rather miffed – not all that pleased – if the adoring public idolise the Private, the Sergeant, or the Lieutenant – rank has it’s privileges, or at least some rather serious expectations.

Okay, the Bible, being God’s word and all, verifies God has rivals!

Ancient Romans, Greeks, Norse, Egyptians, Celts, Maya, Aztecs, Incas, Polynesians, etc., etc. all had many gods – these ancient peoples weren’t dummies in their belief, so why should they be rubbished for polytheism when you’re not rubbished for monotheism?

One problem with God or gods is with respect to creation. God (or the gods) created the Universe which contains therefore God’s (or god’s) creation, Planet Earth. God (or the gods) created on Planet Earth human beings in His image. Humans are the pinnacle of His (their) creation. We are the jewel in His (their) crown. Humanity is the be-all-and-end-all of all Godly (godly) things. We’re extra special in the eyes of God or the gods. 1) That being the case what fraction of the volume of the observable universe is devoted to providing His (their) supreme creation with a home? A grain of sand is far larger when compared to the size of the Earth it rests upon, than the size of the Earth compared to the observable universe. Translated, God (or the gods) created a heck of a lot of space for no apparent reason since it has no relevance to His (their) special creation – Planet Earth and its human inhabitants. 2) That being the case, what fraction of the age of the Universe has been occupied by – give us a Supreme Creation pat on the back to – humanity? Well, what fraction of 13.7 billion years is the reign of Homo sapiens? Homo sapiens have been making their mark on Terra Firma for some 100,000 years. Do you begin to see something odd here? The Apex of God’s (gods) creation, the creation that gives ultimate meaning to God Himself (gods themselves), humanity, has existed for as close to no time at all as makes no odds. If we’re not special at all in space and time, then we’re not special in the mind of God (or the gods). Or, perhaps what this suggests is that there is no creator God or gods at all.

If you accept the general verdict of history, there has been a transition from polytheism to monotheism; if both God and gods have, or had, reality, how is this explained?  Assimilation or conquest by a monotheistic culture over a more primitive or weaker polytheistic culture is one way – missionaries rule! Still, it’s difficult to overturn the establishment, especially an establishment that’s held sway for thousands of years. Most people, cultures, societies don’t like to have new ideas rammed down their collective throats.

Okay, time to abandon that suggestion and have a bit of fun, speculate, and jump into the deep end of the pool. The basic idea is that the old gods just pack up and leave. If that’s the case, God replaces the religious vacuum left behind. Where did the ancient gods go, assuming they existed in the first place? Back home presumably, wherever home is – probably somewhere out there.

So one other viable alternative to the existence of bona-fide supernatural gods or God is to suggest their bona-fides, while real, isn’t within the realm of the supernatural. That is, presumably, the gods, and God, were flesh-and-blood aliens from space, or in ancient times and human perceptions, a being(s) from a Heaven or from the sky – as in sky beings. One could object that the gods (or God) are visualised or depicted as very human or humanoid (some of those ancient Egyptian gods are a bit suss) and thus the extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) is O U T – out. However, human-like alien beings are not unknown from within the modern day UFO era’s literature. So, appearances might be deceiving. 

One could further postulate that all of the mythological beasties part and parcel of the realms of the gods actually are extraterrestrial creatures – ET’s pets, like say Pegasus! And some of the more humanoid beasties, Medusa, the Cyclops, the Minotaur, well let’s just say they wouldn’t be out of place as aliens you might have to deal with on another planetary abode!

Back to the deep end of the pool and boldly going where angels fear to tread: I’ll start by speculating that it’s relatively easy to envision two separate and rival extraterrestrial civilizations – the gods on the one hand vs. God plus associated crew and underlings (angels, etc.) on the other. Perhaps there was a ‘Star Wars’ of sorts with God sending the gods packing! That’s the most likely scenario since there’s no love lost between God and company, and the gods. Or, perhaps, if you like the Zoo Hypothesis (we’re property – the zoo ‘animals’; ET is the zoo keeper), there was a changing of the guard – the old shift (the gods) clocked off; the new shift (God, etc.) clocks on (except of course God nearly destroys our terrestrial zoo in a fit of temper! Then again, Zeus nearly did the same!) Or, maybe God is a cosmic sheriff with local jurisdiction within our stellar neighbourhood. Sheriff God had to chase the bad guys (the gods) out of Dodge (Planet Earth) for violations of their version of the Prime Directive. But, once a lawman, always a lawman, and so our cosmic sheriff rides into Dodge and imposes His version of the law (‘Thou shall not…’) on us. 

