Jesus Christ is more likely to be an alien than the son of God.

Semantics- I believe con has made a fatal error with his use what I would call unfair semantics. When you accept a debate you're supposed to attempt an honest evaluation of what your opponent means. The meaning of the word son in this debate is clearly that God impregnated Mary and conceived a child by the name of Jesus. I'm arguing that aliens are more likely source for Mary's virgin conception and birth. Envisage has had 2 different accounts and has proven he is quite adept at theological debates. Given how good of a debater my opponent is and how familiar he is with theology, he clearly knew what my intent was when using the word son. My opponent's entire rebuttal actually depends on his use of these manipulative semantics. Without that, they fall apart. No matter how he defends his use of these semantics later, it doesn't changed the fact that he used them in an attempt to get a cheap win and should be penalized accordingly. Aliens- Pro has simply ignored the evidence I've provided for alien contact. Artifacts simply aren't as important as my opponent has indicated. This is obviously a species with capabilities light years ahead of us. They wish to conceal their presence, so they do. The breeding programs discussed by eyewitnesses is just more evidence they want to concern their presence while being able to closely study and possibly even influence us. While I haven't provided the evidence that my opponent insists on, but I've still provided evidence for alien contact. The article I linked to concerning the abduction narrative was heavily cited and so is this one that goes into a little more detail. . http://en.m.wikipedia.org... The alien abduction experience and narrative isn't disputed by serious researchers in the field. There are legitimate rebuttals for what these people are experiencing. What's not disputed is the fact that they occur. Unfortunately for my opponent is the fact that he has merely dismissed the abduction experience instead of offering a rebuttal, means my argument still stands. It's also too late to offer a rebuttal now, because I won't have any chance to respond to it. Recap- It should be clear I've won this debate by now, but I'll highlight a few important things. My opponent's focus on his absurd and unfair semantics means he never actually gave a real argument against my Jesus isn't the messiah and is therefore not the son of god argument. All of my arguments showing Jesus isn't the son of God have been essentially dropped in favor of his semantics play. If you don't buy that my opponent gave an honest evaluation of the meaning behind my words than you should count my argument in this regard as standing. My opponent has dropped the eyewitness testimony of the abduction narrative which is experienced by between 2% and 4% of the population. He's proposed counter evidence, but it doesn't count as a rebuttal, nor does it pass the smell test for reasons I've already explained. Bonus- I label this section bonus, because I feel as if I've already won the debate. My opponent can't offer new arguments, but can do a summary such as the one I'm doing. So I don't expect some monumental come back. The rest of this is just mainly for bonus information. "If aliens and abductions are so common, there would be many more examples. " Well how about 2%-4% of the entire population? That's a ton of examples with a lot of overlapping information. A common theme can clearly be deciphered. "Either aliens exist in abundance, or they don't. " They don't have to exist in abundance to exist. Or they could exist in abundance and are so far advanced of us that our vastly inferior technology is so out of date that no picked up communications could occur. "Anything worthy of scientific interest would pass through the peer review process and published in a respective journal. " Check the citations on the first article I linked to. That covers this criteria. Good luck to con.