The Instigator
joshuad
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
DevonNetzley
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

Aliens have helped develop our society

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 3 votes the winner is...
DevonNetzley
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/31/2012 Category: Science
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,461 times Debate No: 20784
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

joshuad

Pro

I honestly believe that other life forms exist and have helped the human race in early development.
DevonNetzley

Con

I accept this debate. Please make this as real as possible.

This is gonna be fun! ^.=.^
Debate Round No. 1
joshuad

Pro

Ok, great to have you here! I think it is almost crazy not to be opened to other intelligent life forms. I'll even go out on a limb and say that there are evidence that supports they helped our early societies. Not to mention the billions of stars within just our galaxy, and the trillions of planets orbiting those billions of stars, there has to be another planet that is in the same scientific dimensions to sustain life. Although there can be other forms of life that don't need to be in our type of environment to live. We obviously don't know. But my point also is if you take ancient civilizations for example. Peoples in Mexico and Egypt have pyramids which we know have an astrological meaning. In paintings and drawings, Egyptian rulers have elongated heads and show UFO's in the sky. In South America, look at Puma Punku, estimated 17,000 years old. They had blocks of granite, one of the hardest stone on earth by the way, one at over 800 tons precisely cut. We would have to use diamond tipped tools to cut it as fine as the Incas did. If they didn't have diamond tools, how did they cut it? They would have to have significant knowledge in mathematics, have schematics, etc but no evidence. Even with modern technology it would be nearly impossible to recreate. The average modern tower crane can lift a little less than 20 tons. You would need mobile, two tower cranes, which involve power (engines) and significant metal work and inventions, with no evidence to any of that except the ruins left behind. The stones interlocked and were drilled (again need to be diamond tipped) perfectly and of same depth. They were constructed using no mortar and were even 4 levels high! The nearest quarry for granite was also over 10 miles away, which means transporting 800 ton sized rocks. This entire process requires extremely complicated logistics and they would have to have intricate infrastructure to support this. There is also other sites besides this like the pyramids of course, Easter island and the Stonehenge site. With all of this evidence of ancient monumental technology with combination of ancient stories, religions and the fact of how much we don't know of our own planet, this has to be true. 70-71% of the Earth is covered in water. Only 5% has been explored or seen with the human eye. What if ancient civilizations live underneath us?

I am really excited to debate with you, and hope you find this just as much fun as I do. Good luck!
DevonNetzley

Con

Well thanks man, great to be here. Now to start on the topic. I can't argue with you that there are in fact billions as stars as well as countless galaxies. Yes there just might be another life form out there somewhere, but the supporting data and fact are required. Such as (1) How large the sun or star is for that galaxy. (2) What type of gasses act as their oxygen if there is even an atmosphere. (3) How their ecosystem is set up, again. If there is even an ecosystem.

"They had blocks of granite, one of the hardest stone on earth by the way, one at over 800 tons precisely cut. We would have to use diamond tipped tools to cut it as fine as the Incas did. If they didn't have diamond tools, how did they cut it?" Here is my response to that. Stated below.

"There are two prominent theories of complex technology for stone cutting and shaping in ancient Egypt. Christopher Dunn : http://www.gizapower.com... proposes some form of acoustic / vibration drill. and a number of authors propose a form of concrete, or geopolymer. However, both of these complex technologies have too many flaws in their arguments. We have located many, if not all the quarries, and the quarry surfaces show that limestone was cut out with saws, and granite would normaly be split out using wedges, but there is some evidence in the quarries of sawn granite faces, and there are round holes drilled out and we have cores from these drillings. Why go to the trouble of cutting and drilling if you have a concrete alternative! We have huge granite boxes that show all stages in construction from rough cut blocks, to the polished finished article. Thus we have all the evidence that the ancients were able to work with solid granite and finish it to fine tolerances." This seems like a solid defense to your argument.
http://www.peter-thomson.com...

Moving large stones over land was more involved. Sledges and rollers were available in pharaonic times, and workers were in great supply. Friction was the primary concern. An 800 ton block measuring 4x4x20 m would create a ground pressure of 1 kg over each square centimeter of its base. A force of at least 400 tons would be required to overcome the friction. Modern engineers working under primitive conditions found that, while moving blocks weighing 6 tons on a sledge, friction could be reduced to nearly zero by wetting the track with a lubricant in this case, water. In the relief pictured above, from the tomb of Djehutihotep, a man can be seen on the leading end of the sledge pouring a liquid on the ground in front of it. Modern reenactments also demonstrated that a friction "seal" is formed beneath a static load that is broken when the load begins to move. An Assyrian relief shows the use of a lever at the back of the sledge, possibly used to break such a "seal," or perhaps to propel it forward.
http://www.catchpenny.org...

