The Instigator
Harlan
Pro (for)
Winning
24 Points
The Contender
dthmstr254
Con (against)
Losing
12 Points

Chances that a alien visiting us would be nearly identical 2 humans or humanoid at all is very small

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/26/2008 Category: Science
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,032 times Debate No: 2210
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (12)

 

Harlan

Pro

...And the media's portrayal of what an alien would look like is flawed. (continued from topic)

This may seem like an odd topic, but I actually have once gotten into an argument about this.

WE are all familiar with the media's portrayal of what an "alien" looks like, and we have seen plenty of alleged videos of aliens which, also, portray an alien that has a complexion almost identical to a human.

But does that really make sense? If an intelligent being from a star light-years away, would it really be plausible that they would be so incredibly humanoid, as portrayed in the media and alleged footage of aliens?

I assert that if an extra-terrestrial came, it would be like nothing we've ever seen.

Think of the wide-ranging variety of species that exist on our incredibly small and insignificant planet. Snails, crabs, whales, humans, birds platypus; we have such an extremely wide ranging variety of animals. Slightly different climates render completely different beings.

Chances are, that any extra-terrestrial that came, would really be pushing our perception of what "life" is, coming from a completely different type of world, they would be completely different. So it is absurd to imagine them looking exactly like us.

What might an extra terrestrial look like? Who knows? Thinking about it is frightening (the fear of the unknown), but it is nonsense to portray aliens as human-like as they do.

I am sure that everyone is aware of the image I am referring to…it is widely accepted as "an alien". There are usually only slight variations to this image. If you want a concrete standard, to base this debate on, I suggest war of the worlds. If you have a different suggestion, we will discuss it. I will here post some problems with how coincidentally human they look:

-they are always bi-pedal

-2 arms with a hand at the end, usually designed like our hands

-2 eyes, on the head, often placed above a mouth, which is used to emit sound, and has teeth, and even a tongue. They often even have some sort of nostrils located between the mouth and eyes.

-rely on vision and sound solely (observation made from war of the worlds).

I have heard 2 arguments that claim aliens would most likely look like humans if we were to encounter them.

1. The first one claims that any species intelligent of to make it hear, would have to have evolved well. They claim that the form we have adapted is the most efficient, and we are probably not the only ones to have it.

-I think this is absolute nonsense. This is obviously not the best form you could have, nor the only one that could allow intelligence. Evolution has to have the right circumstances. Also, what is the most efficient on earth would certainly not be the most efficient somewhere else. Little things, like the nutrients available for them to feed on, and the gravity of the planet, would make it necessary for a completely different body complex, than what we have here.

2. The second one, is pretty trippy and far-fetched, but I thought I should include it none the less. The second claim for this argument I have heard is that millions of years ago aliens (who look like us) came, and genetically modified US, to look like THEM. They claim that we are part-alien.

-I don't even know where to start. The chances are an alien that is capable of living somewhere else, would not be able to live on earth, any more then Humans could live openly on mars (as in breathing the air, etc.). So their genes would not be helpful in the least. Also, the two beings would be fundamentally different, and it would be impossible to mix their genes (if the aliens even have "genes"). Also, the aliens would have no purpose in doing this, it would be pointless. There is plenty of evidence of why Humans NATURALLY evolved the way they did.

So we see, both arguments towards aliens probably looking like humans ar flawed in many aspects.

-Harlan
dthmstr254

Con

I am only taking it because I figured it would be a rather interesting discussion, given my taste for Stargate/Star Trek. As a start, I am not even an evolutionist, nor do I believe that any aliens exist, but I love sci-fi and that kind of stuff. Now, on with my side:

Firstly, with potentially billions of billions of trillions of planets in however many galaxies as exist in the universe (I don't know the estimation, but I believe you get the point that there are lots of planets around the universe), chances are that there are other "earth-like" planets in the universe. It is a decent assumption, therefore, that there are possibly (via our rules of science) other humanoid species. However, there are lots of other different types of planets over hundreds of different types of stars. Therefore, there are also probably hundreds of types of intelligent life forms out there.

GOing further into speculation, some sci-fi writers have even hypothesized the possibilities of beings with triple helix DNA strands, silicon-based lifeforms, and hundreds of other types, with possibilities that used something other than proteins as building blocks.

I guess that my argument is that there are probably lifeforms of humanoid AND non-humanoid beings. For all we know, there may be an intelligent life form similar to the Go'Auld from Stargate that communicates as a symbiote and aren't really humanoid at all.
Debate Round No. 1
Harlan

Pro

Thank you for accepting my debate, and now, onto your arguments…

"Firstly, with potentially billions of billions of trillions of planets in however many galaxies as exist in the universe (I don't know the estimation, but I believe you get the point that there are lots of planets around the universe), chances are that there are other "earth-like" planets in the universe. It is a decent assumption, therefore, that there are possibly (via our rules of science) other humanoid species."

