The Instigator
DebateBehemoth
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Marauder
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

Aliens have a bigger chance of being real rather than BIGFOOT

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Marauder
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/22/2012 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,734 times Debate No: 24387
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)

 

DebateBehemoth

Pro

NO semantic
I will try to prove that Aliens can be proven more than Bigfoot
Marauder

Con


Hello, I thank my opponent for starting this debate. A topic like this promise’s to be fun J


Since my opponent did not I will go ahead and define the terms of the resolution, make sure I’m not the ONLY one whose not going to use semantics.


Aliens: talking extra-terrestrial life not illegal immigrants. Strait up underground reptilian alliances and little grey men and beautiful Nordic looking people in flying saucers (my opponent doesn’t literally have to argue about those particular most common form of alien sighting but you get the pitcher I hope….) http://www.experienceproject.com...


Bigfoot: the legendary Satquatch, the Yeti, an ancient beast called Gigantopithecus blacki http://www.wynja.com... (note I don’t have to prove Bigfoot exist in North America specifically to affirm the resolution)


Having a bigger chance: more evidence, both hard and soft or belief that better fits with overall facts that we know about the world I guess would be a good way to put more likely, but we can leave this up for debate if you want on how to determine what should get something to qualify as “having a bigger chance”


Real: as in existing outside of our imaginations



So with that out of the way, normally I would just accept and wait tell next round when my opponent does not start with arguments of there own but there’s only 3 rounds this debate and it would be a shame to waist the character space.


Now in your past debates you have stated you are a Christian if I am not mistaken. http://www.debate.org...


Now perhaps you were lying and just playing devils advocate or have changed your faith since then since its not on your profile but I’d like to hold you to the Christian paradigm in general for this debate as it will allow for some interesting arguments I’d like to see how you would respond to concerning aliens.


If you refuse and would rather argue from a non-Christian perspective and make me prove god and the bible first before being allowed to use these arguments then fine, I understand that, I guess I’d just be appealing to voters that are Christian.


Case against Aliens


I would like to make the case that while UFO encounters do happen, they are not caused by aliens as witnesses claim but rather demons. And there is high evidence to suggest that. http://www.jeffersonscott.com... in the link I just gave Jefferson Scott gives 8 arguments as to how all alien abduction encounters seem parallel demon encounters. The aliens can even be stopped from abducting you it seems from calling on the name of Jesus. I’m prepared to personally pull out all 8 reasons specifically myself if you want to make my case but I think you can just read the link. After reading them as a Christian I don’t see how one would look at aliens encounters as anything other than demon encounters. They are basically the same phenomenon. So aliens likely don’t exist since all evidence for them is more suggestive to the existence of demons than they are aliens.


Case for Bigfoot


Now of course I’d like to start by stating the obvious elephant in the room fact, sighting of this creature are relatively numerous over the years www.bfro.net/gdb


Second off I’d like to make it clear that there really is no question that Bigfoot has existed, the fossils have been found of a creature that is basically in every way what we call bigfoot, and its been named Gigantopithecus blacki. http://www.wynja.com...


So the only actual question about Bigfoot being real is “is he real TODAY?” not extinct so the sighting of him could be true ones.


To say he is around today is actually not a big leap at all. It would just make the Gigantopithecus what is called a “living fossil” http://en.wikipedia.org... which there are lots of that we know about around today. The fossil record said all these creatures were extinct and was later proved wrong http://www.cryptomundo.com...


http://en.wikipedia.org...


http://www.cryptomundo.com...


http://en.wikipedia.org...


Bigfoot would be joining the ranks of all those creatures that are alive today though there fossils say they went extinct millions of years ago if he is real and alive today. And given how many people have seen bigfoot isn’t it reasonable to just make the leap that’s probably the case?


Case for Bigfoot Vs Aliens in likeliness


Consider this; the leaps you must make with “aliens are real”. The existence of our life on earth as things are is by all rights against the odds. If the earth were just a cm closer to the sun we would burn up and if it were just scotch farther away from the sun we would freeze and life would not be possible. So many things that come into play that were not likely that gave the conditions for life on our planet you have better odds of winning the lottery 10 times but thankfully it occurred. But to ask one to believe in life on another planet is like asking to believe those terrible odds that life occurred not only happened once but TWICE. So while I may concede you can make a decent case its possible as for it being by any standards likely, its definitely not.


With Bigfoot however you only have to make the leap there is a undocumented living fossil walking the earth which is very likely considering the numerous ones that have always been walking the earth undocumented until they were finally discovered and proven like the famous coelacanth.


So in conclusion:


I will just admit I probably cant 100% prove bigfoot exit and my opponent cant !00% prove the aliens exist, but toward the resolution in terms of “chances” of which are possibly real I have made it clear the size of the leaps you have to make to believe in bigfoot is drastically smaller than the ones you take to believe in Aliens from another planet.


Debate Round No. 1
DebateBehemoth

Pro

I WILL REFUTE
-Bigfoot: the legendary Satquatch, the Yeti, an ancient beast called Gigantopithecus blacki http://www.wynja.com...;(note I don’t have to prove Bigfoot exist in North America specifically to affirm the resolution)
-
The link states that gigantopithecus blacki is just similar to the claims of bigfoot but have not been proven
The Myths------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some suggest that Gigantopithecus blacki did not in fact become extinct, and continues to exist as the Sasquatch and the Yeti. Gigantopithecus blacki could have crossed the Bering Land Bridge, the same way humans are thought to have entered the New World (Geoffrey Bourne, 1975, cited in Ciochon et al., 1990). So far, though there have been many alleged sightings, no indisputable physical evidence has been recovered. One is led to suspect that the question of Sasquatch (and related entities) is more for comparative mythology, cultural anthropology, or psychology, since an actual creature the size of Gigantopithecusblacki existing in numbers sufficient to qualify as a breeding population would not only leave physical remains, but would have an observable effect on their environment.
-
-

