The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
5 Points

The Existence of Aliens

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/29/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,079 times Debate No: 51210
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)




I do not believe that aliens exist because Earth was created by the omnipotent God who declared humans as the only intelligent living species (other that like animal and plants) in the universe.

First Round is for short explanation.
Second and Third Rounds are for supporting your argument.
Fourth Round is a conclusion.


I do not believe Con's argument is sound because (1) aliens need not be intelligent, and (2) God did not declare humans as the only intelligent living species in the universe.

I believe aliens exist because of the enormous probablistic resources in the universe.

Debate Round No. 1


There is no proof or evidence of life on other planets and in the bible, it did say that the existence of aliens is false.


Con states that the Bible says the existence of aliens is false, but she provided no reference. I don't believe the Bible says any such thing, so Con needs to demonstrate that the Bible claims what she says it does.

Let me go into more detail now about what I mean by "probablistic resources." Let's say there's a lottery with a 1 in a million chance of winning. And let's say only one ticket is sold. What is the probability that the one ticket will match the winning lottery numbers? Well, the odds are 1 in a million.

But if you increase the number of tickets, you increase the odds of one of those tickets having the winning numbers. If you sold a billion tickets, it would practically be guaranteed that at least one of the tickets would have the winning numbers.

So "probablistic resources" are basically chances for something to occur. The lottery tickets are the probablistic resources for getting a winning ticket. The higher the probablistic resources (i.e. the more lottery tickets), the higher the chance of getting a winner. The more chances there are for something to happen, the more probable it is to happen. Even prima facie low odds can be overcome with sufficiently large probablistic resources.

The universe is estimated to have 3e26 stars in the galaxy. That is an unimaginably large number. Assuming conservatively that there's 1 planet per star, and no moons, that's 3e26 chances for life to emerge in the universe.

But that's a very conservative number. After all, it's not as if each planet only gets one chance. The universe is 13.82 billion years old.[2] Let's cut off the first two billion years and assume there were no planets before that time. Still, that's 11.82 billion years that planets have been around. If we assume, conservatively, one chance at life every year, that's 3e26 times 11.82 chances at life. And if we assume chemistry is happening, not just in one place on a planet, but all over the planet, that raises the probablistic resources to a mind-blowing level.

So it would appear that there are enough probablistic resources in the universe to produce life no matter how unlikely life is prima facie.

But that is assuming nature is all on is own. However, if nature is not all on its own, then there's an even greater chance of life emerging. If there is a God known to be capable of producing life, and if this God produced life on earth for the sake of its own glory, and if this God had a passion for his glory, we should expect this God would want to produce life in more than one place in the universe. With the ability and the motive, there is at least some positive probability that God would produce life somewhere else in the universe.

So it is highly likely that there are aliens elsewhere in the universe.




Debate Round No. 2


ok so aliens may exist but we don't know and we won't know for a while, at least until scientist can have a closer look at other galaxies and planets. Aliens do not exist within our solar system and that is true. But for now, it does not matter whether or not aliens exist. I mean, what difference does it make?


Con has dropped her Biblical argument against aliens and has conceded that aliens might exist, though not in this solar system. She hasn't made any attempt to refute my argument for aliens except to say "we don't know and we won't know for a while." My argument is that it's more likely than not that there are aliens, so whether we can know for sure is not relevant. It's a probablistic argument.

Debate Round No. 3


There has been no proof for aliens to exist because our current technology is not good enough but in turn, we must ask ourselves, "If everything is here (in the universe) for a purpose, what purpose do aliens serve in our universe?" There has been no proof yet about aliens existing. If it is an extraterrestrial life, what proof do we have that it exists? It is a matter of our imagination and aliens, for now, only live in our imagination.


Con never picked her Biblical argument against aliens back up after dropping it in the last round, so I think we can dismiss that argument.

Con's claim that there's no evidence for aliens rings hollow in light of my unrefuted argument for aliens. She needed to refute my argument, but she ignored it instead.

Thank you for coming to tonight's debate.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by lightingbolt50 2 years ago
I find it sad that all con could debate were biblical arguments. Even if god existed, why wouldn't he create aliens? He made the massive universe(s) for just 1 planet? He sure knows how to frack around then.
Posted by Ore_Ele 2 years ago
Drake Equation mentioned in my RFD
Posted by SPENCERJOYAGE14 2 years ago
I was going to add this to my favorites until I realized Con probably won't respond. ;-;
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: With no BOP explicitly stated in the OP, we shift to an equal BOP which each side showing their support. Cons arguments focused on that we have not seen aliens and the bible. Pro asked for the evidence that the bible says there are no aliens and Con never provided it. This is as good as a refutation on this point. Pro later went to show the statistic probability of life out in space. Though the equation that he used was very rudimentary and could be picked at, he was basically going for the Drake Equation (linked in comments). This gives him arguments. He did include some sources to back up some of the numbers he provided, which were never contended by Con. So this gives him sources. If I was awarding Speaker Points for this, I'd give a 9/10 for Pro, because the only opportunity he missed was the Drake Equation. I'd give Con a 2/10. she made a number of arguments but was not able to back them up, even the ones about the bible, gave no sources, and eventually backed down.