We are NOT the only intelligent living beings in the universe.
Debate Rounds (3)
second round will be reasons, explanations, thoughts, etc.
Third round will be left for any last thoughts or remarks
My position in this is:
we are not the only intelligent living beings in the known universe.
Defining my terms:
Intelligent Living Beings (ILB): when I say this, what I mean is; MultiCellular Organisms that are developed enough to construct cities, buildings, transportation, and possess the ability to advance in fields such as science, medicine, mathematics, communication, etc. The human race can be used as an example. When I say ILB I don't mean, bacteria or micro organisms.
We are the only intelligent living beings in the known universe.
Known universe: The area of the universe the human race has observed and can acurately describe. To truly know a something is to be able to describe it. Familiarity is not knowlage.
I personaly believe that there are other intelligent beings in the universe, but not in the known universe. I am asserting that no intelligent beings are in the universe as we know it and they most likely do not know of us.
Good luck to the instigator, this will be a challanging topic to construct arguments for.
It seems like we both agree that there are intelligent beings in the universe but now that we have both defined our terms, I'm not even sure if this debate should continue or would make any sense.
I'm an now going to apologize for the hit below the belt I have given.
Yes I believe that there is inteliegent life in the universe.
The problem that I find in my opponents arguement is that if we have no knowlage of anyother intelligent life then therefore they do not exist in the known universe.
I agree with my opponent of the triviality of this debate, however I believe there is more to debating that truth.
I would like to point out that at the heart of this debate lies arguments about what is considered knowalage and what is considered intelligence.
I would like to state that my low blow was not a dodge of the original topic it was simply an attack of the one and only flaw i could find in my opponents arguement.
I invite my opponent to find and exploit any flaws in my arguments in order to secure there victory, just as I have done to them.
Alternatively, we could smply both provide arguments as to why it is definate that there is intelligent beings somewhere in the universe, and ask that the votes be based on who gave the most compelling evidence to as to why the assertion is definately true.
The problem I see here is our perspective on knowledge and what I mean by it. As well as intelligent life. So as for as my stance goes, I believe there is a civilization out there capable of many things and advancement in the thousands of galaxies we know to exist but we haven't made any contact with them. In a way, I do say there is other intelligent Life but either 1) Neither have they or us have made advance communication technology to reach each other or 2) They know of us but do not wish to make contact just yet.
The reason why I believe there is other ILB is because the galaxies we see now and every other star we see with our telescopes and images are old and in a way, a image of the "Past". To make it clear, I will use a star that we can see with our naked eye as an example. When we look up at night we are able to see stars but some of the stars may have died out minutes to hours before hand because the time it takes for the light from the star to reach our eyes can take a very long time. Even though light travels extremely fast, in the vacuum of space, it can take years. The same goes with the galaxies we see with our telescopes. Some of the furthest galaxies we can observe are billions of light years away. So if we see a galaxy that is 10 billion light years way from us then that means we are seeing the galaxy the way it was 10 billion light years ago, not how it is the present. So if another civilization on a planet that is 50 million light years away from us, pointed a telescope towards earth, they wouldn't see New York city with its tall skyscrapers but instead, they would see the dinosaurs.
This is all I can do for now and I would like to thank my opponent for their critical thinking on this argument/debate.
I mostly agree with my opponent, I would simply like to state, that I find it very unlikely that we have observed a location in the universe and failed to see signs of intelligent life, thus intelligent life is only probable outside the know universe.
However, the point about how the things that we see appearing older than they really are is very strong.
I feel as is it is simply up to probability
Vote pro if you think it is likely that intelligent life exists in the known universe thus we "missed" them when we observed that location.
Vote con if you find that scenario not likely.
Thank you to my opponent for a very well thought out debate and topic.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by frozen_eclipse 1 year 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:||3||0|
Reasons for voting decision: omg i wanna scream at both of you....we have made contact with aliens and they have contacted us with simple microwaves. Sigh theirs so much you need to learn.
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.