But, maybe the ancient gods haven’t left the building at all since if they had, God wouldn’t be so worried about them and about you cuddling up to, and worshiping them. If the gods had gone walkabout and left, wouldn’t it be a case of ‘out of sight, out of mind’?

Back now into the shallow end of the pool: In the final analysis however, one has to ask whether it is really believable that Planet Earth should have hosted thousands of supernatural gods over the last several thousand years. I mean, if you were to add up all the various major and minor deities that have formed the ‘religious’ bedrocks for society after society after society, it starts to get a bit like a novel that has a few more characters to keep track of as is really necessary to the overall plot.

So, one can easily imagine that there really are no supernatural gods at all, and by implication no God (I mean why should the one exist when the many don’t?). Or, one can pick and choose from the supernatural multitudes and come up with a reasonable handful – except that 1000 people will come up with 1000 different lists. Or, maybe all (or at least most or some) of the gods and perhaps including a God (as one of the many) exist, or did exist, but weren’t really supernatural, only seen through primitive human eyes as supernatural – back to the ETH again.

“What if” there is no God or gods, supernatural or otherwise? Not now, not ever. If one were to sample the world’s population, the majority will confess to a believing in some sort of Supreme Being. [Since the era of polytheism is pretty much gone, I’ll stick to the singular, usually translated as ‘God’.] However, in factual matters, majority doesn’t always rule. If a billion people believe in a foolish idea, it’s still a foolish idea. Anyway, if there is no God of any kind, then you’re on your own. There’s no one to blame for the bad; no one to thank for the good. Trillions of dollars and man-hours; millions of needless sufferings, have been all for naught.

So what if there is no God? While there’s lots of examples one could cite that suggest that the concept of God is illogical and often self-contradictory, that there isn’t one, or at least a logical one, could be a conclusion reached summed up by examining the logic behind the example of what’s commonly called the ‘end of days’ or Armageddon. The point, regarding the whole Biblical end of days, Armageddon, etc. bit, is that the resolution of the whole Biblical end of day’s event or scenario has already been laid out and the exact ending foretold. So, what’s the point in going through the whole exercise? I mean if you know, absolutely know, in advance that you’re doomed to failure – it’s a futile exercise – if you are to flap your arms and try to fly, why bother going through the process?

So if we conclude that there is no God…

Then billions of people, over thousands of years, have spent trillions of ultimately wasted hours in prayer, attending church, observing/attending various religious rituals, spent in religious/Biblical study, door-knocking, preaching, discussing, arguing, going on pilgrimages, etc.

Then all those religious rituals, the do and do not rules that govern things regarding food, dress codes, ceremonies, relationships, sex, and etc. ultimately have been meaningless. 

Then millions of people have been tortured, murdered or executed, imprisoned, ridiculed, humiliated, exiled, and hated for no reason.

Then billions of dollars have been spent on cathedrals instead of say hospitals; Bibles instead of textbooks; educating priests instead of medical doctors, nurses and scientists.

Then for those formally educated and qualified in religious studies, spending entire careers preaching, etc. they have wasted their lives in devotion to an invisible friend that has all the reality of Casper, the Friendly Ghost.

Then multi-millions of animals have been sacrificed and offered up to a supernatural being that doesn’t exist.

Then you can’t blame all your aches and pains, your bad back and creaky joints, on some all knowing great intelligent designer, who apparently bioengineered you (from dust or a rib) while simultaneously failing Bioengineering 101. I mean placing the food tube right next to the breathing tube was a disaster waiting to happen, as evidenced by all those people who choke to death every year. And how many women have died giving birth because the compatibility between the birth canal and the size of the baby, well just wasn’t! A divinely created human wouldn’t be flawed and have need of eyeglasses or a hearing aid. God wouldn’t create a human with jaws to small to allow for wisdom teeth. As to the appendix organ, that’s just another oops.

But “what if” there is a God (or gods). Well, I guess that depends on which one or which version. It all seems to boil down to any one of a multitude to pick and choose from, from monotheism to polytheism to extraterrestrial theism. Go shopping! Polytheism perhaps survives after all. Personally, I find something about the Norse gods quite appealing! They get my vote!

Captain Yahweh and the Starship Heaven: Part Two

We’ve all heard of Heaven, but beyond that the concept is pretty fuzzy depending on your culture, your religion, your upbringing, and your personal interpretation(s). There are probably as many worldviews of Heaven as there are people who think about it. My own unique spin on the concept not only envisions Heaven as a physical place, but a high-tech one as well – not the home of Yahweh (God) the deity (who doesn’t exist) but Yahweh the extraterrestrial – once Captain, now ex-Captain of the Starship Heaven. That is, Heaven is a spaceship (or was – it’s gone away now).

