New Member Tournament: Aliens have visited Earth
Debate Rounds (4)
Full Resolution: Aliens have likely visited Earth.
Burden of Proof is on Pro to establish that it is more likely than not that aliens have visited Earth. Con's place is to find fault in my argument, cast doubt and establish why it is more likely that aliens have not visited earth. I will be using quite a few pictures and maybe some videos as evidence. Because of the BOP, Con will likely have no need to provide these, so no fault on him for that. Upon reading the debate, if you readers view that it is likely aliens have visited earth, Pro wins. If you view that it is more likely that aliens have not visited earth, Con wins.
I plan to set up the debate around two main points: ancient history supports alien life on earth, and current alien evidence (NASA footage, etc.) The set up could be subject to change depending on how much space both of my arguments take up.
Round 1: Acceptance, definitions, clarifications
Round 2: Pro- Arguments for ancient aliens Con: Rebuttals
Round 3: Pro- Arguments for current evidence Con: Rebuttals
Round 4: Pro- Rebuttals of con's rebuttals and closing, Con- Final rebuttals and closing
Alien: Any intelligent species that was not born on earth; an intelligent species that is not human.
likely: seeming like truth, fact, or certainty; reasonably to be believed or expected; believable
Good luck to my opponent!
I accept the terms, and only challenge part of one definition. Defining alien as " an intelligent species that is not human." is highly liable for abuse.
I look forward to my opponents opening arguments.
I attempt to show to you readers that it is believable that Aliens have visited Earth. In order to do this, I will strive to give you enough pieces of the puzzle that fit into an overall likelihood that this is so. I attempt to provide sufficient evidence that our history is seeping with clues of Alien contact. The real kicker will be round 3 when we discuss current evidence, but in order to establish a basis for this resolution, we have to take it back and look throughout our history.
I admit that this post will be rather image heavy. I did not intend to win this debate by loading it with fancy pictures, but the imagery is a highly important factor in the evidence.
A lot of ancient evidence of Aliens comes from Egypt. So we must begin by taking a quick glance at Egyptian Culture. It is believed that the Egyptian empire came into being about 3150 BC.  Some might think that people of these times were primitive; we didn’t develop antiseptics or electricity until very recently after all. But we also know that the Egyptians had a very advanced lifestyle with a deep culture and a sense of creation and preservation. Some might even guess that it was Aliens that jump started this knowledge among the Egyptians. Although this is simply speculation, it is worth keeping in mind when we look at the facts to come.
Here are some interesting ancient artifacts. Let's look at the photo to the left. We see an artifact that has been found wrapped inside a mummified body from ancient Egypt. This artifact is clearly a space craft. There is an interesting spiral design on the craft. It is universally accepted that the spiral indicates a basic pattern in life and nature, and also represents evolution of the universe.  This could symbolize that flying is considered a basic step in the evolvement of people. It is funny that this was wrapped inside something that could be preserved throughout a long period of time, almost as if it is a clue for any future person who might be smart enough to dig it up. As advanced as the Egyptians were, we have found little evidence to show that they had acquired a high knowledge of technology. So who inspired the idea of this artifact, that so closely resembles our own current aircrafts? Similar artifacts have been found throughout the world, including India and Peru. 
This piece of art was from the Renessaince Era, in the 15th century. Around this time, we had a very basic understanding of technology. So how is it that such an advanced looking craft, with lights on them, would come from this time? This tells us that UFO sightings have happened in the past. It is also worth noting the mysterious looking creature next to the man. It is made out that the creature has arms and legs, but looks nothing like animals we have seen here on earth. Although this is not proof in and of itsef, when coupled with the evidence to come, this painting points to the existence of alien encounters throughout our history.
This is an interesting engraving from ancient Egypt. You can see that the two adult people are depicted with normal shaped heads, and the babies have elongated heads. Could this be a clue that these creatures are different from human creatures, or is this simply some form of artistic expression? We see these elongated heads all throughout Egyptian art, although most Egyptian art is realistic in nature and doesn’t push the boundaries towards artistic abstraction.
Here are a few of the actual skulls found that are seen in the art above. It is a common misconception that these skulls have been deformed from the act of head binding. But anthropologists have admitted that these skulls are unlike the deformity caused by binding.  Any amount of binding cannot increase the capacity of the cranial void, and these cranial voids are significantly larger than what is found in humans. These skulls were found in Nazca, Peru. Does that name ring a bell? This is where the Nazca Lines are; Huge mysterious lines carved into our earth that can only be seen clearly from space:
Here is the infamous “Starchild” skull in comparison with a normal human skull. It was found in the 1930’s in Mexico, and Carbon dated to be over 900 years old. This skull has several physiological differences from a human skull, including bone that is over half as thin as a human skull, having a high carbon and low phosphorous content compared to a human's high phosphorous and low carbon content, and the lack of frontal sinus cavities.
