Intelligent life exists beyond Earth

Thank you Con for being a challenging debater.I respect Con and will stay true to my original resolution. Besides, that's more exciting! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Knowledge comes in different forms.There are facts which are based on empirical evidence and then there are deductive conclusions or in science known as 'deductive inference'. a conclusion based on reasoning from accepted premises. Consider a somewhat loaded example: "The earth is a spherical body, a sphere by definition has equal radius in all directions, and therefore the radius of the earth is equal in all directions." We've taken two reasonable premises and reached a conclusion from them with. - http://www.gly.uga.edu...The way I come to the conclusion of the existence of not only extra-terrestrials but intelliegent ones is through deduction and analysis.Take a grid for example. On the x axis we have five numbers of stars and on the y axis we have variables for conditions for life such as planet size, weather, atmosphere and so on. The variable will be numbers from 1 to 10 and 5 being the perfect conditions for life to occur and evolution to take place. Then we place points or markers that represent the planets orbiting the star including Earth. Because of the planetary conditions and the distance from the star, there is life on Earth and we can see that empirical evidence. We know for a fact life exists on Earth including intelligent life because of the right conditions. Evolution began as clumps of matter. "organic molecules concentrated, formed more complex molecules, and became simple cells." But you see by logic, everything happens because of cause and effect. So the thing that caused evolution is not just 'probability' or that it just 'happened' out of coincidence but logical science. If it's not then your talking about creationism. You're saying evolution was done by a god and so living organisms popped out magically from the organic molecules. But from a logical standpoint life happened because of the right variables or conditions and that evolution is part of the inherent nature of life and living organisms.So what I am saying is, evolution states that we come from simpler organism. And there IS evidence for this theory. And these simpler organisms come from organic compounds created because of the right conditions on the planet.So with this in mind, looking at our graph (ignoring the connecting lines), take a star other than the sun and change the variable of the planetary condition to 5. Just because it is a different star with a different planet, they are still both similar in terms of star/ planet size and condition. We can call the planet in star 2, Earth 2.0 . Because Earth 2.0 has similar or exactly the same properties as our Earth, therefore it will have the same compounds and thus, the organic compounds to transform into simple cells.The right habitable planet, by the definition of evolution will have living organisms on it, guaranteed as I shown above. Just because it's not the same planet, it does have the same properties and thus, like an experiment, produces the same result; living organisms. If this wasn't the case and life was purely made by chance, then it is contradicting evolution/ cause and effect and evolution is the theory that has evidence to back it up.Earth like planets = Life. Not the chance of it, because that would again contradict cause and effect. It is like saying applying a litre of water to a lit candle may or may not extinguish it, or that there is a high chance that the flame will be put out, but you dont' even need to add probability to the equation because that much water will put the flame out. Cause and effect. If the water doesn't extinguish the candle flame then that just means there was a mistake in the experiment. Maybe when applying the water, you extinguished the wrong candle. But the main thing is that cause and effect will burn out the candle by water and that is science. Cause and effect will bring life to a planet with the right conditions if evolution is true.So now the real question is, Are there other habitable planets like Earth in the known Universe?The answer is, of course, yes. Like I've mentioned before about Kepler 22b and the other three Earth-sized worlds situated in the perfect Goldilocks Zone where, "... liquid water, and life, can exist on a planet's surface." - [1], these Earth-sized planets could have supported life. Right now Nasa's space telescope kepler is broken and might not function ever again but in just the four years of operating, it had found over a hundred exo-planets and almost 3000 candidates and found the most Earth like potentially habitable planet ever, Kepler 22b"But Kepler-22b is a different story. Sure, the planet orbits about 15% closer to its star than Earth does to the Sun, but its star is also significantly cooler, dimmer, and smaller than ours. And while scientists have yet to determine K-22b's composition — be it rocky, gaseous or liquid — they estimate that surface temperatures on K-22b average a very Earth-like 72-degrees Fahrenheit." - http://io9.com...This planet could very well be the Earth 2.0 I was talking about in my graph. http://img.gawkerassets.com...; data-chomp-id="18lpblqtbwyhpjpg" />Like I've said, a planet with the same exact properties, Star properties and distance of planet to Star as Earth, will create living organisms. Cause and effect. But you don't need the exact same properites because we've seen life dwell in places where it's thought not to, like in extremely hot under water temperatures and even in the sky as discovered and written in this article, http://paleobiology.si.edu...And in just 4 years of operating, the kepler telescope found over 2,700 potential Earth like candidates? The probability that one of those planets have properties similar to Earth is staggering. In fact, the planet doesn't even need to have very similar properties to Earth to provide evidence for life. By just detecting bio-signature gases like oxygen that could only be produced by plants or algae, we can confirm the existence of life on a planet. And according to a new equation, the probability of finding planets with biosphere gases is 2. http://img.gawkerassets.com...; data-chomp-id="18ripzjli2hxxjpg" />"This means that we should be able detect at least a pair of planets with biosphere gases in the relatively near future " - http://io9.com...But then of course they are just probabilities and not empirical evidence, therefore it is much more logical to assume that there are no Earth-like planets out there. And even if there are, there's no gurantee that it is Earth-like enough to support and have life on it's surface. The probabilities are high but there's still a fraction of a chance that they all might turn out to be wrong.So alright let's assume that out of the less than 3000 candidates and all the other potential habitable planets we try to find in the future, we come up short and still don't find these biosphere gases (man are we unlucky). That doesn't mean that there IS no habitable worlds in the known universe because if that was really the case, if Earth was the only planet with life, then there is no logic in this universe at all.How many stars are there in the Universe? "For the Universe, the galaxies are our small representative volumes, and there are something like 1011 to 1012 stars in our Galaxy, and there are perhaps something like 1011 or 1012 galaxies. With this simple calculation you get something like 1022 to 1024 stars in the Universe. This is only a rough number, as obviously not all galaxies are the same, just like on a beach the depth of sand will not be the same in different places." - http://www.esa.int... Now think how many planets there are in the stars and multiply that to the numbers above.And some people say that Earth is the only planet that is habitable? The only planet with organic compounds combining to make cellular organisms? They are saying, out of more than 10 to the power of 24 planets in the universe, only one of them is special enough to contain life. How do you get one planet out of 1024 planets to be the only one habitable when the properties of the planet are not at all special or impossible to achieve in the random configurations of planets.To say that Earth is one of the only habitable planet or the only one of its kind of properties in the trillions and trillions of other planets with random properties is INSANE. What would make you to prefer to believe that?Like I have said, there is no empirical evidence that I can provide because that is impossible for me just like asking me to prove that a circle has infinite lines of symmetry. I can't show you because I would never reach a limit of the number of lines. But knowledge and certainty comes in different forms. Like the theory of evolution, even though there is no emprical evidence, some take it in as knowledge. What I am saying here is just my logical reasoning, it is my personal preference in believing what is highly likely (that among the many planets, there are habitable planets with life) than what is not likely (that Earth is with its not impossible to replicate properties is the only planet with life).And how does the existence of extra-terrestial life equal intelligent life? Because of evolution and natural selection, life will arrive at the same conclusion of evolving into smarter species of life. Why is this true? Because its happened and is happening all around us, living and breathing. Us.And that's really why I know, Intelligent life exists beyond Earth.