Instigator / Pro
4
1294
rating
75
debates
18.0%
won
Topic
#1385

Resolved little green men visited long ago

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
6
Better sources
2
4
Better legibility
2
2
Better conduct
0
2

After 2 votes and with 10 points ahead, the winner is...

oromagi
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
One day
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
14
1922
rating
117
debates
97.44%
won
Description

New evidence points to visitations from space long ago https://start.att.net/news/read/article/business_insider-alien_civilizations_may_have_explored_the_galaxy_a-newscred2/category/news

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

This debate was a colossal fail. Pro doesn't seem to understand that they always have the burden of proof. Pro's entire argument boiled down to "there is no way for you to disprove the little green men." However, as con correctly pointed out, that's not his burden to show they didn't. Since Pro dropped every one of con's contentions and failed to provide any solid evidence on his side, the arguments go to con. Conduct to con for the forfeit.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

"spacefaring lifeforms might just be biding their time" ... This was by far the strongest point by pro, and it still fails to meet the lowest standard of BoP to imply that any aliens (Canadians don't count) ever visited or even observed our existence. Con of course argued first that BoP is on pro, which was successful to a high enough degree that the rest of his case was needless (it was nice of him to explain things to pro, but not something I need to review).

Sources for flipping pro's own source to show "no evidence for alien intelligence currently exists." Pro's own offered evidence says he's wrong, and that was not overcome. Otherwise con literally school pro, teaching the basic concepts pro needed to use to build a case.

Conduct:
While con gave an implicit concession ("as much as i want there to be space aliens i know there is no solid proof"), he kept arguing, so he still loses conduct for the forfeiture.