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

3) Enoch Visits the Starship Heaven

Now apparently some flesh-and-blood human mortals have visited Heaven and returned in the flesh-and-blood - Enoch is an example.

Enoch apparently authored a trilogy of books, titled the “Book of Enoch” or “1 Enoch”; then there’s the “Second Book of Enoch” and finally “3 Enoch”.

While the first chapter of the “Book of Enoch” describes the fall of the Watchers, the angels who fathered the Nephilim, the remainder of “1 Enoch” describes Enoch's visits to Heaven in the form of travels, as well as visions and dreams, and his collective revelations about what he saw and learned.

In that first “Book of Enoch” there’s a chapter called “The Astronomical Book” (1 Enoch 72 – 82) which is also called the “Book of the Heavenly Luminaries” or “Book of Luminaries”. 

This chapter or book contains descriptions of the movement of heavenly bodies and of the firmament, as knowledge revealed to Enoch in his trips to Heaven guided by Uriel. Uriel acts firstly as a guide for Enoch in chapter one of the “Book of Enoch”, titled the “Book of Watchers” and he (Uriel) fulfils this capacity in many of the other chapters or books that make up “1 Enoch” like the chapter comprising his astronomical thesis. Now Uriel is one of them there archangels (or senior crewmembers of the Starship Heaven, IMHO) and therefore pretty qualified to act as host and probably chauffeur (shuttlecraft pilot?).

The upshot is that one can visit Heaven up close and personally while in a very much alive physical body and return safely to Earth. Sort of sounds like a Biblical version of Shuttle astronauts visiting the International Space Station!

4) The Afterlife Carrot-and-Stick

So why is there an entire deception over this ultimate Retirement Home in the Sky (Heaven as paradise) concept? Well, it’s a version of the old carrot-and-stick approach. Captain God has got to keep the primitives under his jurisdiction on his straight-and-narrow; keep them in line, off the streets and out of trouble. It’s like being under the thumb of your parents – if you’re good, you get dessert; if not, you get no supper at all. If you’re good, an afterlife of paradise awaits; if you’re bad, an afterlife of hell awaits. That there is no actual afterlife paradise, or afterlife hell, is beside the point. As long as you think there is, you’re under Captain God’s thumb and under control.

Now “life wasn’t meant to be easy” according to the wisdom of a former Australian Prime Minister, and no doubt in 4004 BC it wasn’t for most of the great unwashed. But an afterlife in paradise made all the hardships easier to bear. You were less likely to go out on strike and earn an afterlife down below instead.

5) Resurrection

Now I really have to clear up one very popular conception, or rather a total misconception, and that is, when you die you get resurrected, you go into Heaven, body and all. Consider how many people have died. That would make for one very crowded spaceship! The proof of that ‘no body’ pudding is that archaeologists, anthropologists, forensic professionals, the police, the medical profession, undertakers, etc. deal with dead bodies all the time. If you dig up your great grandfather’s grave you’ll find a body in it – a skeleton at least and skeletons qualify as a body or at least a vital part of what makes a body, a body. If somebody dies in a car accident their body doesn’t suddenly do a vanishing act Heavenly bound.

Some bodies don’t even survive death intact to get transported to Heaven. If you get eaten by a shark, you get converted into fish flesh and fish poo. If you were at ground zero at Hiroshima or Nagasaki your body got vaporised. Many people post death opt to have their bodily remains cremated; ashes either stored in a jar by loved ones or scattered to the four winds eventually to be incorporated into the environment. Your ashes aren’t whisked away to Heaven and reassembled into a resurrected you.

Even if the body remains intact post death, it’s not going to remain that way for very long. The zombies may not get you; the vampires may be denied; but the itty-bitty germs won’t be. A frequent phrase is “what is my purpose in life?” Well, your ultimate purpose for existing is to die and be a food source for bacteria. Your brain, that which contains all of what makes you, you – the ‘inner you’ rots away consumed as food by various microbes. Whatever remains of the ‘inner you’ (memories, personality, etc.) is now housed in millions of microbes. You become microbe flesh.

So, scratch out any immediate thought of resurrection and a quick trip to paradise within seconds of your demise.  

As to a much later, future, resurrection of the body, forget-about-it! Once dead, you’re like that fallen Humpty Dumpty. Once you’re fish poo; vaporised; cremated; your brain scrambled and digested and turned into microbe flesh, no jigsaw puzzle or Rubik’s Cube enthusiast can put you back together again – now or ever. In a nutshell, neither you nor God (supernatural or extraterrestrial) can unscramble a scrambled egg.

