9 Replies to “The Looking Planet

  1. 1
    SteRusJon says:

    Wow! Just Wow!

  2. 2
    Mapou says:

    Beautiful. This kind of beautiful creativity can only come from the soul. I’m sure that art is one of the reasons that God fell in love with humanity and will not let us perish.

  3. 3
    Dionisio says:

    Is this the same Eric Anderson who writes OPs and comments here in UD?

  4. 4
    Dionisio says:

    Interesting animation video – definitely it shows a well-developed artistic storytelling ability, nice effects and also how much effort went into its creation. It has received numerous awards. Most comments seen online praise the film.

    Here are a few observations:

    At the start of the film one can read this:

    a tale translated from the cosmic background radiation

    then shortly later this:

    The Earth is really a double planet. Our Moon is much too large in relation to the Earth to be considered just a moon. We now know the formation of a double planet like ours is remarkably unlikely.
    We also know the Moon has had a profound impact on the evolution of life.

    and this too:

    Without the Moon, Earth’s axis would shift wildly, continually wiping out life and preventing it from attaining complexity. And without its tidal effects on the oceans, life would not have had the help it needed 380 million years ago to emerge from the seas, taking the first steps onto land…

    Here’s part of a commentary by a third party:

    […] at the center of the story is a young Cosmic Engineer named Lufo. He’s creative but feels stifled doing the same thing millennium after millennium, so he finds a way to break up the monotony and discovers something unexpected in the process.

    Review of “The Looking Planet”
    By Elleinah McCairn Posted on November 21st, 2015 at 12:10am Last edit on December 5th, 2015
    http://moviepilot.com/posts/3650962

    Here are two comments copied from YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8LRxIANzQs):

    James Williams 3 days ago
    It’d be cute if it wasn’t for the glaring contradiction. This short talks “evolution” but shows creation by intelligent design. So…which is it? It’s a great example of how confused or care-less people are about their origin. And that I find to be sad.?

    Kevin Franck 10 hours ago
    +James Williams – My thought exactly. It’s either illustrating a version of Theistic Evolution or it’s sending a message that Evolutionists [especially Panspermia types] are okay with intelligent designers being extraterrestrial as long as that extraterrestrial creator is not the Biblical God. More and more Metaphysics and Teleology is creeping into scientific explanations all the time as the traditional rules of purely physical and naturalistic explanations fail to provide satisfactory answers. Still, this was interesting.

  5. 5
    SteRusJon says:

    I took note of James William’s comment as well. I found it to be sad that James, whom I sense is anti-ID, is not well acquainted with the plethora of metaphysical solutions to the who, what, when questions that exist among those of us who agree that some intelligence was needed to bring about what we presently see in the cosmos. Many, indeed most, I suspect, IDist hold to some form of guided evolution.

    Stephen

  6. 6
    Dionisio says:

    SteRusJon @5

    The second quoted comment by Kevin Franck touches more points than the preceding comment.

    The video states that life emerged from the seas onto land 380 millions years ago. Where did they get that information from? Is that number a fact?

    The same text also gives the blurry impression that the moon-influenced tidal effects on the oceans was basically all that was needed for that sea-to-land transition. Is that correct?

    Also, where did Lufo’s species come from? How did they get there?

    Also, considering that the ID folks claim that they leave the identity of the intelligent agent out of their narrative, then the reference to Lufo’s species as the intelligent agents could imply that the film does not present an accurate ID message. Is this correct?

    Obviously, that’s not a scientific film, just a science-fiction artistic creation, hence it doesn’t have to stick to facts. But then it can’t claim to be purely ID, because it does not stick solely to known evidences.

  7. 7
    Vy says:

    The CGI was great but the aliens are hideous!

    It’s kinda ironic “ordinary” living matter asks @3:14:

    How can ordinary matter be alive?

    The animation would’ve been sorta OK if not for the BB/multiverse mythology/evodelusionary babble and implausible aliensdidit theme.

    And tiktaalik? Really??? Looks a lot like the crap Neil deGrasse Tyson would smile at.

  8. 8
    Eric Anderson says:

    Dionosio @3:

    No, not me. 🙁

    There is one particularly distinguishing feature about my name: it is quite common.

    There were three of us in my high school. I remember one amusing incident where “Eric Anderson” was called to the Principal’s office over the school loudspeaker. All three of us showed up!

    There was also the time I ran for one of the student government offices at school. I didn’t win (fortunately, in hindsight). Several people came up to me afterwards and said, “Oh, I thought it was the other guy who was running.”

    Probably more than 20 of us when I was at the university . . .

  9. 9
    Dionisio says:

    Eric Anderson

    Thank you for clarifying my question @3.
    BTW, why did you add a ‘sad’ face icon where you wrote that it’s not the same person? Considering the comments posted @4, @6 & @7 I’d expect a 🙂 instead. I’d rather be artistically challenged than confused about fundamental questions of life.

    I liked the funny anecdotes from your student years.

    Have a good weekend.

Leave a Reply