Is it reasonable to believe that aliens do not exist
Debate Rounds (5)
"aliens cannot exist"
"i have not seen good hard proof of an alien before"
Just because my opponent has not seen "good hard proof" before does not mean they do not exist.
"wouldn't they evolve just as fast as us and we would have gotten radio signals from them?"
Evolution is affected by many factors and not all organisms evolve at the same rate. They may have started evolving later than us, meaning they would not be at our stage of development. Even if they are at our stage of development, it is no guarantee that we would receive signals from them. Space is vast, and these signals could easily be lost in it.
With billions of stars in space, it is very probable that there is life somewhere else other than Earth.
Water is a key ingredient for life and there are many celestial objects, even in our own solar system, that have liquid water.
Radio signals have, in fact, been found. There have been multiple cases where we could not explain the origin of certain signals that seemingly came from space.
Life always finds a way. Organisms thrive even in the harshest of environments. There are microbes from Earth known as extremophiles that can survive under the surface of Mars.
Overall, I do not see why one would think that there is no more life anywhere in this gigantic, ever-expanding universe.
Aliens mean any sort of life, not just what we would call "intelligent". If the life is intelligent, I do not see why we would be aware of it for a long time. Why would they send out signals to space? How large is the chance that we would be able to intercept this signal in the vastness of space? 0.000000001%?
Considering the sheer size of space, it is very probable that there are other planets with hospitable conditions, fit for life.
Frankly, I think it is ignorant to believe that we are the only planet among trillions that have life.
"That the speed with which our own human life sprung up was so quick,"
According to evolution, living things have been on Earth for about 2 billion years. It took 2 billion years for organisms to evolve to the level of humans. That is not quick.
Forgive me for misunderstanding, but I do not see what light-years have to do with extraterrestrial life. It only proves that space is enormous and the chance of a planet having hospitable conditions is high.
"So am I to understand you are proposing that mankind will somehow break all known laws of physics to find these life forms on places we can't verify exist across distances we can never cover even if we had extra solar craft able to go one hundred thousand times the speed of light?"
I said nothing about "breaking physics" and finding lifeforms on other planets. We are arguing whether or not it is reasonable to believe that they exist. Not about finding them.
"If a tree falls in a forest with no one around to hear it, does it make a sound? The answer is no, it doesn't."
1. sound produced by continuous and regular vibrations, as opposed to noise.
The definition of sound means that the tree will still make a sound. It will create vibrations through the medium that it is in (air).
"For life to exist, it must be interpreted as life. If I burn a paper, it moves, it splits apart, creating more burning papers, and creates offspring of ash, all the while consuming air. But is it alive? Of course it isn't."
You do not define living things by whether it moves. Cars move but they are not living. Living things are determined by whether or not it has functioning cells.
"So you cannot assume that life exists just because there is an environment to support it."
Actually you can. It is reasonable to believe that there is life in places where the environment can support life.
jajkalope105 forfeited this round.
jajkalope105 forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by iamanatheistandthisiswhy 2 years ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: I am sad Pro decided to forfeit, although at that point Con was winning the debate anyways. So while disappointing I think Con still would have won. Interesting arguments Con used and Pro could have made a better resolution or a stronger case for aliens not existing.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.