What is even more interesting is DNA tests done by experts in 2010. They found that the DNA from the mother was human, but the DNA from the father was unlike anything they have found on earth. You can watch an interesting video on this subject as my number  source, where I acquired the facts about this exquisite specimen. I will put this video in the comments so as not to effect the format of the debate.
Ancient Artifacts found in Space
Here is a NASA image of a monolith found on the moon. Buzz Aldrin himself admitted to seeing this structure. Monoliths have been found in nature, but they are usually rigid, mountain-like structures. This monolith is clearly defined by a smooth diamond surface, and is very tall as seen by the long shadow. This is clearly something that is not naturally constructed. Even with our current technology, it would take astounding resources to successfully land and build something on the moon. Now who would have made this?
This Angel was found in a rock on our moon. It is carbon dated at 20,000 years old. Even if the evidence shown could point to humans having been able to fly in the past, the artifacts left by the ancients were more suited to flight within our own atmosphere, rather than outer space flight. More NASA evidence actually points to much more damning evidence of Aliens on our moon, but we will get to that in the next round. If Aliens have reached Mar's Moon and our own Moon, it is only logical to agree that they have likely visited our home planet.
We have seen artifacts and skulls that are more alien than human in nature. When we look back on our history, there have been millions of documented UFO and Alien encounters. While it is safe to presume that some of this could be false, we would have to be blind not to take into account these witnesses and assume Aliens are all a fabrication. As our own technology has advanced to the point where we discovered movement faster than the speed of light, it is not too outlandish to guess that other life forms have found a way to reach our planet. I believe that by piecing together these clues, we can agree that it is likely that Aliens have at some point visited our Earth.
Sorry for a late and likely sub-standard reply. Anyway, I know the BOP is on my opponent, but I will still present a few theories/arguments to support the Con side.
Theory: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
Looking to my Opponents first round of argumentation, most of her evidence is frivilous at best, and misinformed at worst. It is not necessarily my burden to disprove all of my Opponents arguments because it is not her burden to show you that aliens are an explanation, but that they are the most logical explanation. People see what they want to see, and a few artifacts vaguely resembling HUMAN spacecrafts/ideas of spacecrafts simply does not constitute close to the amount of evidence needed to affirm. Note that the resolution states likely not possible, so if at the end of this round my opponent hasn't convinced you that aliens are the best (51% or greater probability) explanation for the handful of oddities she's offered, you negate by default. I cannot emphasize this enough, a Con ballot is presumed.
Argument: It is unlikely that intelligent extraterrestrials exist.
On Earth, there are an estimated 8.7 million non-bacterial species. How much life have we discovered outside of Earth? Absolutely none. I concede that we have only explored a tiny part of our Universe, but consider the following scenario. You are on a mountain that has 8 ponds on varying parts/heights of the mountain. You examine one and find fish. Is it more logical to assume that the other ponds have fish in them, or that they are devoid of fish? Clearly given the close vicinity it's more logical to assume that more ponds than just the one contain life. Now consider the solar system. Earth has life, so if life existed outside of Earth, wouldn't it be logical to assume that we would've found some in our own solar system considering the mountain pond scenario? Of course, it will be immediately objected that the differnece in the planets are too large to support this analogy, but in comparison to outer space, our planets are quite close together indeed and considering how life on Earth exists EVERYWHERE even the most extreme parts, life should exist on at least a few of our neighboring planets. Thus, since we haven't discovered any life where it most logically would be (near a planet known to contain life), we ought to assume it to be an Earth unique thing. Differences exist between our planets, significant ones; however from a cosmic view they are radically insignificant. Just like one pond might have a Ph level 1 higher than another--to the fish in the pond, such a difference would seem highly significant. To a perspective examining all of Earth it's highly insignificant.
Now, let's consider another thing. Of the 8.7 non bacterial species, a whopping one has acheived spaceflight. That is .0000000114%. How many have achieved interstellar spaceflight? 0. Such things like that So using the only sample we have availible to us, we can conclude that intelligent life capable of inter-galactic/significant interplanetary travel can only occur if life exists at a practically infinite magnitude in the Universe. We know from exploration that this assertation is false.
Consider Silentium Universi (Latin: "silence of the universe"), no extra terrestrial contact has been made. This is paradoxical to the multitude of arguments supporting the idea of extra terestrial life (including my opponents). Because of Silentium Universi we can conclude two probable scenarios.
