Total Posts:7|Showing Posts:1-7
Jump to topic:

It is likely that aliens have visited earth

apb4y
Posts: 480
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2014 3:19:16 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/26/2014 12:00:31 AM, a_drumming_dog wrote:
Please critique my arguments in this debate.

http://www.debate.org...

They're weak and rely too heavily on circumstantial evidence. However, you actually have an argument, whereas your opponent does not.
a_drumming_dog
Posts: 93
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2014 5:19:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/26/2014 3:19:16 AM, apb4y wrote:
At 9/26/2014 12:00:31 AM, a_drumming_dog wrote:
Please critique my arguments in this debate.

http://www.debate.org...

They're weak and rely too heavily on circumstantial evidence. However, you actually have an argument, whereas your opponent does not.

Please elaborate, if you will. What is weak about them?
The truth will set you free
apb4y
Posts: 480
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2014 6:35:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/26/2014 5:19:31 PM, a_drumming_dog wrote:
At 9/26/2014 3:19:16 AM, apb4y wrote:
At 9/26/2014 12:00:31 AM, a_drumming_dog wrote:
Please critique my arguments in this debate.

http://www.debate.org...

They're weak and rely too heavily on circumstantial evidence. However, you actually have an argument, whereas your opponent does not.

Please elaborate, if you will. What is weak about them?

Your argument goes:

1. Aliens could exist.

2. UFOs have been sighted.

3. A bunch of people agree that these UFOs are alien in origin.

Therefore: Aliens have visited and the government is covering it up.

You're essentially jumping to a conclusion here. Rtfg2 hasn't made a very good counter-argument, but voters are biased and could side with him/her if he/she makes a decent rebuttal in the final round. Your only hope of winning is if they forfeit or screw up their response.
a_drumming_dog
Posts: 93
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 3:45:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/26/2014 6:35:12 PM, apb4y wrote:
At 9/26/2014 5:19:31 PM, a_drumming_dog wrote:
At 9/26/2014 3:19:16 AM, apb4y wrote:
At 9/26/2014 12:00:31 AM, a_drumming_dog wrote:
Please critique my arguments in this debate.

http://www.debate.org...

They're weak and rely too heavily on circumstantial evidence. However, you actually have an argument, whereas your opponent does not.

Please elaborate, if you will. What is weak about them?

Your argument goes:

1. Aliens could exist.

2. UFOs have been sighted.

3. A bunch of people agree that these UFOs are alien in origin.

Therefore: Aliens have visited and the government is covering it up.

You're essentially jumping to a conclusion here. Rtfg2 hasn't made a very good counter-argument, but voters are biased and could side with him/her if he/she makes a decent rebuttal in the final round. Your only hope of winning is if they forfeit or screw up their response.

Alright, thanks for the feedback
The truth will set you free
a_drumming_dog
Posts: 93
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 5:57:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/26/2014 6:35:12 PM, apb4y wrote:
At 9/26/2014 5:19:31 PM, a_drumming_dog wrote:
At 9/26/2014 3:19:16 AM, apb4y wrote:
At 9/26/2014 12:00:31 AM, a_drumming_dog wrote:
Please critique my arguments in this debate.

http://www.debate.org...

They're weak and rely too heavily on circumstantial evidence. However, you actually have an argument, whereas your opponent does not.

Please elaborate, if you will. What is weak about them?

Your argument goes:

1. Aliens could exist.

2. UFOs have been sighted.

3. A bunch of people agree that these UFOs are alien in origin.

Therefore: Aliens have visited and the government is covering it up.

You're essentially jumping to a conclusion here. Rtfg2 hasn't made a very good counter-argument, but voters are biased and could side with him/her if he/she makes a decent rebuttal in the final round. Your only hope of winning is if they forfeit or screw up their response.

For the record, I did say at the beginning that it was likely that aliens have been here, not definitely that they have been.
Also whats wrong with circumstantial evidence? Isn't a lot, if not most, of scientific evidence circumstantial?
And my arguments were a little more complicated than what you stated. It's more like this

1) It's likely that aliens exist in the universe and even that they have very advanced civilization.

2) There have been thousands of sightings of unexplainable UFOs.

3) There is an abundance of anecdotal evidence and documentation suggesting that these UFOs could be extraterrestrial in origin.

4) Therefore, it is likely that extraterrestrials have come to earth in what we call UFOs.
The truth will set you free
Otokage
Posts: 2,352
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2014 10:14:18 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/27/2014 5:57:54 PM, a_drumming_dog wrote:
At 9/26/2014 6:35:12 PM, apb4y wrote:
At 9/26/2014 5:19:31 PM, a_drumming_dog wrote:
At 9/26/2014 3:19:16 AM, apb4y wrote:
At 9/26/2014 12:00:31 AM, a_drumming_dog wrote:
Please critique my arguments in this debate.

http://www.debate.org...

They're weak and rely too heavily on circumstantial evidence. However, you actually have an argument, whereas your opponent does not.

Please elaborate, if you will. What is weak about them?

Your argument goes:

1. Aliens could exist.

2. UFOs have been sighted.

3. A bunch of people agree that these UFOs are alien in origin.

Therefore: Aliens have visited and the government is covering it up.

You're essentially jumping to a conclusion here. Rtfg2 hasn't made a very good counter-argument, but voters are biased and could side with him/her if he/she makes a decent rebuttal in the final round. Your only hope of winning is if they forfeit or screw up their response.

For the record, I did say at the beginning that it was likely that aliens have been here, not definitely that they have been.
Also whats wrong with circumstantial evidence? Isn't a lot, if not most, of scientific evidence circumstantial?
And my arguments were a little more complicated than what you stated. It's more like this

1) It's likely that aliens exist in the universe and even that they have very advanced civilization.

I agree it is likely that aliens do exist. Although I dont think you have backed your assumpion that they have developed interestelar travel methods and have visited Earth. As far as ive seen, you only base the assumption on witnesses, which can not settle a scientific argument if any way. If that were the case, we would have come to the conclusopn that God exists, since theres infinite witneses of God (or his voice, etc)


2) There have been thousands of sightings of unexplainable UFOs.

3) There is an abundance of anecdotal evidence and documentation suggesting that these UFOs could be extraterrestrial in origin.

i dont think thats possible. Vanguardian human technology is a more likely explanation

4) Therefore, it is likely that extraterrestrials have come to earth in what we call UFOs.