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

Will we never be contact/contact Aliens.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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: 8/14/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 623 times Debate No: 60473
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




1st round acceptance
BoP is on me to prove they will never contact/visit us, or us contacting/visiting them.
Thanks future debater!


I accept the challenge. But, I do have to note that I am technically a beginner in so I may be lowering your expectations. Nevertheless..

Good Luck! Have Fun Debating!
Debate Round No. 1


Alright newbie Jk.
Scientists always look for life, we have sonar and satellite telescopes. We can observe a small fraction of space but still in the range 20 Billion Planets. Not just regular planets but Earth-like planets. The problem is no life is on them.
If life in space did exist, it would exist on a place like us. No intelligent life will ever form on Jupiter. Common sense.
Earth ourselves are fantastically and super lucky to be basically perfect in tilt, size, gravity, moon are and size, and sun size and distance. The planet would very much like us, almost identical. If that is the case, with same gases in the atmosphere to the formation of dirt, rock, and water. If this planet existed it would probably be close to our age or probably older. If intelligent life came about this planet what would they look like? Like us.
You nor anyone commit a mental picture of another intelligent life that would live on the same planet but ours.
Nationality they will have too, we think for some reason the whole planet is united to kill us. Physics, and just the way life forms around a planet differ, from Labs to German Shepard, like from English to Germans. Aliens would not be united and we could see some nationalities similarity and differences.
The whole point, if these Aliens were Humans, and even if they were 1 billion years older than us, they still could travel to other stars, why? Too far, not enough energy and can't create a worm hole because not possible on that scale.
They will be like us stuck, sending stupid signals that take forever to complete you will never no.
They will probably not care too much like we do, we could become obsessed and start worshiping them, no no.
Conclusion, they're never coming.


Alright, sorry I took so long. Been busy lately.. Nevertheless,

Let's get on with it.

In today's debate round, I will point out flaws that were present in side pros speech while also presenting only one argument of mine:

1. How history has proved to us that we can explore the boundaries of space.


The whole of side pros arguments were based on two main principles and I will justify today why these two principles are ultimately flawed.

1. Aliens must be suited to human-like needs.

Side pro raised the blatant assumption that aliens can only live in an environment where they are suited to human needs. Therefore, they are humans and can only live in a place which is suitable for humans, thus Earth itself. 2 responses.

1. No, aliens do not need to be suited to humans. What makes you say that they are humans and need to live in a place where humans live. These are aliens, not humans. Aliens are extraterrestrial beings that we have not met before. They may come in other forms that can suit them in their planet. It's an arbitrary claim to say that aliens are humans in the first place.

2. Even if humans and aliens needed to be the same, that does not mean there aren't other planets like us. Because, in fact, there is. Kepler 22-b and many other planets that do look like us and are considered places we might have to go to in the event that our planet gets destroyed. [1]

2. Restrictions to space that restrict us from meeting aliens.

Next, side pro presented us with restrictions in general space that disables us from meeting aliens because it's impossible for pros eyes. I will address this argument fully in my main argument for today.


1. How history has shown us that we can explore the boundaries of space.

Throughout history, it has been continually proved that we humanity in general have progressed to such an extent where whatever we believe was impossible is continually getting possible. Simple ideas like whether humans can fly have constantly been deemed as impossible in the past. Nevertheless, after tumultuous and effective human progression, we have reached the conclusion where humanity will always progress and new inventions will always be made.

Experiments like the one being conducted with the Mars rover intending to terraform the planet in the 2020's are experiments that are continually being progressive and a step towards meeting or contacting aliens. It is very flawed to claim that our meeting of aliens will be tangibly stopped by the fact that there are restrictions which seem "impossible" but in the end will ultimately lead to our meeting with the aliens.

Therefore, it is to my belief that, yes there are restrictions, but these restrictions can always be overcome by the progression of humanity and the constant proof that we have in history.


In the end, side pro failed to provide me with any form of tangible principal flaws that exist under my paradigm. I have told you how aliens cannot just be limited to humans and also how these restrictions can always be overcome in the end. For all those reasons above, side opp wins.
Debate Round No. 2



Unless you can show me a biological path to intelligence that can live without water, fertile soil and atmosphere my point trumps. The reason is if we are to find life or right now we are only looking for life on earthlike planets. We should not even assume intelligent life can prosper on Neptune like it can on earth.
It must be a rock planet with a similar rock layer make-up. Also a common core, gravity pressure, weather cycles and atmosphere to even start to think that non-intelligent can hold. Kepler 22-b had a chance but no one assumes anymore life is on it.

For the history part and our expansion watch this very creditable video.

We can travel to our nearest star in about 1,100 years from today, that is just our nearest star and if we don't go extinct or go back in to a dark age.
WE and the ALIENS cannot and do not have the technology and resources to reach each other. We have accomplished many things but...
The greatest achievement ever executed in the cosmos is when Humans traveled to the moon. - Francesco Tredinari


Side Pro's whole statements today was based on two things.

1. How Aliens Can Not Biologically Exist.

For this argument, side pro fully believed that for aliens to exist, there must be a planet out there that can cope with "them". Side pro then followed it up by saying that there needs to be biological evidence that shows that an alien can survive in a foreign, "unsupported" planet.

What side pro is clearly failing to understand is the fact that both of us do not care what or who these aliens are, as long as these aliens exist and can be classified as life. Therefore, it is very flawed to say that they must be suited to humans and must posses the right needs of a human. If an alien is built in such a way that it can withstand enourmous heat, then it does. It's still an alien.
It does not matter whether these aliens need to be biologically supported, the debate is about meeting aliens , not what these aliens are.

2. How There are restrictions concerning space.

"WE and the ALIENS cannot and do not have the technology and resources to reach each other. We have accomplished many things but...
The greatest achievement ever executed in the cosmos is when Humans traveled to the moon. - Francesco Tredinari"

Side pro made several one liners in this statement. Firstly, he acknowledged that we have accomplished many things but that provided a boundary saying we will not progress to space even more.

Unfortunately, there were various missing links in this statement, side pro has not even mentioned how history which is a clear evidence (and is my first argument) can be flawed.

This is due to the fact that history itself has proven to us that we can explore this boundaries, that we do have the ability to oneday, explore even further in space and meet aliens.

Conclusion : Ultimately, side pro failed to provide any tangible core principles that go against the meeting of aliens. Most of pro's arguments were based upon arbitrary restrictions that only exist in pro's minds. These boundaries and limits cannot be limited and must be expanded.

For all those who do think that restrictions and boundaries cannot be arbitrarily decided, vote for side opp.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by BradK 3 years ago
First of all, are there aliens out there? Probably. It's not impossible. Will we survive long enough to possibly hear from them? Who knows. There's the drake equation which is a way to roughly estimate the chances of them being there in the first place.
No votes have been placed for this debate.