Now there will be multi-millions of people who will vehemently disagree with this. Why? People have a vested interest in God being able to unscramble eggs. People desperately want to and need to believe in an afterlife especially one that dangles paradise in front of you. It’s understandable but that doesn’t make it so. 

6) Is There A Starship Hell?

Now I’m sure the question on everybody’s lips is that if there is a Starship Heaven, does this mean there’s also a Starship Hell? No!

Nearly all people, therefore nearly all societies and cultures believe in an afterlife – those multi-millions referenced immediately above. Very few of us want to die even though we have no choice in the matter, so it’s not surprising that we have opted for the next best thing and invented that security blanket – the afterlife – and we would have done so irrespective of any deities be they supernatural or just plain old extraterrestrials.

Another trait universally shared by humans is the concept and application of symmetry. For every concept there is an equal and opposite one, an anti-concept. If you have goodness you have evil; truth vs. lies; beauty vs. ugly; the yin and the yang. So if you conceive of a paradise afterlife in the above direction, there will need to be an anti-paradise afterlife in the downwards direction. And thus nearly all societies have the underworld, or Hades or Hell or whatever you wish to name it.

But since there is no such thing as an afterlife the application of symmetry in this case is totally irrelevant. So just because you have a Starship Heaven (which has nothing to do with your nonexistent afterlife – those concepts of Heaven/paradise and the afterlife being just God’s carrot-and-stick strategy) doesn’t mean you have a Starship Hell – an afterlife in Hell also a part of God’s carrot-and-stick mind control. 

Fortunately, God, his Starship and those carrots-and-sticks have gone away.

Author’s note: All Biblical quotations taken from the King James Version.

Captain Yahweh and the Starship Heaven: Part One

We’ve all heard of Heaven, but beyond that the concept is pretty fuzzy depending on your culture, your religion, your upbringing, and your personal interpretation(s). There are probably as many worldviews of Heaven as there are people who think about it. My own unique spin on the concept not only envisions Heaven as a physical place, but a high-tech one as well – not the home of Yahweh (God) the deity (who doesn’t exist) but Yahweh the extraterrestrial – once Captain, now ex-Captain of the Starship Heaven. That is, Heaven is a spaceship (or was – it’s gone away now).

Let’s start the ball rolling here with a little sci-fi story: Stardate - 4004 BCE: You are directed in this your first command, Captain Yahweh, to proceed at warp speed with your crew of the Starship Heaven to the Sol planetary system in the Alpha Quadrant, third rock outwards, and quietly, discretely, and inconspicuously infiltrate and assist the primitive native hunter-gatherers in the region called the Middle East to attain the next socioeconomic level upwards on the road to their becoming a modern civilization we can openly have diplomatic and trade relations with. Any violation from this Prime Directive will result in the recall of you, your ship and crew to face court-martial.

Postscript: Unfortunately, Captain Yahweh proved unfit for command, suffered a mutiny against him, disobeyed orders, and the rest, as they say, is history. Apart from a modern token presence (UFOs), they (Captain Yahweh, First Officer Jesus Christ, and angelic crew) have all gone now – maybe voluntarily; probably not. So, was Heaven just a spaceship?

Now my basic premise is that God and the Son of God (Jesus Christ – hereafter abbreviated to J.C.) collectively are not supernatural deities but flesh-and-blood extraterrestrials. Recall John 8: 23 “And he [J.C.] said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world” or John 18:36 – “Jesus answered: My kingdom is not of this world”. In order for extraterrestrials to get from there (wherever “not of this world” is) to here (Planet Earth), they will need a spaceship or starship. Since God seems to be the Top Dog, let’s assume he is in command of just such a starship, and since Heaven is considered the place where God dwells or resides or calls home, then I’ll equate the name of his starship with Heaven. God the ET is the Captain of the Starship Heaven. Is there anything in religious texts than helps confirm or contradicts this idea?

There is no absolute agreement among the world’s religions or peoples as to exactly what Heaven is. Some deny the existence of a Heaven in any shape, manner or form. To some, it’s nebulous, even just a state of mind. It might be all in the mind (a spiritual ‘place’ or feeling) or a never-never land like another dimension or higher plane-of-existence (whatever that phrase really means as it’s never been adequately defined to my satisfaction). To others, Heaven is a physical place, your Great Retirement Home in the Sky. For the purposes of this essay, I’ll focus on the traditional monotheistic concept – Heaven is a physical place. Heaven has to exist in our normal four-dimensional space-time in order to accommodate all those past, present and future retirees, except that in reality there actually have never been or will be any heavenly pensioners. But that doesn’t alter the physical reality of Heaven. 

1) Location; Location; Location: Where Exactly is Heaven Located?

