There is life on other planets

Thank you for the extra opportunity to present my arguments. This is my first debate on this website so some of the format may be off but I will try my best to disprove the pro position. The basis for any discussion about whether life exists in the rest of the universe relies upon what we consider "life" to be. I propose a definition of life that excludes any organisms less complex than animals are. For the purposes of human experience, the only life that we would find meaningful has to exist at at least this amount of complexity. I shall attack the pro position from two perspectives: a scientific one and a religious one. For pro to meet the burden of proof, pro must disprove the arguments flowing from each one of these perspectives. My first argument is that life is a cosmic accident. The only reason life has evolved on Earth was the lucky chance that a major collision either with an asteroid or a comet has not occurred in the past 70 million years. There are also lucky conditions that happened on Earth which are exceedingly unlikely to have happened anywhere else. The existence of the atmosphere, water molecules, and a host of other conditions like temperature, etc. COMBINED with the lack of huge collisions with interplanetary objects lowers the chance of evolution towards the complexity of animal life. The theoretical possibility for life to occur, therefore, on other planets/ places in the universe is so statistically small that it is worth counting zero; if Pro manages to win that there is a 0.00000001 percent chance that life could exist elsewhere, that is not a sufficient burden of proof as that percentage is, to any mathematician, statistical background noise that ought to be rounded down to 0. I will pre-empt the argument about an expanding universe here. Einstein clearly proved that instead of existing through three dimensions of space and one of time, the universe contains four dimensions of space-time. Four dimensions is the number of dimensions needed for life to even occur: it is impossible to imagine living in a purely 1 or 2 dimensional world. For the purposes of the proof of a contracting universe, imagine this: you have created a (one-dimensional) universe that resides on a piece of string. This piece of string, stretched out on your hand, would clearly have two distinct ends. However, astronomical observations and mathematical concepts illustrate that a conceptual end to the universe is impossible. We could, on the other hand, conceive of the string as a symbol for a never-ending line, yet this is also problematic. It is impossible to conceive of something going on indefinitely. Math is uncomfortable with dealing in infinities. The best solution to this dilemma would be to conceive of the universe as a circle, maybe a ring in the palm of your hand. The universe now has a finite size yet is still unending and "infinite." Now upgrade that one-dimensional universe to two dimensions (like on a piece of paper). This falls trap to the same dilemma explained above: either it is finite or stretching infinitely in both directions, neither condition being mathematically desirable. If, however, we were to conceive of a two-dimensional piece of paper being bent into the form of a sphere, the issue is once again resolved. This provides a third dimension to the universe itself. It is possible that our Universe is like a piece of paper that has been bent into another dimension, so that if we had a powerful enough telescope we could see the backs of our own heads. In this conception of the universe as a sphere, we can conceive of it in the image of our own earth, having two distinct "north" and "south" poles. If the astronomical observations are correct (such that we have drifted away from where the Big Bang originated and yet at the same time the stars we observe appear to be moving away from us) this conception in fact explains why. Imagine the "north pole" of the universe being the site of the Big Bang and a "Big Crunch" being located at the "south pole." This would, indeed, explain the ACCELERATING rate at which stars and galaxies are being observed to move away from us and provide evidence for a contracting universe. Now for the religious argument. It is stated clearly in the Bible that God created beasts and other forms of life only on the earth and for the purposes of engagements with the humans that are created in His own image. The creation of other forms of life in the universe is not only unmentioned throughout the Bible but would mean that Jesus went to another planet and died for them too, something exceedingly unlikely. Therefore, life can only exist on earth. I await my opponents response.