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

enough credible evidence exists to believe n UFOs from extraterrestials

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 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/30/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 543 times Debate No: 77152
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)




enough credible evidence exists to believe in UFOs from extraterrestials

there are tons of credible people and even whole cities who claim to have seen UFOs. given so much evidence, it is reasonable to believe in UFOs coming from extraterrestrials
here is some evidences

(1) The many reported cases of abduction. The reports are too many and without any apparent motive. "One of the earliest studies of abductions found 1,700 claimants, while contested surveys argued that 5"6 percent of the general population might have been abducted.[4]" (

Lies are told for benefit, but rarely if ever do people gain much benefit from such stories. Rather, they are laughed at and even persecuted. Nor are these people crazy: "Mainstream scientists reject claims that the phenomenon literally occurs as reported. However, there is little doubt that many apparently stable persons who report alien abductions believe their experiences were real.[8] As reported in the Harvard University Gazette in 1992, Dr. John Edward Mack investigated over 800 claimed abductees, and "spent countless therapeutic hours with these individuals only to find that what struck him was the 'ordinariness' of the population, including a restaurant owner, several secretaries, a prison guard, college students, a university administrator, and several homemakers ... 'The majority of abductees do not appear to be deluded, confabulating, lying, self-dramatizing, or suffering from a clear mental illness,' he maintained."[9] "While psychopathology is indicated in some isolated alien abduction cases," Stanley Krippner et al. confirmed, "assessment by both clinical examination and standardized tests has shown that, as a group, abduction experients are not different from the general population in term of psychopathology prevalence."[10] Other experts who have argued that abductees' mental health is no better or worse than average include psychologists John Wilson and Rima Laibow, and psychotherapist David Gotlib.[11]" (

(2) UFO sightings. Very reputable sources including government officials and millirary commanders have seen alien ships up close and personal. Fife Symington, former USSR govenor saw one; Colonel Charles Halt, USAF and four other millitary witnesses also saw one up close. Other witnesses have even touch the ship itself. A gigantic ship passed over Arizona and was seen by many witnesses. Do humans have this technology?

The descriptions given are not of some vague light in the distance; they desribe seeing a ship. Nick Pope, former US Millitary defense reveals that radiation readings show there is real tangible evidence to support that a craft was indeed present when 5 witnesses claimed to have seen the ufo. There is also visual footage of ufo's which the government confiscated. You will notice in these links that so-called more "rational" explanations have been refuted. A ufo appears next to a missle testing site and shuts down 10 of the missle launchers, and some would-debunker wants to say the malfunction was due to a power outage. This argument has been rebutted. They had double back-up on power; and even if one or two missle launch pads went down, 10 could not be a coincidence. And it couldn't be a coincidence that this happened to occur on the exact moment of a ufo appearing. These things at times come too close and are seen by too many to be mere hallucinations, or mistaking something normal for an alien ship.

These things travel at speeds that would be deadly to any human pilot, and are tracked on radar, showing that they are real objects and not just hallucinations. The Belgian UFO Air wave is a good example. "F-16s attempted nine separate interceptions of the targets. On three occasions they managed to obtain a radar lock for a few seconds but each time the targets changed position and speed so rapidly that the lock was broken. During the first radar lock, the target accelerated from 240 km/h to over 1,770 km/h while changing altitude from 2,700 m to 1,500 m, then up to 3,350 m before descending to almost ground level " the first descent of more than 900 m taking less than two seconds. Similar manoeuvres were observed during both subsequent radar locks. On no occasion were the F-16 pilots able to make visual contact with the targets and at no point, despite the speeds involved, was there any indication of a sonic boom. Moreover, narrator Robert Stack added in an episode of Unsolved Mysteries, the sudden changes in acceleration and deceleration would have been fatal to one or more human pilots."
( This was witnesses by 13, 500 people. Oh yes, aliens exist. If we are the only beings in the universe, it seems like an aweful waste of space


There’s no way I can check the citations of Pro, because they don’t point to anything specific on the site. Her sources all go to google’s or youtube’s main page. These websites are so vast, they cannot be counted as sources. Furthermore, “” seems to be a dead website.