Firstly we need to distinguish the heavens from Heaven. The heavens are just another name for the universe or the cosmos – that celestial dome or vault over our heads and ultimately home to all the gods from all societies. But Heaven is where Yahweh (hereafter God) lives.

Well Heaven, God’s home, has to be fairly close by if God is to keep tabs on his Kingdom on Earth since not even God is immune from the restriction posed by Einstein (and confirmed many times over) that being the finite speed of light. So God has got to be close to where it’s all happening – where the action is – so as to fulfil his mission and look after his Chosen People. 

Heaven certainly can’t be placed on top of or inside a fluffy white cloud – that’s a kiddie’s version of non-reality.

Heaven cannot be located here on Planet Earth since there are many Biblical passages that distinguish the two – Luke 11:2 “Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth” or Matthew 6:10 “Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven” or for a different example, Deuteronomy 4:39 “Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the LORD he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: there is none else.”

Heaven tends to be associated with the direction we call ‘up’ or ‘above’. Heaven isn’t sideways in any compass direction, nor is Heaven downwards. Heaven is somewhere far above the surface of the Earth. It’s often synonymous or at least closely associated with the sky or space, especially to the ancients. Well, when we launch our spaceships, we launch in the upwards direction. Our spaceships have to travel through the sky to each space. Of course to the ancients sky and space were synonymous as they couldn’t identify a boundary between one and the other. When we look at our orbiting satellites and spacecraft or where our Apollo astronauts trod the Moon, we don’t look down, we look up. However, when looking up, is there any actual real estate, any physical place, we can associate with ‘paradise’ which is what Heaven is supposed to be? No! The ancients could only have known about the Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn. None of these abodes, viewed in the ‘up’ direction, could remotely be described as a paradise – though the ancients didn’t know that. Since no natural solar system abode serves as a heavenly paradise, and even abodes discovered more recently like Uranus, Neptune and Pluto are hardly paradise-city, we must look elsewhere. 

If Heaven isn’t the Starship Heaven, if Heaven isn’t a spaceship, and if Heaven isn’t on Earth or within our solar system, then the next nearest location of Heaven has to be over four light years away, something quite beyond the comprehension of Biblical scholars of that time. That also introduces that finite speed-of-light restriction since any development on Earth that needed God’s attention would take over a full eight years before that development got resolved.

2) Let’s Get Physical

Probably most Christians consider Heaven a physical place. A spaceship is a physical place.

Heaven is a kingdom, that is, it has a ruler. Well all ships, aircraft and spacecraft have a Top Dog, usually called the ‘captain’. So, the ruler of Heaven is Captain God. Large ships and aircraft, and presumably spaceships (like the fictional NCC 1701 Enterprise) have second-in-command officers. In this case, Jesus Christ is the First Officer. And like First Officer Riker and Captain Picard (of “Star Trek: The Next Generation”), there are lots of Biblical references to J.C. standing or sitting at the right hand of God. For example, Mark 16:19 “So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he [J.C.] was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God”. Ships, aircraft and large spaceships (the Enterprise again) will have crew. Well, Captain God has a whole cast of crewmembers – angels, etc.

Now a kingdom must contain abodes, living quarters, where officers and crew live or reside. No doubt Captain God resides in his Starship along with his other officers (archangels) and crew (ordinary angels). In John 14:2 we have J.C. saying that “In my Father’s house are many mansions [or dwellings or rooms]”. Again, think of Star Trek’s Enterprise (any version) or Voyager or even Deep Space Nine – all have many mansions or dwellings or rooms for all and sundry.

Also you tend to have references that people, even J.C., ascend “into” Heaven, not just go up to Heaven, just like you go into your home or into an aircraft. For example:  2 Kings 2:1 “And it came to pass, when the LORD would take up Elijah into heaven by a whirlwind, that Elijah went with Elisha from Gilgal” and later 2 Kings 2:11 “And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven”. That sounds a lot like a shuttlecraft transporting an ordinary mortal up to God’s spaceship!

Author’s note: All Biblical quotations taken from the King James Version.

To be continued…

An Ancient UFO Event: The ‘Star’ of Bethlehem

The New Testament ‘Star of Bethlehem’ event apparently coincided with the so-called ‘birth’ of Jesus Christ – assuming Jesus Christ actually existed; not all scholars see eye-to-eye on that point. The ‘Star’ has been interpreted as an astronomical, astrological, supernatural, even fictional event. I suggest that perhaps it was an extraterrestrial event, extraterrestrial as in ‘ancient astronaut’ or UFO related.