1. The Earth is unique, which invalidates Drakes Equation and all of my Opponents arguments
2. The Earth is non-unique, however extra-terrestrials for some reason do not visit us. (this brings up a whole new set of critiques against extra-terrestrial life which I will explain in further detail later).
If we accept scenario 1, I win. If we accept scenario (which is less likely) 2, I still win. Here's why:
Let's look that the only example we have availible to us, the example of Earth. Clearly any aliens capable of inter-steller travel are much more advanced than we are. We already have intelligent, but less advanced races on Earth today; our relatives the apes, and the whales and dolphins. Do we take them under our wing, teach them, communicate with them, and influence them? No. We make them our pets, we destroy and occupy their habitats, we force them to perform for our amusement, we test on them, in some places we eat them, and we sure as hell do not conceal our presence from them. We have to make estimate using the data availible to us. What do intelligent species do to lesser intelligent species? In short, they destroy them. Why should aliens be any different?
For that matter, people even destroy THEMSELVES based off of race (which according to D. J. Witherspoon, S. Wooding, A. R. Rogers, E. E. Marchan, W. S. Watkins, M. A. Batzer, and L. B. Jorde doesnt even have a biological difference: "data also show that any two individuals within a particular population are as different genetically as any two people selected from any two populations in the world") as evidenced by Hitlers destruction of the Jews, and the Europeans absolute and utter destruction of the Native Americans.
The IBTimes argues:
"Researchers say extraterrestrials might behave the way we humans have behaved whenever we have discovered other previously unknown intelligent beings on Earth, like unfamiliar humans or chimpanzees and gorillas.
Just as we did to those beings, the extraterrestrials might proceed to kill, infect, dissect, conquer, displace or enslave us, stuff us as specimens for their museums or pickle our skulls and use us for medical research,"Even if we assume foolishly that the Aliens will not destroy us for their benefit (which violates all we know about Darwinism--individuals act in their own selfish best interest, even at great costs to others species or people. Don't believe me? Look around you at the planet we're destroying.), why would they visit us and then leave? We know from human history that when a population discovers new inhabitable territory it expands into that territory. If aliens existed who could be present on Earth long enough to affect the culture of the ancients, why did they not settle? Further, why do we no longer hear from them today? These are questions we need to consider.
I also contend that it's not likely for a civilization to survive to the point of inter-stellar travel. It would be illogical to think a civilization could travel to other stars until it has at least mastered its own (and thus reached a level two civilization on the Kardashev scale). It's estimated that humanity could reach a level 2 civilization, at minimum, in a few thousand years. At the way we're going, can we really be expected to last another couple thousand years? Tensions between the U.S. and China are rising (likely leading to a second cold war, one that will be settled in blood) that could likely lead to nuclear war and the extinction of us all. We've built a society over a finite resource (oil), that is rapidly disappearing. Absolutely no progress has been made on NASA's near earth object program, an asteroid or comet could strike at any time and wipe us all out. The OST prohibits the colonization or true development of space. We will not last much longer, and since humanity is the only example we have of an intelligent race, we have to judge based off that.
It is unfortunately intrinsic to the nature of "intelligent" beings to destroy others. So I urge you to negate.
(I realize I didnt refute my opponents statements..I'll do it in the next round. The temptation to write this argument was too great.)
I thank Thett3 for his interesting response! I will begin by bringing up the second part of my case, and then move on to my rebuttals of Con's case. However, con brought up a point that my next case is highly involved with. He brought up the question that if there are aliens who can visit us, why haven't they made themselves known.
What I intend to show you in my next case is that aliens have made themselves known. Let's think of it this way. If you live in America and there was an earthquake in China, would you know about it? Would the earthquake have any impact on you? No, the only way to find out about what happens on the other side of the world is by listening to the news/ media and trusting the information as accurate. Granted, Media can fabricate things, but the point is that Aleins have made themselves known to millions upon millions of people. Just because one person hasn't been a wtiness to it, doesn't make it not apparent to others.
One striking set of witness accounts is known as The Disclosure Conference.  This conference showcased over 120 US Military Official's stories of Ufo and Alien contact. The general theme surrounding these eye wintess accounts was nuclear weapons. What many people described was a UFO coming to a missle site, and the missles would become deactivated (sometimes in mid-air.) These people, some of whom were in the air force, admitted that it was unlike any aircrafts they have seen before. The Technology used to deactivate these missles were so advanced that it was highly unlikely to be from an opposing country. This happened in various countries around the world. Some of these officials had even admitted to seeing the aliens themselves.