Pro appeals to alien abductions and UFO sightings. This evidence is from eyewitnesses, which isn’t credible. There have been many cases where someone was wrongfully convicted because of eyewitness testimony [1]. Our minds process visual information and often make mistakes. For example, a trained pilot mistook Venus for another airplane on a collision course [2]. Eyewitness evidence over time becomes even more flawed. Neuroscientist Steve Novella states [3],

“Human memory is utterly flawed. Like perceptions, memory is not

a passive recording; instead, our memories are constructed entirely

by our brains. In fact, they’re tied together with everything that we

think and believe with our internal model of reality...There is a false assumption that all problems with memory are associated with recall. Some memories never form; in other words,

we may experience something but never consolidate it from short-term into long-term memory. Memories also degrade, fuse, and morph over time.”

UFO sightings and testimony after the fact are simply not credible enough to claim that aliens exist.

Supposed alien abductions can be explained by sleep paralysis, then memory corruption caused by UFO support groups. Sleep paralysis is an natural event where “a person wakes up paralyzed, senses a presence in the room, feels fear or even terror, and may hear buzzing and humming noises or see strange lights. A visible or invisible entity may even sit on their chest, shaking, strangling, or prodding them.” [4]. Despite the seemingly supernatural nature of these events, they have a neuroscientific explanation [5] Many alien abductions can be explained by this phenomenon [4].

A UFO isn’t enough to claim evidence of aliens. It could be a variety of things. Swamp gas for example can create lights in the sky [6]. Drones have also caused spikes in UFO sightings [7]. Even if I accept that they are some sort of new technology, it doesn’t prove the existence of aliens anymore than it proves the existence of new experimental technology from another country or a secret government project.

Pro cites the Belgian UFO wave, however it’s wrong to state the F16s detected the UFO on their Radars

...the F-16 pilot saw no UFOs at all. I spoke with some of his friends who had laughed with him about the UFO hypothesis. Had it not been for the SOBEPS team, these so-called mysterious radar returns would have been labeled as ordinary “angels”. Another important thing is that at one point the “return” remained unchanged on the screen while the plane was maneuvring, which is indicative of an instrument failure. This is also what Lieutenant-Colonel Salmon from the Belgian Air Force Electronic War Center remarked when he was interviewed by journalists of Science & Vie Junior in 1992. And this is also what I had written in an article that the ten scientists had chosen to add to their press-release in October 1991. [8]

The author goes onto write most of the claims of UFO sightings are responsible because of the publicity done by SOBEPS.

Furthermore, Nick Pope’s radiation readings have been said to be background noise from the very manufactures of Pope’s device. [9]

Pro states that no human pilot could survive the acceleration and deceleration of the observed ship. However, this opens up the question of how an alien could. How would it counteract the law of inertia?

Pro’s last statement is “If we are the only beings in the universe, it seems like an aweful waste of space.” This is an argument for the existence of aliens in general. Not an argument that evidence exists to conclude UFOs are of extraterrestrial origin.

Explanatory Power.

The idea of aliens interacting with us has very poor explanatory power. Most of the universe is hostile to life. If any alien life exists, it most likely is far away. If aliens somehow managed to figure out light speed or faster than light travel, why would they come to Earth? They would be leaving their families and due to time dilation might never see them again, to see some primitive planet, which they don’t even make direct public contact with.

Furthermore, why would aliens need to abduct so many humans? They can master interstellar travel, but are too stupid to understand human physiology? Why would aliens tease us with UFOs? If they wanted to contact us, then why not do so overtly? If they didn’t, why are they flying them so close?

The idea that aliens contact us has weak explanatory power.

Back to Pro




[3] Novella, Steve. Your Deceptive Mind. A Scientific Guide to Critical Thinking Lecture 4. P. 35-36 in guidebook.







Debate Round No. 1


i forfeit


Sure thing.
Debate Round No. 2


Why do they call them little green men when they're grey?
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by tejretics 1 year 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: Concession. Sources to Con since Pro's sources are just Google and YouTube *main pages*, with no specific search item or video.
Vote Placed by 64bithuman 1 year ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro sources google results pages and YouTube, then the forfeiture. Points go to Con.