We have no idea what date Jesus Christ (hereafter J.C.) was ‘born’, if a virgin ‘birth’ can be interpreted as being somehow naturally ‘born’. Because nobody has a real clue about the actual ‘birth’ date of J.C., there’s only a one in 365.25 chance that it was December 25^th. That’s not good betting odds in most people’s bookkeeping. The 25^th of December is a pure invention on the part of the Christian Church, the hijacking of a pagan winter festival that celebrated the rebirth of the Sun; the return of lengthening hours of daylight – even the exact year of J.C.’s ‘birth’ is uncertain. Some scholars and astronomers have tried to pin the date and year down by trying to come to terms with the related ‘Star of Bethlehem’ event. However, IMHO, this is futile because the ‘Star’ had nothing to do with celestial phenomena and everything to do with an extraterrestrial spaceship.

The so-called ‘Star of Bethlehem’ is of little use in pinning down J.C.’s date and year of ‘birth’. Despite speculation that the ‘Star’ was a conjunction of two or more stellar and/or planetary objects, the ‘Star’ would still resolve itself into two or more points of light, even though apparently in very close proximity. Further, that two or three individual points of light connection would also have been obvious to observers in the days and weeks before (as the points of light grew closer together) and after (as they drew apart again). A supernovae or a comet would have been visible for many days’ even weeks. A ‘shooting star’ would visually last for way too short an interval. No, the ‘Star’ must have been a one-off short duration event. Let’s call a spade a spade here – the ‘Star’ was a classic UFO sighting! The proof of that pudding is that the so-called ‘Star’ led people, wise men or otherwise, to a very, very specific geographical location, something no astronomical object could do. 

An astronomical object (apart from actual or potential polar stars) just doesn’t stay put in the sky at a fixed point. Celestial objects traverse the sky in a generally east to west fashion. A real ‘Star’ of Bethlehem in order to be useful had to stand still. 

Consider that any astronomical object(s) would rise and set with the rotation of the Earth. Because the Earth’s axis is tilted (other than on the days of the equinoxes) with respect to the greater outside, the positions of celestial objects with respect to Earth’s compass directions alters, even over short time intervals. Say in high summer in Australia (December 21^st), the Sun rises in the extreme southeast and sets in the extreme southwest; it doesn’t follow a straight east-west path. So if you follow the Sun on the summer solstice ‘Down Under’, you sort of traverse a curve, not a straight line.

Now consider even following a celestial object that does rise due east and sets due west. Say you see the planet Venus shinning brightly in the western sky (as the Evening ‘Star’). You head towards it. Where do you end up? Well, somewhere to the west of where you started from. The point where you end up is the location you’re at when you get tired of following Venus or when Venus sets beneath the western horizon.

But if you spot a UFO towards the west and walk towards it, sooner or later (assuming it doesn’t fly away) the object will be directly overhead and you know you’ve arrived at your destination. Now 2000+ years ago, many prosaic explanations for our modern UFOs couldn’t be entertained. The ‘Star’ of Bethlehem couldn’t have been a weather balloon, or aircraft, or flare, or helicopter, or satellite, or piece of space junk re-entering the atmosphere and burning up, etc. Who would think to hoax a UFO event back then? Of course maybe it was just ‘swamp gas’; or ‘ball lightning’; or ‘St. Elmo’s Fire’, but ghee-whiz, what a coincidence that such rare natural phenomena would just happen to coincide with the ‘birth’ of J.C. (or shortly thereafter – some scholars think the audience bearing gifts arrived a few months after-the-fact). In any event, ‘ball lightning’, etc., like a ‘shooting star’, has a natural duration of a minute or two; probably just a few seconds. Hardly time to get one’s bearings. So it’s back to a bona-fide UFO (as extraterrestrial spaceship) happening. 

Piling on the speculation, let’s say our UFO was, say if not Starship Heaven (my presumed extraterrestrial-in-residence and ‘ancient astronaut’ God’s spacecraft), at least a shuttlecraft from same. If the infant J.C. were, in a manner of speaking ‘beamed down’, well more likely as not delivered to the stables or wherever the prospective adoptive parents and hangers-on were assembled, well that would be something akin to a ‘virgin birth’. Modern UFO abduction lore would suggest that our modern aliens, the greys say, do have some sort of beaming technology, but that’s probably not really a necessary bit of technology required for our purposes. 

One obvious question arises. Why would ‘ancient astronauts’, if interested in spreading their word, or undertaking missionary related efforts, send down an infant instead of an adult of some knowledge and stature? The only thing that comes to mind and makes sense is acclimatization, mingling with and getting to know and think and live like the natives think and live. An extraterrestrial infant who is ‘born’ and grows up and matures in a terrestrial society – becomes one of us – is probably a far more credible potential missionary than a fully adult extraterrestrial who just pops in from down high and starts preaching. ‘God’ tried that in the Old Testament and things didn’t work out too well. 

