Joined: May 2002
Originally posted here.
January 13, 2003
ID and Human Cloning
By Paul Nesselroade
Does the Intelligent Design (ID) movement have anything to say about current experimentation with human cloning?
Clearly, starting points are critical in shaping how we view the appropriateness of any action. If our starting point is the belief that human life was accidental and brought about solely by the impersonal forces of natural selection and random mutation, then, any purpose or meaning for life has to be assigned by us, chiseled out of the void of meaninglessness with our own hands. Starting here, the idea of cloning new life explicitly for the enhancement of our own lives (through organ replacement, stem cell harvesting, or for reproductive purposes) can be legitimized. The human ‘cost’ associated with both fine-tuning the cloning process (animal cloning rarely results in birth and virtually all of those born have serious abnormalities and/or die early) and creating life expressly for sacrificial purposes, may be considered unfortunate, but can hardly be considered wrong.
Strange that this ARN missive doesn't recognize the Raelian's oh-so-crucial "starting point":
Welcome to the Evidence page, a subsection of the Raelian Revolution website.
If we truly were created by people from space, then there would be traces of this creation in our history, mythology and religion, be it Judaic, Buddhist, Christian, Islamic or other. Science should confirm this and there should be UFOlogical evidence of them monitoring our progres and even visitations.
In fact, if one takes the trouble to look, this is exactly the case and the horisontal navigation bar above provides links to such evidence including a bibliography section listing references and authors whose totally independent conclusions support the validity of the Raelian Message.
Supporting evidence p. 3
EMBARRASSING QUESTIONS FOR THE EVOLUTIONISTS
For 20 years, the Raelian vision of "scientific creationism" : a step ahead of science ?
It is striking to note that while the Raelian theory is being confirmed by a continual series of scientific discoveries, the theory of Evolution is, on the other hand, being increasingly challenged as its old questions remain unanswered and even more embarrassing new questions are appearing.
An anti-evolutionist system in our genes:
Perhaps the most awkward question today for the theory of evolution is the one raised by the recently discovered p53 and since then a mutlitude of others - the DNA repair mechanism. This has been found to be common to all mammals and repairs damaged DNA. If the damage is too great to repair, it organises the cell's self-destruction.
Therefore if any defect in the transcription of the genetic code arises, (the foundation on which evolution is based) then this repair or programmed cell death mechanism will remove such a mutation. If not, then the organism as a whole will die of cancer.
This control system is clearly present to avoid all mutation. Thus, if this system is common to all mammals, according to the theory of Evolution, it should also be present in the common ancestors of mammals.
If it were present in our ancestors, how were they able to diversify in order to render so many different species ? This is clearly a major contradiction which can only put a serious doubt on the theory of evolution.
Here you will find other resource material which support the messages given to Rael by the Elohim
- in whole or in part.
The Triumph of Design
The Triumph of Design clearly and dramatically shows the gaping holes in Darwinian theory and the mounting evidence for the intelligent design of the universe. This video features Phillip Johnson, the distinguished law professor from the University of California, Berkeley whose best-selling book, Darwin On Trial, re-ignited the evolution controversy in the early 1990's. (more info)
Evolution - Fact or Belief ?
( also released in French as "Enquetes & Reportages")
More and more scientists are abandoning the Evolution Theory on the grounds that it is contrary to the basic laws of modern science. They maintain that it is a philosophy, not a science.
This video interviews scientists from around the world to find out why they do not accept evolution as a reasonable explanation for the origin of man and the universe.
I do agree with the ARN wedge update about one thing: your starting point is important. For instance, if you start out by ignoring evidence contrary to your position, there is no end to the silly conclusions you will come to.