Now, you might be thinking that these people lied to get attention/ media covered. But they have gotten very minimal coverage on this, aside from being called crazy.These officials all decided to lie? Why has this Conference not gotten much media coverage? It is because the government has tried so hard to cover up the existance of Aleins.
So is it more likely that these officials lied, or more likely that there was some form of cover-up? We already know that National Security exists to keep things certain aspects of the military and government secret. We also know that we have experienced governmental cover-ups in the past. One example of this is a little fiasco called MK NUKE.  This was a porgram conducted by the government and the CIA in the 60's to brainwash people through trauma experience, and brainwash the masses at large through control of information release. Controlling what information gets out to the public, to sway them into certain modes of belief. So what is most likely is that these Military Officials felt a duty to expose the truth to their country, regardless of any sort of cover- up.
The president of Mexico has admitted to the existance of Aleins, and has said that the United States Government is working to cover it up. People from the Disclosure conferences have stated the same thing.
SETI, Search for Extra-Teresstrial Intelligence, has received various signals from Outer Space. CIA & NSA have pressured them not to release this information to the public. Shortly after this information became known to the public, SETI was shut down. It was said that they shut down due to budgeting, however, their Satellites are still up and running for any "special cases" that might pop up. 
NASA themselves has several clips of leaked footage involving UFOs and Alien- crafted buildings. I will put these videos in the comments section.  Many astronauts have confirmed these sightings. For example, Buzz Aldrin admitted to a UFO flying past them on the Apollo 11 mission. 
Many surveys have been done on whether Astronomers have seen ufos (astronomers are trained to spot what is in the sky- they know the difference between a meteor, a human made craft, and a non-human craft.) Between multiple surveys, averaging a couple thousand professional astronomers each, about 5% of Astronomers admit to have had a UFO encounter. 
My opponent equates Alien existence to finding a fish in a pond. A fish in one pond doesn’t necessarily mean that a fish is in another pond. This really proves nothing, because it doesn’t mean that there are no fish in the other ponds. There are many reasons why Earth has conditions to support life, such as the distance from the sun, our magnetic field, and the moon. SETI has already found hundred of planets that fall into Earth like conditions. They are too far away for us to explore beyond that.
I also ask you this. Just because no fish are in a pond, does that mean that a fish was never there? There is sufficient evidence to believe that mars at one time supported life. They have found small traces of bacterial life on mars currently, but conditions aren’t proper in this time for that life to expand into something further. They have found water on mars, supporting the idea that life could have been vibrant on Mars at some time in the past.
My opponent also brings up the idea that if there were Aliens, they must destroy us, because that is what we do to lesser creatures here on earth. The disclosure conference proves this idea wrong. They obviously had a reason to want to stop us from using the Nukes with minimal involvement. I bring up the point that we are the most evolved species on earth, and we are least likely of all the animals to kill without remorse. Intelligent species are also more likely to destruct for sport. Take a chicken. Any deranged person could go beat on their chicken, but who wants to watch that? Stick two roosters up against each other, call it a cockfight, and you've got a whole happy deranged crowd!
The main idea here is that we cannot know the intent of another species that is more developed than us. We do not even know the intent of our neighbor. We can speculate about what their intent would be, but it holds no relevancy to the truth of their existence. What does hold relevancy? Proof of their existence through witness, videos, and "mysterious" reminders that have been left for us all throughout the worlds history.
Sorry if I missed a few of my opponents points. I've run out of time and space and will continue the rebuttals next round. This round has been rushed a bit, so if Con requires any elaboration or verification on the points I brought up, I will be happy to oblige next round.
1. Video- See comments
5. 2 Videos- see comments
thett3 forfeited this round.
Arguments extended. I will leave you with a video of former Astronaut, 6th person to walk the moon, Edgar Mitchell, giving his take on the existence of UFOs.
Gosh, I appologize for this debate getting so off track. I will go down the debate and attack all my opponent has said.
My Opponent links a few strange looking sculptures. First, we must consider the Egyptian culture which was a strange one indeed. Before we can deduce such artifacts as significant, we need to look at the whole picture. How many errectic and seemingly pointless things did the Egyptians do? the answer is ALOT. If these sculptures came from a culture like, say, the Plains indians who valued utilitity and rarely did any art then we might have something. However the Egyptians highly valued art, as evidenced by the fact that so much of their culture and art still exists. So what would lead us to believe that these scultpures are any different than say, art in the present day? My opponent has not shown us that the only explanation for a few sculptures looking vaguely like aliens or our idea of spaceships is that aliens came down benevolently and encountered the Egyptians. Thus, you drop not only this argument, but each and every one that has not been proven the only explanation. My Opponent has given no weighing analysis to deduce the likelihood of things, so you can only vote pro if you can think of literally no other explanation for these occurences.