Satan Is One of the Good Guys!

Satan (Lucifer, the Devil, Beelzebub, whatever) has gotten a lot of very bad PR. But if you stop and think about it, it’s hardly justified. One could argue that Satan, though hardly a poster boy for the Salvation Army, is angelic relative to his former boss, commonly called God or Jehovah. However, in the final analysis, it doesn’t matter as both Satan and God/Jehovah are as fictional as Winston Smith (“1984”), Sherlock Holmes and Harry Potter.  

If Satan popped into the United Nations today – a tourist obviously – and was recognised (those security cameras are everywhere) what would or could that international body actually accuse him of and charge him with? Could Satan be hauled off to the International Criminal Court or International Court of Justice and tried for something – say crimes against humanity? Since he is the most evil being that ever was or ever will be, you’d think they’d not only throw the book at him but the whole contents of the New York City Public Library – and that’s a lot of thrown books!

Could Satan be accused of assault, being drunk and disorderly, book burning, bribery or blackmail, child abuse, counterfeiting, corruption, drug use and abuse, drug trafficking, eating meat on a Friday, illegal gambling, graffiti, infidelity, hijacking, being a homosexual, incest, jaywalking, littering, murder, being a paedophile, being a pervert, polygamy, practicing medicine without a licence, prostitution, rape, robbery, sex with a minor, spitting in public, tax evasion or avoidance, terrorism, witchcraft, even cheating at cards? No; none of the above.

Can Satan be accused of genocide? No, but God surely can be. The proof of that pudding is in the Old Testament itself - something to do with forty days and nights of rather inclement and stormy weather. Then there are these Godly bloodthirsty passages from Deuteronomy: 10-17:

¹⁰When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace unto it.

 ¹¹And it shall be, if it make thee answer of peace, and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee, and they shall serve thee.

¹²And if it will make no peace with thee, but will make war against thee, then thou shalt besiege it:

 ¹³And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword:

 ¹⁴But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee.

 ¹⁵Thus shalt thou do unto all the cities which are very far off from thee, which are not of the cities of these nations.

 ¹⁶But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:

 ¹⁷But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee:

Satan isn’t as bloodthirsty as God, that’s for goddamn sure!

Now Satan did some rather nasty things to Job, but that was with God’s full authority and approval, so Satan escapes that rap.

I can’t recall anywhere where Satan has actually advocated anyone breaking terrestrial laws. Satan hasn’t issued his version of his Ten Commandments.

Can Satan be accused of mutiny or rebellion? You bet he can and a damn good thing too as he (and his followers – those fallen angels) mutinied against the worst tyrant civilization has ever recorded. The tyrant is God; the written record the Old Testament. Satan and his followers get thumbs up for his and their mutinous action. Now mutiny in the heavens is probably something outside terrestrial jurisdiction and is ultimately none of our damn business. Mutiny itself is not evil; it depends on the circumstances, and ousting a tyrant is a good a circumstance as you can think of. I’m sure we all cheered when Fletcher Christian gave the finger to Captain Bligh on the HMS Bounty.

Can Satan be accused of being a smooth-talking, snake-oil salesman? Yes, but that’s hardly a crime as even back then its Caveat Emptor. He smooth-talked Eve into biting that apple; he tried to smooth-talk (tempt) Jesus too. In fact, this smooth-talking is the basis for all of  Satan’s bad PR. He smooth-talks those willing to listen and lead people away from the love of God, but nobody in their right mind who has read the Old Testament can believe for a moment in a loving God, so IMHO Satan is to be commended for trying to steer the great unwashed away from the tyrant we so loving refer to as God. Now of course history is written by the winners, and the Bible is God’s version of things, so its little wonder Satan gets a bad rap since Satan’s mutiny ultimately failed. I mean if the South had won the American Civil War, I very much doubt that Abe Lincoln would have quite the positive image he has today.

What about Satanism or Satanic rituals? We’ve all heard of that, but you won’t find any connection between those and the Satan of the Bible which after all is THE source. Just because some people worship Satan and engage in religious rituals in support of that worship doesn’t of necessity mean that Satan wrote that ‘how to worship me with satanic rituals’ textbook for them – unlike God’s Bible. God is very clear about how He is to be worshiped and adored.