And as for your water theory. There just might be an ancient civilization under water. I mean the ancient city of Atlantis is down there. Then again, it's name does not translate the right way, but that is for another debate some other time. But you never know what is down there.

I now leave it to my opponent to make his response. This is fun!
Good luck Pro. ^.=.^
Debate Round No. 2
joshuad

Pro

Very good point Con!

Although the Egyptians are very well known for their advancement in technology, which thanks to your response and link to Dunn's website, I am convinced in this area. But you leave out the other civilization in Bolivia responsible for the building of Puma Punku. Evidence supports that the Andean peoples with "simple reed boats" could not have moved these giant rocks over 10 km, which was where the rock quarry was located. The type of holes and drilling that were so mathematically exact, proves impossible to use from stone or copper tools. They would need a more advanced way to cut the contoured holes out. These contoured holes through the huge slabs would show that they are similar to interlocking building blocks. I would say that compared to just stacking huge blocks on each other, "interlocking building blocks" would require a significantly higher amount of thinking and reasoning. Keep in mind this was all done with almost exact precision with one of the hardest stones on Earth. The sheer sizes of these rocks, with the intricate detail in the overall engineering of the rocks interlocking and precision cuts and drills prove a thinking process higher than that of the civilizations known at that time. Not to mention the transportation of the red sandstone block slabs, about 85 metric tons, up a steep hill from the quarry 10 km away. Although concrete would be a solution to the complexity and the regularity of the rocks, there aren't any concrete in that area at all. Plus modern day geologists would be able to discern rock from concrete. But what about even lifting the stones into place? They would need cranes of course, but operated without any engines, so it would all be muscle to operate which would be even harder because the crane wouldn't be 100% operating efficiency and the work to maintain the "machinery". They would also need ropes or cables strong enough to lift these blocks somehow.

This is great by the way!
DevonNetzley

Con

To begin I just want to say i am not in a very good mood today. So don't expect a great performance.

"But you leave out the other civilization in Bolivia responsible for the building of Puma Punku. Evidence supports that the Andean peoples with "simple reed boats" could not have moved these giant rocks over 10 km, which was where the rock quarry was located."

You don't specify whether or not how large or small these "simple reed boats" are. I mean they could range from the size of a kayak to a massive ship. Even though you say they are boats, you fail to mention it's size. "Franz L�hner has thought about a few details how the large and heavy stone blocks could have been loaded on the boats and transported down the Nile, for example from Aswan to Giza. New Two barges and a raft on which the stone lies are combined. The raft is tied to the longitudinal side of each barge, so the barges don't tilt towards the inner side. The raft and the two barges have enough buoyancy to counterbalance the weight of the stone (doctrine = one barge)In the harbor loading ramps are built sloping from the land into the river. The raft is lying in the middle and on top of the ramp and the two barges on both sides of the ramp. The stones are tied to sledges and then hauled over the ramp onto the raft. Two rope rolls are used, installed on the raft. (doctrine = unexplained)The Tura stones and the granite blocks are brought to giza on the Nile with ships (= doctrine) A small raft is drifting in front of the boat and in the back of the boat a round stone attached to a rope is towed over the river bed. The steering is done with the ropes attached at the back. This is a so called Herodotus' steering (According to Goyon) In the harbor of Giza ramps for unloading are built from stones or wood, sloping from the land into the river. The sledges are hauled over the tracks on land. To accomplish this, rope rolls are installed on land. (doctrine = unexplained)Transporting heavy loads on the Nile with special barges. To transport the heavy stone blocks on the river Franz L�hner suggests combining two barges with a raft between, where the stone lies on top. The raft lies between the longitudinal sides of the vessels and is attached to them rigidly, so that the barges don't tilt inwardly from a heavy load. The two barges and the raft form a stable unit. The raft with the stone would have negative buoyancy, but the barges give an additional lift and compensate this. According to G. Goyon the Egyptian barges (or ships) can carry an average load of 40 tons. For his calculations Franz L�hner reduces this figure to 30-35 tons. With the combination of two barges and the rigidly attached raft the load-carrying capacity of the ships adds to 60 to 70 tons. In addition there is the raft which is constructed from at least two large layers of logs on top of each other (one layer lengthwise, one across) and which had a load-carrying capacity of about 10 to 15 tons. Together this adds to 80-90 tons load capacity. The stones weighting up to 50 tons can be carried with no problems downstream on such barges . This double ferry (we call it a ferry because it is carrying or ferrying the sledges with freight) can also be used for the shorter distance from the Tura quarry to Giza. Ferries like this were used in Europe on rivers and lakes during the last century to transport heavy loads." This is how they transported massive amounts of weight over the water.
http://www.cheops-pyramide.ch...

