The Instigator
SMike
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
tejretics
Con (against)
Winning
28 Points

Do Aliens Exist?

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 5 votes the winner is...
tejretics
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/4/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 431 times Debate No: 74777
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (2)
Votes (5)

 

SMike

Pro

I believe that aliens exist, but finding them is on the verge of impossibility. A picture was taken by the Hubble Space Telescope, it zoomed into a small portion of its view and in it, there were hundreds, thousands of galaxies. If there was an equal amount of galaxies in the entire universe, the chance of just one of them being similar to the Milky Way is more likely than not.
tejretics

Con

I accept. I shall presume the Burden of Proof lies with the proposition to demonstrate without any doubt that "aliens" exist. The BoP is with the proposition because of Bertrand Russell's celestial teapot analogy that posits that the burden of proof lies with the person making a scientifically unfalsifiable yet unproven claim.


== Definitions ==

Alien - "a hypothetical or fictional being from another world." [1]
Exist - "to have actual being; be real." [2]

== What is my advocacy? ==

The interpretation of the word "alien" used prior to a verb indicates that it is a noun, which, in the typical sense, means the being described is *intelligent*. I presume this is what the proposition intended to convey. I merely need to present a simple case against these intelligent extra-terrestrials, or merely rebut the proposition's claims.

== Arguments ==

(1) Evolutionary Biology

According to the principles of natural selection, to reach a certain level of brain complexity to be perceived as "intelligent", any organism has to go through a long process of natural selection. Thus, for such an extra-terrestrial to exist with standard understood evolutionary capabilities, it will have to fulfill "soft panspermia." Soft panspermia "argues that the pre-biotic organic building blocks of life originated in space and were incorporated in the solar nebula from which the planets condensed and were further —and continuously— distributed to planetary surfaces where life then emerged." [3] This has to be proven without doubt.

==Conclusion==

Standard methods such as the scientific method have not proven that intelligent extra-terrestrials exist without doubt, thus I maintain the proposition's advocacy cannot be fulfilled.

Sources

[1]: Google ("define alien")
[2]: http://www.thefreedictionary.com...;
[3]: https://en.wikipedia.org...;
Debate Round No. 1
SMike

Pro

SMike forfeited this round.
tejretics

Con

Extend. Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 2
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Philocat 1 year ago
Philocat
Forfeiture.
Posted by lexxxxxiwexxxxxi 1 year ago
lexxxxxiwexxxxxi
Seems about Right.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 1 year ago
Blade-of-Truth
SMiketejreticsTied
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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Con. Pro forfeited the final round, which is rarely acceptable conduct in any debate setting. For this, Con wins Conduct. S&G - Tie. Both debaters had proper spelling and grammar throughout the debate. Arguments - Con. In Pro's first round of argumentation all he accomplished was proving that there is a *chance* or *possibility* for aliens existing. He did this by theorizing that due to the high amount of galaxies, there is a chance that aliens exist "out there" in one of them. This simply does not meet the burden placed on him in this debate. On the flip side, Con was able to build a strong foundation and then concluded that through "standard methods such as the scientific method", there has been no conclusive proof for the existence of intelligent aliens. This claim by Con then remained unchallenged for the remainder of the debate. Thus, Pro failed to maintain his BOP, and left Con standing unchallenged. Sources - Con. Pro failed to utilize sources whereas Con did.
Vote Placed by Diqiucun_Cunmin 1 year ago
Diqiucun_Cunmin
SMiketejreticsTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro conceded, so conduct to Con. Con used the only sources, so sources to Con. Pro did not satisfy his BOP, and did not even give evidence or reasoning behind his bare assertion that the probability is high. Arguments to Con.
Vote Placed by The-Voice-of-Truth 1 year ago
The-Voice-of-Truth
SMiketejreticsTied
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 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: Conduct to con due to FF by Pro. Sources to Con, as he had the only sources. Args to Con, as he provided an effective counter-case that was supported by sources. S&G to Con, as he had better spelling and grammar (duh). I can expand on this RFD if either debaters want me to.
Vote Placed by Theunkown 1 year ago
Theunkown
SMiketejreticsTied
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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture if nothing else
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
SMiketejreticsTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro ff a round, so conduct to Con. Only Con had sources.