The Instigator
Alycelilylilan2
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
PowerPikachu21
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Living things on other earth like planets.

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/15/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 12 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 384 times Debate No: 91280
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

Alycelilylilan2

Pro

I believe there are other living things in earth-like planets. I'd like to have a debate with a person who doesn't believe in this.
PowerPikachu21

Con

I'll accept this debate. The burden of proof is on Pro to prove that life exists outside of Earth.

Definitions:

Living: Consisting of sentience, and requires Food, Water, and Air to survive.

Earth like planet: A planet that is able to inhabit life.

I hope Pro is willing to do battle against me. May your words be strong, like Lucario. Let's do this.
Debate Round No. 1
Alycelilylilan2

Pro

http://edition.cnn.com...
Earth-like planet-- Have an atmosphere, water and land
We do not have evidence to prove that there are living creatures in other earth-like planets. But I believe that there are many living things in other earth-like planets. But one thing I'd like you to keep in mind is on earth, most living things need food, air, light, and water. BUT, that doesn't mean creatures on other earth-like planets need air. Maybe they doen't even need food or water!!

One reason for my belief is that the universe is huge. We don't even know how big it is. If it's so big, we can't be the only living thing in the universe. Discoveries of earth-like planets are increasing through out the year. Chances of finding living things out side our planet is increasing.
PowerPikachu21

Con

I thank Pro for posting his argument. Let's get into my rebuttals first.

Rebuttals:

Analyzing Pro's site;

I'm much too lazy to read the entire article. I suggest Pro tell me certain quotes from this article that could help his position that life exists outside of Earth. Voters shouldn't have to read the entire article to cast a decision. I read some of it, and it basically says they're looking for life. Whether they have or not is beyond me, and, again, I won't search.

Pro's Opening paragraph;

"We do not have evidence to prove that there are living creatures in other earth-like planets." Yet, the burden is on Pro to show that kind of life exists.

"But one thing I'd like you to keep in mind is on earth, most living things need food, air, light, and water. BUT, that doesn't mean creatures on other earth-like planets need air. Maybe they doen't even need food or water!!"

What Pro is suggesting is that some kind of life can survive without nutrients. Not needing anything to breathe, I could imagine that. Not having anything to live off of at all... can it really survive?

Pro's 2nd paragraph;

"If [The Universe] is so big, we can't be the only living thing in the universe." Who knows? We could very well be the only planet containing the essentials for life! While a lot of alien believers use this exact reasoning, it can be dismissed easily as an Appeal to Probability; a logical fallacy.

Argument:

Point 1; Lack of Evidence

Disproving an alien race is a lot like trying to disprove God; it's pretty much impossible. I'll admit that. Then again, how easy is it to prove it? I'm sorry if you were expecting an easy first debate, Pro. But, alas, the entire Burden of Proof (What he must prove) is all on Pro to prove that it is likely (How about 60%?) that aliens do in fact exist.

As far as I know, aliens haven't been shown to exist, and doing so is tough. People often dismiss photos as being photoshopped. Pro must show something like fossils, possible plants or liquid that a being from that planet could feed off of.

Closing thoughts:

Again, Pro, if you were expecting an easy debate, sorry. But I do wish you come back, and post more topics. Keep getting better at debating, and maybe challenge me to another topic? Anyways, if you do wish to proceed with this debate, I'll be waiting.
Debate Round No. 2
Alycelilylilan2

Pro

Thanks for posting your argument! This debate is hard, but I will try my best to not give up.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"What Pro is suggesting is that some kind of life can survive without nutrients. Not needing anything to breathe, I could imagine that. Not having anything to live off of at all... can it really survive?"

I'm not suggesting that they don't have to live off anything. Maybe the creatures could get energy from other things than eat and drink? For an example, they could "suck" energy out from their planet.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are few people who say they have seen an alien or UFO. But is true? I'd like to believe it is true. So I'm going to use alien and UFO sightings as my evidence. If there are aliens or other kind of living creature out there, there may be races who are advanced in technology than us, humans.