"The type of holes and drilling that were so mathematically exact, proves impossible to use from stone or copper tools. They would need a more advanced way to cut the contoured holes out." Not necessarily my friend.

"To cut stone in such a way, a man sits on the stone block and three men hit the iron chisel in turns with sledgehammers. After each blow the chisel is turned by an eighth, until the hole is 10 to 15cm deep. A series of these holes is driven along a line which is determined by the quarry master. Now wrought iron wedges are put into all the holes of the line (= splitting holes). They are well lubricated and then driven into the rock between two metal shims (or feathers - narrow at the top and flaring outward so that you can grip them). Each wedge is pounded once, moving down the line in consecutive order. When the wedges are all driven in deep enough, the granite is forced apart, breaks and starts to split along the line of holes. This break - along the so called cleavage plane - is very even and the stone has to be worked only very little to achieve a smooth surface. Sledgehammers used for this kind of work have a special shaft which is more elastic, so it puts less strain on the workers." You don't need a degree in mathematics to understand how to cut into a stone the correct way.
http://www.cheops-pyramide.ch...

"Not to mention the transportation of the red sandstone block slabs, about 85 metric tons, up a steep hill from the quarry 10 km away." This is where the lovely complex pulley system came in very much use. "Pulleys are simple machines that consist of a rope that slides around a disk, called a block. Their main function is to change the direction of the tension force in a rope. The pulley systems that appear on SAT II Physics almost always consist of idealized, massless and frictionless pulleys, and idealized ropes that are massless and that don't stretch. These somewhat unrealistic parameters mean that:
The rope slides without any resistance over the pulley, so that the pulley changes the direction of the tension force without changing its magnitude.
You can apply the law of conservation of energy to the system without worrying about the energy of the rope and pulley.
You don't have to factor in the mass of the pulley or rope when calculating the effect of a force exerted on an object attached to a pulley system.
The one exception to this rule is the occasional problem you might find regarding the torque applied to a pulley block. In such a problem, you will have to take the pulley's mass into account. We'll deal with this special case in Chapter 7, when we look at torque.
The Purpose of Pulleys
We use pulleys to lift objects because they reduce the amount of force we need to exert. For example, say that you are applying force F to the mass in the figure above. To lift mass m at a constant velocity without a pulley, you would have to apply a force equal to the mass's weight, or a force of mg upward. Using a pulley, the mass must still be lifted with a force of mg upward, but this force is distributed between the tension of the rope attached to the ceiling, and the tension of the rope gripped in your hand. Because there are two ropes pulling the block, and hence the mass, upward, there are two equal upward forces. We know that the sum of these forces is equal to the gravitational force pulling the mass down, so F + T = 2F = mg or F = mg/2. Therefore, you need to pull with only one half the force you would have to use to lift mass m if there were no pulley."
http://www.sparknotes.com...

I now leave it to my opponent to make his argument. Good luck man. ^.=.^
Debate Round No. 3
joshuad

Pro

joshuad forfeited this round.
DevonNetzley

Con

My opponent has forfeited the round. In doing so not having any information, I have nothing to work with. I will wait for my opponent to respond with his argument, rebuttals and closing statements.
Debate Round No. 4
joshuad

Pro

joshuad forfeited this round.
DevonNetzley

Con

My opponent has dropped all arguments, and closing statements regarding to the argument. I have nothing more to state, except that aliens did not help in our early development.
Vote Con! ^.=.^
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by DevonNetzley 5 years ago
DevonNetzley
Thanks.
Posted by THEBOMB 5 years ago
THEBOMB
pretty cool debate
Posted by DevonNetzley 5 years ago
DevonNetzley
The answer for all advancements in technology? Ancient aliens.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
joshuadDevonNetzleyTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: counter
Vote Placed by Yep 5 years ago
Yep
joshuadDevonNetzleyTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Aliens!
Vote Placed by bcresmer 5 years ago
bcresmer
joshuadDevonNetzleyTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfetted