Book Review: Lights in the Sky & Little Green Men: A Rational Christian Look at UFOs and Extraterrestrials

Authors: Hugh Ross, Mark Clark, Kenneth Samples (from Reasons to Believe)
Year: 2002
Spiritual Bias: Christian
Origins Bias: Progressive Creationists
Rating: Middle of the Road
Level: Intermediate

Comments: Written by an astronomer, a philosopher, and a political scientist, this book addresses all aspects of the UFO controversy from both a scientific and Christian perspective. "Does life exist outside of planet earth?", "Are alien reports real?", "What is Area 51 all about?", "Is the U.S. government covering up knowledge about UFOs?", and "Did aliens crash in Roswell?" are amongst some of the questions that are answered in this book. The trio conclude by claiming that the extra-dimensional hypothesis, which attributes extra-terrestrial activity to occultic and demonic involvement, is the best explanation for residual UFOs. Although many Christians will disagree with this view, this is a good book and I would recommend it for those interested in this topic.

Summary Quotes:

"The recently discovered "oxygen-ultraviolet paradox" helps explain why no such soup or substrate existed: The existence of oxygen in the atmosphere and the ocean would guarantee the shutdown of prebiotic chemistry. The absence of oxygen, on the other hand, would allow intense ultraviolet radiation to penetrate Earth's atmosphere and upper ocean layer, also guaranteeing the shutdown of prebiotic chemistry. Either way, the primordial soup explanation for the origins of life uttterly fails."

"Some contactees, especially the early ones of the 1950s, claimed to have face-to-face, physical encounters with space aliens. They sometimes mentioned boarding metallic spacecraft and touring the solar system with their new space brothers. On occasion they produced evidence (for example, Adamski's alleged photograph of a spacecraft) to substantiate their extraordinary claims. Yet none of the physical evidence was unimpeachable. In fact, the evidentiary basis for the assertions of the early contactees is sorely lacking."