My Opponent shows us an image from the Renessaince era, that has a fuzzy image in the background that is claimed to look similar to an Alien spaceship. Look closer. Looks a lot more like an eye to me, which fits the image well (as in the eye of God), and my disagreence shows that such a fuzzy blurry image can't be deduced to anything, let alone PROOF of Aliens when we've been doing ASET for DECADES with literally no response. Besides, what does one painting during the Renessaince tell us about modern science and the great qestions of life? Nothing, abolustely nothing.
Another image is shown, this one Egyptian in origin. My Opponent tries to argue that since the heads are slightly larger than the already exaggerated head lengths in Egyptian art this shows that they're aliens. Really, we need more evidence than this. Much much more.
These skulls are merely the result of pre-columbian religious rituals. The top scientists all agree on this. These are human skulls subjected to head binding, despite what my opponent asserts to the contrary. Even if you agree with her that these arent the result of Mayan rituals (despite being from the same era in the same area), wouldn't it be much more lgoical that these were just some freaks of nature? Are we really to believe that aliens would have skulls so similar to human skulls that we could even have thus discussion? I dont believe that, and neither should you.
Their purpose is still hotly debated, however the most logical explanation is that they existed to communicate with dead ancestors in the heavens. Next.
As for the supposed "starchild" (human child) skull, if the DNA testing TRULY sshowed "nnothing on earth" than I absolutely assure you that we would've heard of this. I really can't be bothered to go out and refute this because I am not a scientist, and the very idea that such an artifact exists and mainstream society doesnt know about it but alien conspiracy sites do is, on its face, absurd.
The artifacts found in space are, respectively, a misunderstanding and a hoax. The first, the supposed "monlith" is just a mountain. Honestly, looking at the picture you can SEE the curves to it (far right, towards the bottom). Besides, why on EARTH (pun) would Aliens want to build a monlith on our dead moon? Lets be reasonable people. Now the Angel carving is where I call BS. Not accusing lick of being a liar, just misinformed. If such an intricate thing existed we would all know about it. The fact that we perform ASET proves that people are interested in alien life, and if such a thing actually existed we would all know.
First, before even consdering anything she says we must acknowledge that my opponent is deluding herself. She argues that "the government has tried so hard to cover up the existance of Aleins." There are a couple problems to this. First of all, why would we think that only governments capable of keeping a secret would know about Aliens? If they're truly visiting us, why wouldd they visit only stable nations, as oppposed to all nations where the government wouldnt be able to suppress it? Oh thats right, they wouldn't. Further, why would the governemnt want to keep this from us? No reason to think they would. Thirdly, if the U.S. government, th undisputed hegemon who has the power to delete any dissenting material from the internet within minutes, if not seconds of its creation is trying to suppress this information, how did she gain access to it?
She then brings up the disclosure conference, citing that 120 examples of UFO's have been sptted by those in the military. Folks, there are over a million soliders in the military. The fact that only 120 misunderstandings were deemed worthy of investigation by the US military out of a probable pool of thousands and thousands of UFO sitings hurts her case, not helps it.
My Opponent then argues that the U.S. military tried to brainwash everyone during the 60's, but this really carries no weight in this round. First, we're in a completely dif. situation now than then, second thats a massive over exaggeration, and third Turn: If aliens are so prevelent, the government would have known about them in the 60's. The fact that we know that they tried to "brainwash" everyone now leads us to the conclusion that the information on aliens wouldvle been leaked as well.
My Opponent then procedes to drop practically all my arguments. She states that my pond example can't apply, but drops the logic cmpletely that planets in close proximity are more likely to have similarities IE life. Extend it. She only responds to the argument about Aliens destroying us with the disclosure conference, baselessly claiming that some nuclear weapons were stopped by aliens, with no evidence what-so-ever. Thus we can extend this. Further, shes hasnt responded to the question of why Aliens would not settle here, or why we "see" them so rarely. Extend both those points.
Thus, I urge a con ballot.
Thanks for a greeat debate lickdafoot :)
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by cameronl35 5 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||1||3|
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct goes to Pro for forfeit however at the end of the debate all of Pro's arguments have been refuted and some of Con's arguments stand...perhaps it's because Con made his arguments in the last round but regardless the more convincing arguments were made by Con for Pro's arguments mainly focused on abnormalities rather than something incapable of humans to produce..see more in comments
You are not eligible to vote on this debate