Some people may ask, "Then why don't they attack us, like in the movies?" I think they don't attack us because they may see us as merely stupid creatures who fight among themselves. If they have an advanced technology, I bet they have a united world, so they can concentrate on technology or other things. But we are having war between countries and in the country.
PowerPikachu21

Con

I thank Pro for not giving up instantly. I was kind of worried that might happen. With this, let's get into my Rebuttal!

Rebuttal:

"Maybe the creatures could get energy from other things than eat and drink? For an example, they could "suck" energy out from their planet." So basically, the aliens are doing photosynthesis, with energy from their planet. The problem is, though, where would this energy come from? I could imagine this, but then there's the question of "When and how did this energy come from?" As this is Pro's assertion, it is his burden to explain how this energy gets into the planet.

I would also like Pro to say how the life itself would come to the planet how would the first life form begin? We can't have life without, well, life!

UFO Sightings:

"There are few people who say they have seen an alien or UFO. But is true?" I doubt it. "I'd like to believe it is true. So I'm going to use alien and UFO sightings as my evidence." Yeah, no. Those people could either be mistaken, or just flat out lying. If Pro does show some UFO sightings (which he hasn't linked us any yet), I'll be glad to refute that.

Argument:

Pro's Burden:

Pro has the burden of proof, meaning he has to prove that aliens do in fatc exist. So far, he's kind of failed. I told him what he needs to do, so he should answer my questions in the next round.

Let's see what those answers are.
Debate Round No. 3
Alycelilylilan2

Pro

Thank you for your questions. I will try to answer them!

Before answering your questions, these are some the sites.
https://www.quora.com...
http://www.goliath.com...
http://www.mirror.co.uk...

"As this is Pro's assertion, it is his burden to explain how this energy gets into the planet."
For an example, the planet could get energy from sunlight. The planet could maybe be like a solar panel.

"I would also like Pro to say how the life itself would come to the planet how would the first life form begin? We can't have life without, well, life!"

Well Living things on our planet, Earth, began as single living cells> We do not know where these cells come from but they could have came form earth or were produced by the conditions on Earth at the time. (http://www.bbc.co.uk...)
Like the same, the planet's life could have formed there or came from somewhere else.
PowerPikachu21

Con

I think I underestimated Pro. He came up with some good answers. Let's see what I can do about this.

Rebuttal:

Pro's sources;

Pro has presented 3 sources. I'll analyze them.

Source 1; It is "10 reasons to believe aliens exist". In debates, you should never let the source do the talking. The point of sources is to prove your points right, not make the sources an argument. I'm honestly not an expert on this subject, but I'm pretty sure you have to explain the sources. Anyways, so do I refute the source? Eh, 1,000 characters. I can do it.

Debunking source 1;

"The Big Bang happened around 10-20 billion years ago, while the Earth is approximately 4.6 billion years old [1]. If we compare the length of time between these two events to that between two of our birthdays, we will realize that it is actually quite a huge amount of time."This is circumstantial. How can we be certain there are aliens out there just because the Universe is old?

"With so much heat from billions of stars in the universe, isn't it very much possible that similar kinds of chemical reactions take place in distant galaxies? Is it not likely that there could be at least ONE such chemical reaction occurring by accident?" This is the Fallacy of Composition. It's claiming that living things are made of chemicals, therefore the chemicals are alive. Here's an analogy:An elephant is made of atoms. Atoms are tiny. Does this mean the elephant is tiny? Of course not! Elephants are huge! Thus, the source's logic falls.

"Water is one of the by-products of star formation [4]. And with a star born every 0.0002 seconds" Water forms stars?

This source says something a bit peculiar. "The gas and dust that flows out of star nurseries contains clouds of hydrogen (H) and oxygen (O) that react together to form water (H2O)." Stars are not exactly made from already existing water. Hydrogen and Oxygen clouds react to form H2O. It's not like H2O will form, and be there long enough for a planet to form next to it. [See source 1]

"Picture a distant planet where lightning is as common as McDonald's is on Earth. With just the right conditions, life may have already dawned there thousands of years ago." So lightning = life? It does also say that certain chemicals, when zapped, create amino acids. I guess this makes sense. But how do we know a planet has the right things to even create amino acids; certain chemicals, and a stormy atmosphere?

