Aliens (Etraterrestrials) Exist

Please watch this video as it refutes everything that my opponent is trying to make us believe: . http://www.youtube.com... >>Does Con deny that travelling 9000 miles in 2 seconds would kill a human being? That's the kind of speed we're talking about here. << It seems my opponent is stuck in the late 1980's, we have been using unmanned drones for a long time and we will continue to use them. >>The whole reason they sent out pilots was because they got VISUAL CONFIRMATION ON THE GROUND OF WHAT THEY WERE PICKING UP ON RADAR! << If you read the articles again you will find no pilot or Col actually saw anything all they saw were blimps on their radars, again I ask how often did technology back then malfunction. See video for further details. >>Con wants us to believe that these military professionals were simply mistaken, and not one, but 2 F-16 pilots couldn't tell the difference between flying past an object and the object speeding away to break lock<< Who said it was an object, I said some sort of light. The craft that was supposedly thought of, is an old military experiment from the late 90's nothing special, See video. .. >>The UFO darts away from plane and changes altitude tremendously in a shot space of time. Was the radar on the ground not working too? << Again no one saw this, it was purely speculated from the radar equipment, watch the video and read the dubious reports themselves on Wikipedia and also watch the video which refute almost everything my opponent has been trying to argue as evidence. >> Fine Con, so you're telling me that each radar on each of the 2 F-16s malfunctioned, so did the one on the ground<< In the early 90's it is well known and documented that certain types of radar often played up in certain types of weather conditions. This is not new, but my opponent refuses to accept the facts and wants to believe his imaginary friends exist from the outer core worlds. .. >>I never said millions are involved in a cover up, he's putting words in my mouth. << That's is exactly what it would have to be if you believe in a government, world wide cover up over the last 50 years, literally millions covering up these wild and fancy ideas for no reason at all. >>Then God should appear over New York City and and hold a press conference to prove his existence. Please define "extraordinary. "<< This is your second kind of adhominum, its like we are discussing the many killings of early Islam and the Muslim says "what about the Christians" this in no way refutes, the many killings of early Islam. >> He told me that he knows for sure; so how can he know this without peer-reviewed proof? << As I said before there are many peer reviewed journals in History and Philosophy on the existence of God, Jesus Christ and the Resurrection. Of course majority are private universities and may be biased, however there are some public ones also. This is my point there is nothing for aliens, zip, zero, nada. >>So let me ask him; if its not nature and its not humans, who or what is it? << The many black ops military testing planes, please watch the video. >> Name one single peer-reveiwed journal that proved God existed, and tell us why the guy who wrote it didn't win the Nobel Prize for discovering God? << I would like to add I never said proof, I said evidence, big difference in the scholarly worlds. Philosophical peer reviewed journals rarely make to the public eye, one is the Kalam cosmological argument by William Lane Craig at Talbot University. How about Licona's peer reviewed journals on the Resurrection, these are all historical peer reviwed journals, there is also the works by the Jesus Seminar on the historical Jesus and the Gospels etc etc The list could go on and on. .. >> Same thing it would take for Abraham to not believe God spoke to him. << So you position is essentially irrefutable to yourself and no amount of evidence will convince you otherwise >>It's also hypocritical to believe in demons<< As I said 1000 times I believe in them by faith, you are claiming they exist based on critical evidence yet fail to provide anything that says otherwise harping on about non existence evidence. >>Let me ask Con this; what would convince you that aliens exist? << If we could test one in the lab. >>reject them as you do evolution<< Who said I reject evolution, I think the facts for evolution that we can test and demonstrate are irrefutable. So now to my closing statement, you will find the video posted sums it all up nicely. However my opponent claimed that Aliens most definitely existed, he not only claimed that but also claimed he knew how they thought, acted, communicated and had for breakfast. He never once provided any evidence for these crazy assertions whilst saying there is no evidence because of Government cover-up etc etc. In the video I have posted, documents have been made discoverable by federal regulations in the USA that they admit to spreading the hype of Aliens to cover up their top secret military projects. So indeed they have covered up and they even admit it, but not what my opponent wants, in fact it goes against the whole alien cover-up theory and wipes out half of his so called "evidence" in one foul swoop. Not only does the real government cover-up destroy the bulk of the claims of missing or stolen "evidence" it also shows the credibility of those who are claiming evidence has been taken off them by governments. What a hoax, these alien theorists make millions off gullible people like my opponent, I bet he has bought thousands of dollars worth of books and fed the hysteria. If the government has been covering up their military secrets by claiming and propagating aliens, then those such as the Col is part of the government, why cant he just be part of the whole ploy? Every bit of evidence that my opponent has produced to support his theories of aliens has been clearly refuted as a hoax or just dont hold water under closer scrutiny. I am still awaiting the real solid proof that aliens do in fact exist and the burden of proof lies on my opponent to prove which I believe he has not done so. Watch the video for a further refutation.