The Instigator
rafalaf
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
mfigurski80
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

Humans are from Mars

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...
mfigurski80
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/29/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,758 times Debate No: 75937
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (10)
Votes (3)

 

rafalaf

Pro

Round 1: Presentation of views
Round 2: Presentation of points
Round 3: Rebutalls
Round 4: Counter- rebutalls

Please, no profanity and only constructive criticism.

My side: The species, called Homo-Sapians (us), have undergone a majority of our evolutionary life on the planet Mars.
mfigurski80

Con

And I will argue that humans have not originated on Mars. The burden of proof falls on con.

Good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
rafalaf

Pro

There is a theory that we are from mars. The human race tried to land on the Earth and colonize it because of the better climate. While landing the ship crashlanded in Africa creating what we know as the first humans. These humans didn't have modern Technology for so long we just wen crazy and started talking to the next enerations of things like unicorns, Atlantis, etc, etc. While all those things actually exist on Mars. And that is how religon started. Each family talked to the next generation only about their favorite things but all are similar a little.
http://www.happehtheory.com...
This link shows how King Tut's head seemed longer than a regular humans. Also the curse of the tomb actually happened. Is that just a coincidence that every single person that leisurely walked into that room that day died soon after? Though King Tutankhamun looks too much like a human to be an Alien. his whole lower part of the body seems to be completely normal. This can mean only that King Tut was a homo-sapien from mars. Not only that, possibly he was an adult alien from mars. Also these "Martians" may still exist. After all the more you have invented the faster you invent. So if they could transport homo-sapiens between planets back then, then now they should have such a jamming system that we couldn't even think about it or notice it. They could block our radars just like that! Also the Martian rover was probablly being controlled by the "Martians", sending us false images and test samples, and to think our scientists believed them. Imagine being able to make a whole race believe in gigantic talking trees or something! They could make us look like fools! Also the Hanging Gardens have been a great wonder. Though what happened to it. All artists picture it with water fowing from the top, but the screw pump was invented by Archimedes in greece during the golden age. How could it happen. Well the answer is easy. The aliens showed us high techs to make us remember waht happened. Though humanity took them as gods and the high techs as Magic.
mfigurski80

Con

Since I mistakenly have myself the BoP, I can only thank my partner for dividing it equally and I will prove my side.

There has been no imperial evidence as to existence of any alien life outside of planet Earth. None of the world's governments recognize the existence of aliens.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov...

I can't really think of much more, I'm just waiting till the rebuttal stage. Also, I recommend that my partner provide valid sources for his arguments instead of pictures.
Debate Round No. 2
rafalaf

Pro

Well the reason of only finding evidence on the Earth is that back then, homo-sapiens new the Earth had the best climate, and so colonized only the Earth. While the reason we can't find them now is because, as I said in round 2, by now they should have such a jamming system they could show us false images and knock out all our technology just by thinking about it, and also make us not notice.
mfigurski80

Con

Firstly, my partner does not provide a single source in his second or third post. I strongly recommend getting something down and posting in the comments.

My partner also said that "there is a theory that...". Yet, he does not provide any name for this theory. Also, theories are hypothesises that are supported by evidence, yet I cannot find any evidence in my partners theory. Why should we accept this? What proof is there?

(1) As for King Tutankhamen. In the picture, my partner presents the similarity between what I take to be either an alien skull or Tutankhamen's skull. However, if you inspect a bit closer you will see that, in the skull shown at the top, the face is pointed upwards, while in the bottom image, the King's is pointed strait. This "differing of perspectives" leads me to believe that that thing at the top is not Tutankhamen's skull.

Also, this is a piece of concept art with no backing whatsoever. My opponent mentions the difformation of the Pharaoh's skull, yet this doesn't automatically prove that he is an alien. There have been many people known to be born with skull deformities, and Mayans and other ethnicities practiced skull elongating in their babies.

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

Counters
My partner claims that the ancient humans knew that Earth is the only habitable planet and so the landed here. This rebuttal shoots itself in the foot. If no evidence has been found for life outside earth, which my partner admits by not debating it, then ancient humans couldn't have existed to come here. And therefore humans were the poduct of "mother earth".
Debate Round No. 3
rafalaf

Pro

http://phys.org...
This is the link that I found the theory.
Also, as I said earlier, by now, when we actually are looking for evidence, they should have such a jamming system they could do anything with us. Please listen to me this time. I said this in all of the rounds.
mfigurski80

Con

mfigurski80 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by rafalaf 2 years ago
rafalaf
Ha, Ha. Very funny. Hope you hear the sarcasm in my voice. :(
Posted by mfigurski80 2 years ago
mfigurski80
I laughed for about a minute when I saw this.

Yes. Yes he should.
And thanks for the post.
Posted by Wolf_Fang 2 years ago
Wolf_Fang
Pro should join History channel. He'd fit in quite well.
Posted by rafalaf 2 years ago
rafalaf
Another source I forgot to put in
- http://www.abovetopsecret.com...
Posted by mfigurski80 2 years ago
mfigurski80
I found some proof against this. Permissiln to present in next round?
Posted by rafalaf 2 years ago
rafalaf
My reasources
1. logic
Posted by mfigurski80 2 years ago
mfigurski80
Uuh, great. I probably should have read through that one more time.
I meant pro.
Posted by Lexus 2 years ago
Lexus
You gave yourself the BoP. You're con.
Posted by mfigurski80 2 years ago
mfigurski80
Well, because he's trying to support his theory. I'm merely going against it, and while I can still give my own points I don't have to.

Besides, what point would you have?
Posted by Lexus 2 years ago
Lexus
"The burden of proof falls on con." why not both?
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by banjos42 2 years ago
banjos42
rafalafmfigurski80Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: 1
Vote Placed by HomelySherlock 2 years ago
HomelySherlock
rafalafmfigurski80Tied
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: The most ridiculous debate I've seen on this site. Arguments by pro were idiotic and unsupported in any way, sources for pro were almost non-existent. I'm no taking away points from Con for FF because had it been me I wouldn't have wasted time with this either.
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 2 years ago
Midnight1131
rafalafmfigurski80Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeits by Con, so conduct to Pro.