Let's not get distracted by a lone source. On to the next!

Source 2;Talks about UFO sightings. I've already said these people could either be mistaken, or lying. Then, ancient writing. Could very well just be a religion. 3rd, a UFO crashed in Area 51. Me personally, I'm wondering the credibility, since it's a flying saucer, and that's a bit cliché. It could very well be a hoax. If Pro wants me to address specific points, just tell me them!

Source 3;So this is a conspiracy theory. A guy claims he saw some secret documents in Britain. 1, how do we know this guy is trustworthy? 2, why is Britain even hiding aliens? They'd be famous!

Pro's defense;

"For an example, the planet could get energy from sunlight. The planet could maybe be like a solar panel." Oh? And what might this sunlight be converted into? And how would the planet go about transforming the energy, exactly? Review you response, and think about what my next question could be, and answer my question before I ask it.

"Like the same, the planet's life could have formed there or came from somewhere else." So the life could start from cells, then possibly evolved into more complex beings. It's good that you did research. Now we need to answer this question: What are these cells feeding off of? We will stick to Pro's absorption theory as the explanation, but he just needs to fill in all the gaps.

Argument:

Pro's Burden of Proof:

Pro only has 1 round remaining to fulfill his burden. I'd have to say he is a good debater; an actual one. Not like all of those purple circles that abandon the site day 1. There is but two things Pro must do:

1: Show that it is possible that alien life could exist

2: Actually proving they exist.

Pro's theory on absorbing energy from their planet allows a simple cell to thrive, but he must expand on this theory. How does the sunlight become edible material? This question must be sufficiently answered.

But then, he actually has to prove this theory is true in a planet. When arguing that alien life exists, theories won't do. You must confirm these theories, turning them into fact. Of course, he can abandon the theory altogether, and suggest there's a planet incredibly similar to Earth. Of course, he still must prove this to be true.

Final Thoughts:

Now that we've reviewed the burden Pro must handle, we see just what trouble he's in. Good luck. That's all I have to say; Good luck.
Debate Round No. 4
Alycelilylilan2

Pro

Sorry for late reply. I was busy with my school work ^^
Now here we go, my last argument.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Answers for your question

"Oh? And what might this sunlight be converted into? And how would the planet go about transforming the energy, exactly?"
"How does the sunlight become edible material"

I"ll be answering two questions of Con here. In Earth, plants use photosynthesis to convert sun light into sugar and oxygen. The planet, which is like a solar panel, could do something like photosynthesis.

"What are these cells feeding of"

Well, if the planet could do something similar to photosynthesis, the cells would"t have problem for food. But now, how do these cells eat these products? I have two theories.
Firstly, the cells can eat the food like us. (find the food and simply eat it)
Secondly, lets think the planet itself is a living thing. Then, the planets can "bring" the food to the cells. For an example, in the planet can control its air, (some kind of gas) it can use its air like hands.

Now these theories/answers can explain that it is possible for aliens thrive in other planets.
""""""""""""""""""""""""

Now the hard one, to prove aliens that aliens exist. But I will try my best to prove that aliens exist.

http://www.express.co.uk...
This site here shows writings, statue and UFO crash. The site says that the writing, statue and UFO crash is in Mars. So, studies have said that Mars had water is the past. This is proved by pebble like stones and erosion caused by rivers. By human common sense, living things need water. So people think life could or did exist in Mars. These pictures prove that list exists outside earth.

