Doc asks to get my arbitrator thoughts on who has the better case on whether there are aliens. He has only himself to blame.
There are the two types of evidence, direct and circumstantial. The definition of this is as follows:
"A fact may be proved by direct evidence, by circumstantial evidence, or by both.
Direct evidence is given when a witness testifies about an event which the witness personally saw or heard.
Circumstantial evidence is given when a witness did not personally see or hear an event but saw or heard something which, standing alone or taken together with other evidence, may lead a juror to conclude that the event occurred. Both types of evidence are admissible and may be considered by you.
Neither is entitled to any greater weight than the other."
Alaska Uniform Jury Instruction 1.14
The two pics above are examples of evidence supporting the proposition that rabbits sometimes live in the snow. Circumstantial evidence is the picture of rabbit tracks. Direct evidence is a picture of a rabbit in the snow. One type of evidence is not inherently better than another. There are situations where circumstantial evidence is far better than eyewitness accounts. Rabbits and rabbit tracks are one of these situations. This is because rabbit tracks are unmistakeable and impossible to replicate, while a number of brown objects or small furry creatures can be mistaken for a rabbit, and also, a rabbit in the snow is an easy thing to stage.
If I understand the two positions, Jones is stating that aliens probably have no motive, means or opportunity (all circumstantial evidence) to contact humans, or even if they are we aren't looking for them in the right way. Doc is stating that we haven't turned over any direct or circumstantial evidence of aliens despite hundreds of years of looking for them, so there aren't any aliens.
I think Jones has the stronger position. Points 4, 5, and 6 are especially convincing, and for all we know, interstellar travel or communication may be impossible, due to distance and things we don't understand. Scientists have not demonstrated any ability to manipulate gravity or time in any meaningful way that would create hope that time travel or warp travel may be developed in the future by humans or aliens. Also, Jones' point about the motive an alien race might have of beaming signals to earth rings especially true. Beaming an alien code would presumably be difficult and expensive for an alien to do, and as many of the stars we see are thousands or millions of light years away, there would be no point of sending a signal to earth, because even if it did arrive and was read, the time lapse delay would preclude meaningful alien-earthling conversation.
Doc states that there is no direct or circumstantial evidence of alien life, but this is not entirely accurate. It seems much more likely that Earth was seeded with biological life from an extra terrestrial source than life spontaneously formed on its own. Earth is part of outer space and spontaneous formation of biological life is science fiction at this point. Terrestrial life seems to be powerful circumstantial evidence that there is extraterrestrial life. Also, if life did somehow spontaneously evolve on Earth, then it stands to reason that the same thing happened somewhere else with similar conditions. Though Earth is especially suitable for life, it is made out of the same material that are found in the rest of the universe, and cannot be considered unique.
Judgment to Jones.
You axed :)