I agree. If you sill see my topic, I am talking about "aliens visiting us". I am sorry if I did not make that clear enough.

I agree that there is a high probability that somewhere there is more life forms that resemble humans in many qualities. However, I think that the chances that aliens VISITING US would not be Human. The chance that out of all the life forms, the ones that came were exactly identical to us does not make sense.

You may say that it is a useless debate because; to some degree it relies on odds. But that is why I said "the chances" in the topic, and also, it is not completely random, there are many factors involved.

For instance, since space is so vast, any life forms that possibly visited would be from (relatively) near by. The chances that there are any Humanoids "near by" is pretty small.

I am sorry if I did not make my stance clear enough.
dthmstr254

Con

Well, now that last comment was interesting. Yes, it is likely that IF a visitor were from nearby, that it would not be humanoid. However, our science might not account for their technology. Historians say that if it weren't for the dark ages, we could have been an extra hundred years along in technology, and there are probably other things that slowed us down. For all we know, they could have developed machines that can transport them long distances in a short time. There are still things our scientists haven't done. I doubt that an ion engine is the farthest propulsion can go. For all we know, a device similar to a stargate or warp engine may be real somewhere out there.

Uncertainty does allow that it is more likely, by our understanding of science, that a closer planet or system be the origin of intelligent visitors, but it also remains that the ability to generate a spacial wave to propel a ship beyond light speed could exist. How can we be sure that any planet near here has developed technology sophisticated enough to travel this distance. Then again, how can we be sure that if aliens did do that, that they would take interest in our unadvanced planet?
Debate Round No. 2
Harlan

Pro

We could spend a long time with what is "possible", but here I want to focus on the most probable.

You suggest that distance does not matter. I disagree. I severely doubt that anywhere is there technology to instantly transport matter. This seems more like magic than science. And the fact that you get this idea from a sci-fi channel TV show only proves my point. Using Occam's razor I assert that this idea you have suggested is too complex; involving too many entities.

And distance is not the only limitation either, that was an example. The fact is still there that, despite the fact that there are probably humanoid beings in existence somewhere other than earth; not every single being in the universe is going to drop by. Imagine picking one human being, out of every man woman and child on the planet, to find that they are identical you in every way. They are the same age, gender, ethnicity, hair color, eye color, born on the same day, and the exact same interests. It would be like that, except even smaller a chance.

And even if it WAS possible that humanoids could come from very far away, what are the chances that THEY would be the ones to come. Very, very, small. The chances are that they would be completely different. You keep stretching it out, giving far-fetched stories of what is possible, but when something requires so complex a explanation, there is a very small chance that it would happen.

Chances are, in my own opinion, that Human eyes will never see any type of being from outside of our little star system. This debate, though, was about IF they were to come, the probability that they would look like humans.

There is also a VERY high chance that there ARE Humanoids out there, but they are mindless animals.
dthmstr254

Con

If chances are what you go by. However, Parineal Plastic sydrome is one of the least likely things to happen without cancer treatment (The immune system basically reawakens after a round of radiation and produces antibodies against the tissues of the body. It is an autoimmune disease), but it still happens to a handful of people. Doctors and scientists are taught to not assume that it is not going to happen just because it is unlikely. The likelihood doesn't matter when it comes to any intelligent being. It was once thought unlikely that we would build a flying device, but now we have people in the International Space Station.

Who knows, if a humanoid species took interest simply because of the similarities between us and them, the chances won't matter a tick.

PS: Unless you were talking about the movie, War of the Worlds describes short, bird-like creatures with tentacles, not humanoids.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Black.Nite17 9 years ago
Black.Nite17
That joke is horrible! but funny =]
Posted by Tatarize 9 years ago
Tatarize
What? I've seen a number of aliens trying to get work down by Home Depot. They look remarkably humanoid!
12 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by kykrebs 9 years ago
kykrebs
Harlandthmstr254Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Tyree 9 years ago
Tyree
Harlandthmstr254Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by padfo0t 9 years ago
padfo0t
Harlandthmstr254Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by RepublicanView333 9 years ago
RepublicanView333
Harlandthmstr254Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Harlan 9 years ago
Harlan
Harlandthmstr254Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by paul_tigger 9 years ago
paul_tigger
Harlandthmstr254Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by PreacherFred 9 years ago
PreacherFred
Harlandthmstr254Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by K0N 9 years ago
K0N
Harlandthmstr254Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 9 years ago
Tatarize
Harlandthmstr254Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by massvideogamer 9 years ago
massvideogamer
Harlandthmstr254Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30