The age of our universe is given as approximately 14 billion years, but this is said to be in its “infancy” given the estimates of lasting trillions of years into the future. By this measure, our universe is scarcely out of the “womb” and far from being even a toddler as yet. Our earth is estimated to be about 4 billion years old, so it is a very “young” planet in the scheme of the universe; and if the Big Bang started as a “seed” intelligent life here on our planet may be the latest thing to sprout on the astronomical chart. Perhaps this is why Jesus compared faith as small as a mustard seed sufficient to move mountains.

Given the immensity of the universe young as it is, it does seem beyond reason that our solar system and intelligent life could possibly be unique in the universe. However, there are scientists who believe the human form the most suitable for an inhabitable planet and intelligent life capable of what our species has accomplished, but probability dampens the hope that ET may be found elsewhere and ours may indeed be a miraculously “privileged planet” and ours a miraculously “privileged species.”

Space.com. April. 10, 2008: … In a recent paper published in the journal Astrobiology, Professor Andrew Watson of the University of East Anglia describes an improved mathematical model for the evolution of intelligent life as the result of a small number of discrete steps… Watson estimates the overall probability that intelligent life will evolve as the product of the probabilities of each of the necessary steps. In his model, the probability of each evolutionary step occurring in any given epoch is 10 percent or less, so the total probability that intelligent life will emerge is quite low (less than 0.01 percent over 4 billion years). Even if intelligent life eventually emerges, the model suggests its persistence will be relatively short by comparison to the lifespan of the planet on which it developed…

While the universities have a stranglehold on Darwin and refuse to let go their doctrine allowing any dissent from faith within the ranks, the Creation Research Society and the scientists in the organization are to be commended for the excellent work they are doing in helping us understand how unlikely our species began and evolved by unaided mechanistic forces of nature. I would be more impressed by those touting their faith in Darwin if they had a clue to what life and death really are, but science does not supply an answer to this question. As it is I find Professor Watson’s estimate of 0.01 percent to be very generous concerning life given all the mitigating factors against such a thing occurring anywhere in the universe, and the rancor of those unable to supply an answer to what life and death are or the origin of life only shows their bigoted prejudice against those of us who believe in Intelligent Design.

There are guesses apart from God being the Creator as to how life may have originated and how our planet seems to have become so life-friendly, but there is no science that actually explains it. However, the intimidation tactics used by the naysayers of ID are little different than the propaganda used to stifle dissent and advance other causes without genuine merit. And some of these people are indistinguishable from other fanatics in their pursuit of persecuting those that don’t kowtow to their propaganda and go along with the party line. In too many cases the opposition of ID remind of children throwing a tantrum much in the manner of calling those who believe the government has been involved in conspiracies of evil “nut cases.” Paying attention to such children because of their tantrums is counterproductive.

I’m far more interested given the infancy of our universe and it being so inimical to intelligent life why such life as we know it should have occurred at all in such an otherwise hostile environment? For those of us who believe there is a design and purpose to life it is an intriguing question. That the question too often falls into religious wrangling is only to be expected given human nature. But while any explanation of God is beyond our imagination, the subject cries out for speculation even among the greatest of philosophers. That we humans are even capable of such speculation is in my opinion evidence of our supernatural origin.

It is interesting that while Ben Stein and Glenn Beck find common ground on the subject of ID they did not seem willing to cross the line concerning the subject of evil in the world pertaining to Satan. But it is this line where even the staunchest supporters of ID become somewhat fearful to associate Creation with the Devil. And it is the subject of Satan that separates me from some believers in ID. While I am a believer in ID I also believe the Bible to be our best source of information concerning the working of God in human affairs, including the Devil being a part of it all, which is why I credit the account of the Temptation where Jesus does not dispute Satan’s claim to the kingdoms of the world. And I might add politicians and the universities.

Even given the infancy of our universe we humans are an infinitesimal part of the timeline, even of our planet; and Professor Watson is among many surmising our planet may not long support intelligent life. But I believe there was an act of God involved with the whole of this as described in the opening chapters of Genesis. If we human beings are really as special as the Bible would have us believe, then it is impossible to imagine given the comparative brief span of time involved with the Creation and the even briefer span of we humans on earth what might be in the mind of the Creator for our future: I Corinthians 2:9: But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.