Now in your past debates you have stated you are a Christian if I am not mistaken. http://www.debate.org... perhaps you were lying and just playing devils advocate or have changed your faith since then since its not on your profile but I’d like to hold you to the Christian paradigm in general for this debate as it will allow for some interesting arguments I’d like to see how you would respond to concerning aliens.
-
I am a true chrisitancand I am not playing devil's advocate I have big faith on God
-
-
If you refuse and would rather argue from a non-Christian perspective and make me prove god and the bible first before being allowed to use these arguments then fine, I understand that, I guess I’d just be appealing to voters that are Christian.
-
I do not see why I have to since ther has only been resons but no true facts about aliens being devil's and you could even assume that Aliens are God's followers warning us of the futur
-
-

Case against Aliens
I would like to make the case that while UFO encounters do happen, they are not caused by aliens as witnesses claim but rather demons. And there is high evidence to suggest that. http://www.jeffersonscott.com... the link I just gave Jefferson Scott gives 8 arguments as to how all alien abduction encounters seem parallel demon encounters. The aliens can even be stopped from abducting you it seems from calling on the name of Jesus. I’m prepared to personally pull out all 8 reasons specifically myself if you want to make my case but I think you can just read the link. After reading them as a Christian I don’t see how one would look at aliens encounters as anything other than demon encounters. They are basically the same phenomenon. So aliens likely don’t exist since all evidence for them is more suggestive to the existence of demons than they are aliens.
-
As the link shows some groups and people Beleive that Aliens are Satanic but have no solid proof of it simple a logical thought like how can there be no other intellegent life if there are billions of Galaxies with Trillions of Planets And the link also states that it is still a theory though I cannot eliminate that theory here yes His Arguments also help prove this theory but still cannot be ringed as true.Plus The phillipines has already been stated by the Pope as one of the most Religious countries in the world which is the reason He does not come back at my country anymore
AFTER READING THE LINK I WOULD LIKE TO STOP THIS DEBATE SINCE I HAVE HUGE FAITH IN GOD I DO AGREE THAT BIG FOOT CAN BE PROVEN MORE.AND NOW I DO ACCEPT THE THEORY THAT ALIENS MIGHT BE DEMONS


Marauder

Con

I'd like to begin with some couer arguments.......................................................................................
.............
......
......
...
...wait, did I just win with the jefferson scott link?

cool, okay. is never happens to me. You conceaded and I guess I win.


Since you dont want to debate anymore even to play a form of devils advocate or something thats fine I wont force you to do something you dont want to, cant have fun doing that.

BUT I DO REQUEST ONE THING OF YOU IF YOU WISH TO NO LONGER DEBATE

post something for the remaining round so that this debate will actally be seen in the voting period and read by people. thats all.

thanks for being an open minded guy whos capable of changing his view when faced with logic and the facts. :)
Debate Round No. 2
DebateBehemoth

Pro

It shows that I am a true christian if this was a comic book chharacter debate I would not have backed down but thanks for the link finnaly learned the truth
Marauder

Con

Well all who read this debate please vote all points to me, and read the jefferson scott link to see what all the fuss is about. if your too lazy here is the summary of his 8 arguments

Argument #1: Walk-the-walk Christians are never abducted

Argument #2: Calling on the name of Jesus stops abductions in progress

Argument #3: The link between UFO activity and the occult

Argument #4: The psychological nature of alien encounters

Argument #5: The religious nature of the aliens' message

Argument #6: The fiendish character of alien and UFO behavior

Argument #7: The interdimensional nature of UFOs and aliens

Argument #8: The focus, in abductions, on extracting terror


The common things between Alien Encounters and Demon possessions or encounters is so numerous its not even funny.

Thank you for your time if you read any of it.

Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Marauder 4 years ago
Marauder
sure, just issue me the challenge, start the opening round with your opening arguments so we can get right to the debating since we already know the terms and conditions really and make 8000 characters long limit and 3 day post next argument period.
Posted by DebateBehemoth 4 years ago
DebateBehemoth
I would like to continue the debate in a non christiaian point of view sicne I have thought about it and found new arguments
Posted by Marauder 4 years ago
Marauder
I dont know why someone would pass up a fun topic for a debate like this for a lame boring semantic win. Belief in Bigfoot VS Aliens is an AWSOME matchup. No worries of semantics from me however seriously do what Ore_Ele said. Its pretty much the only full proof way to stop semantics. define Bigfoot as "reported Bipedal harry ceature sought after by many cryptozoologiest and a general link on claimed beliefs about its description found here...." and theres no room to start arguing about big-footed tribesmen. Define Aliens as "extraterestrial life for other planets" and no worries about arguments about Mexicans who cross the border.
Posted by Ore_Ele 4 years ago
Ore_Ele
The easy way to stop semantics, rather than say "no semantics" would be to define "Aliens" and "Bigfoot" in your OP.
Posted by DebateBehemoth 4 years ago
DebateBehemoth
you could easily make up something like bigfoot if your a troll you can turn bigfoot into big footed people I know what semantics are (trolling)
Posted by TheOrator 4 years ago
TheOrator
Just for reference, do you know what semantics are? I know that some people post that just to make it look like their debates have more quality, and since semantics really have nothing to do wiith this topic I was wondering if this is one of them.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 4 years ago
Ore_Ele
DebateBehemothMarauderTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:15 
Reasons for voting decision: PRO admitted that CON was correct, thus allowing CON to win the debate. The only reason that CON loses the conduct point is because he presented a link with his argument and told us to read it. Sources are suppose to back up arguments, not provide them.