Now Con is likely to say that these pictures are fake. Well we don't know. But one thing I want to ask is. When did these alien/UFO sightings start? What I think is that somebody did have seen an alien or UFO. Then other people started to see alien or UFO. But someone, started to tell lies. This made it very hard for people to tell the difference between a lie and truth.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I thank Con for accepting my challenge. He is a very good at debating. At first, I have though lightly of my topic. This was a very hard fight. I'm looking forward to Con's reply.
PowerPikachu21

Con

I'm proud of Pro; he never gave up, even though he admits this is difficult. With this, let's get into my final rebuttal.

Rebuttal:

Pro's photosynthesis theory:

During this debate, Pro has suggested some species of alien life could do a kind of photosynthesis to survive. He's suggesting the planet would convert sunlight into a kind of energy. How? Let's hear his response:

"In Earth, plants use photosynthesis to convert sun light into sugar and oxygen. The planet, which is like a solar panel, could do something like photosynthesis." I agree this is a logical conclusion, and possibly the most simplistic theory for how alien life could exist. But... looking at what Pro said... he suggests the planet itself is doing photosynthesis for the alien life. The planet itself is alive?

Pro also has a theory of how the edible matter is actually eaten. He came up with two theories.

"Firstly, the cells can eat the food like us" This suggests that the matter is tangible. How would sunlight be converted into like an apple, or water? You can't eat sunlight.

Unless the sunlight is converted into a gas which the life inhale? But this is a planet's doing. How does the planet convert? Pro should've gone into more detail as to how the sunlight is converted, and what exactly it's converting into.

"Secondly, lets think the planet itself is a living thing. Then, the planets can "bring" the food to the cells. For an example, in the planet can control its air, (some kind of gas) it can use its air like hands." 1) If the planet is alive, what does it feed off of? 2) Are we bringing some deity into this, that deity being the planet? We have a (small) possibility! Now all you gotta do is turn theory into fact! Prove it!

Theory into fiction:

Pro created a theory. Did he find any source that shows a godly planet does exist? Answer: One probably doesn't exist. Most people probably wouldn't come up with this theory, and would find water first and foremost. Pro proves my water assertion later.


"So, studies have said that Mars had water is the past." Why is water relevant? "By human common sense, living things need water." So there goes Pro's theory! He never said these life forms needed water, in fact, he said they didn't need it! I guess he was proven wrong by his own source.

Judging Alien's existence based off of the source:

So now that Pro's theory fell, what do we have to go off of? Water, Atmosphere, edible matter, and life itself. The source tries to say that life did exist before on Mars, but it said that people did find it shaky, myself included.

Writing on the wall? What writing? Mayan Statue? I dont think they're aliens [Not certain, though]. Crashed UFO? Do I trust this? The source says it looks like a rock. A building on Mars? Must've been a small, simplistic house, because it could very well just be stones.

"Now Con is likely to say that these pictures are fake." Of course I did. "Well we don't know. But one thing I want to ask is. When did these alien/UFO sightings start?" Since the belief that little green men on Mars came about. That's when the saucers started flying!

"But someone, started to tell lies. This made it very hard for people to tell the difference between a lie and truth." We'll find the truth in time, not soon, though.

The question is "Do aliens actually exist?" I think it is plausible aliens exist, but practically impossible to actually prove they do. The closest we can get is gods and goddesses in religions, and those are impossible to prove as well. Thus, the entire burden is on Pro, which he couldn't really get to. Since it's difficult to prove aliens exist, and even more difficult to disprove their existence, the default position was my own. Thank you for this debate. Voters, who do you think won?
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by PowerPikachu21 12 months ago
PowerPikachu21
I believe it is possible, and would be cool if life existed outside of Earth. But I also know proving such is incredibly difficult.
Posted by Hanate333 12 months ago
Hanate333
This is for con

I understand your argument and would vote for you, but off the record do you believe in life outside earth?
Posted by Alycelilylilan2 1 year ago
Alycelilylilan2
Sorry! I wasn't clear. I'm arguing that life exists elsewhere.
Posted by Ragnar 1 year ago
Ragnar
Welcome to the site. Are you arguing that life exists elsewhere, or that it would be nice if it did?
No votes have been placed for this debate.