Can Satan be accused of hellish torture? God, who allegedly created all things, has to take full responsibility for not only creating Satan but hell as well. You can’t blame Satan for hell and associated tortures – that’s your ever loving God’s doing. And Satan has nothing to do with satanic ritual abuses – that’s a human ‘invention’. “The Devil made me do it” is just an all too typical human trait that shifts the blame away from where it actually belongs – on the human’s head.

Satan certainly can not be accused of any and all traffic offences and violations. Those are all null and void – no road rage here. Ditto no computer hacking or any other nasties that require modern technology. 

Can Satan be accused of trespassing? Well no doubt God would argue that Satan was trespassing at the Garden of Eden when he shape-shifted into a serpent and chatted up Eve. So, okay, Satan can be charged with trespass. That’s not usually a hanging offence except at Area 51 and similar top secret military bases and locations, but the Garden of Eden hardly qualifies as an example. Besides, if God is so all-powerful, why didn’t He just smite Satan then and there and be done with His one time subordinate? I mean God is hardly squeamish when it comes to cold blooded murder. Of course that would make for a very boring story; the Bible would hardly be a best seller if Satan had been bumped off in Genesis! I mean we can’t have James Bond kill off the villain in chapter one and then have the rest of the chapters alternate between casino locations, bedroom scenes, and being chewed out by M. But on the grounds that God probably didn’t care about the Bible reading something akin to a 007 novel, God could have eliminated His opponent in the beginning but didn’t. Something’s fishy.

And that fishiness leads to wonder, what is the origin of God and of Satan and of monotheism itself?  Clearly in the historical record, there has to be a first accounting; a first mention. And there is! What’s ultimately filtered down to us as God and Satan is nothing more than the invention by Zoroaster (Persia), known also as Zarathustra, from roughly 600 BC. His invention was the start of the transition from mythological polytheism to real reality monotheism. He invented the first monotheistic religion (called Zoroastrianism obviously).

The rational was that it was way more convenient to take all of the thousands of good and bad polytheistic gods and roll them into just one dualism; one example from each of the two extremes, which were called Ahura Mazda (good deity) and Angra Mainyu, sometimes known as Ahriman (bad deity).  Polytheistic Jews held in Babylonian captivity around 600 BC, absorbed this new idea and when eventually repatriated to their homeland (present day Israel) adopted the new monotheistic dualism, and the rest, as they say, is history. Everything spiralled out of control like fast food chains from that original invention, Zoroastrianism branching off into variations on the new theme (maybe to avoid plagiarism). Then, as now, new bright ideas provide ample scope for spin-offs. New and improved imitations branched off; all the monotheistic variations starting with Judaism, hence the Islam, and Christian varieties we know today.

It was Zoroaster who first conceived of the ultimate final battle between good and evil – what we call today the (oft forecast, never arriving) apocalypse. He of course set himself up as chief prophet vowing his second coming (sound familiar?). His religion also promised a final judgement, a resurrection and an afterlife (also sound familiar?). However, Zoroaster never totally wiped out polytheism. Consider the following Biblical verse: Psalm 95:3 (King James Version) “For the LORD is a great God, and a great King above all gods.” That “gods” plural just won’t fade away, and that polytheistic reference is just one of many in the Bible. And since the Bible is the word of God, we note just from that one verse that He has a bit of an ego; He’s really more than just a little bit up Himself!

However, the credibility of Zoroaster and his invention of monotheism is a bit suss. The priests of Zoroastrianism were known as Magi, from which we get the word “magic”. They formally institutionalised the concept of what we call today astrology, charting the movements of the stars in the heavens to predict that ultimate apocalypse. Magic and astrology don’t normally sit well with rational people.

In conclusion, the great fallacy here, quite apart from the likelihood that both God and Satan are as fictional as “Star Trek’s” Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock, is the great unwashed swallowing hook, line and sinker what their religious superiors (priests, rabbis, clergy in any shape manner or form), via selective picking and choosing from Biblical texts, preach to them. The message universally is God is good; Satan is evil. Yet the unwashed sheep, those religious flocks, have never apparently bother to actually read the Old Testament evidence for the accuracy of that good/bad labelling themselves. 

Far closer to the facts of the matter is that God is the ultimate in incredible evilness; Satan has a few flaws, but at least his heart’s in the right place – he never tried to drown the whole lot of us! As far as God is concerned, He has His chosen people; the rest of humanity can take a long walk off a very short pier for all He cares! The various current monotheistic religions that evolved from the original monotheistic Zoroastrianism have preached everything half-ass backwards. IMHO, God wears the black hat; Satan the white hat. God is General Santa Anna (one who shows no quarter, shows no mercy, takes no prisoners – everyone is put to the sword); Satan is Davy Crockett (fighting the good fight against all the odds). God wins in the short term but eventually Texas exists!