Intelligent Alien Life Forms Exist in Our Universe

As we all know, the argument is whether or not intelligent alien life forms exist in our universe. Con argues that they do not exist in our universe, while I argue that they do exist in our universe. Con started by stating that 'exist' means to have actual being or to be. I have no argument there; however, I disagree with Con when he stated that I contradict myself in the following phrase: "Although there is no definitive evidence that any aliens or even intelligent alien life forms exist in our universe." Con continued to explain that the word 'exist' now "means aliens for sure are." Is it possible to see a source where you got this new definition, Con? Also, I do not see how the above statement of mine shows any implication that "there is only a chance that aliens may be." I only stated there is no definitive evidence of aliens, such as, interaction with aliens or reliable photographs. "Definitive: serving to decide or settle finally" (1) The evidence brought forth by people around the world of UFO's, alien bodies, and other objects belonging to alien beings, extraterrestrials, is not definitive due to its inability to settle the debate of the existence of intelligent alien beings in our universe. Con then presented another definition, this time of 'proof'. After viewing Con's source for this definition, I concluded that he used the first dictionary result and the first definition given. Con only copied down part of the definition given here. "Proof: evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, OR TO PRODUCE BELIEF IN ITS TRUTH." (2) Con's affirmation is correct, that there is no definite evidence that alien life forms exist in our universe. His statement based on his affirmation that "there is no evidence," is incorrect. As I previously stated, there is evidence, but not definitive evidence. Con then agreed with the extraordinary well-favored odds that aliens exist, but states they "are not enough to give proof that aliens exist." "Proof: evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, OR TO PRODUCE BELIEF IN ITS TRUTH." (2) During round 1, I provided sources of whom are highly knowledgeable of the topic of extraterrestrials, such as Stephen Hawking and Seth Shostak. These two men believe in the truth of the evidence that alien life forms exist; thus, making the evidence proof. "Hawking has suggested the possibility of alien life before but his views have been clarified by a series of scientific breakthroughs, such as the discovery, since 1995, of more than 450 planets orbiting distant stars, showing that planets are a common phenomenon." (3) In the last sentence of Con's argument, he states "Until there is PROOF of alien life form existence, it cannot be guaranteed, not even assumed that alien life forms exist in our universe." Because I have clarified that the evidence is proof of alien life form existence, then according to Con, it can be guaranteed that alien life forms exist in our universe. I believe I addressed every point made by Con, and if not then I will remember to come back to them in round 3. Best of luck to Con. 1. http://dictionary.reference.com... 2. http://dictionary.reference.com... 3. http://www.timesonline.co.uk...