The Instigator
Joey888
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
lannan13
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points

Resolved: The United States Government Should Colonize Mars By 2033.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
lannan13
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/18/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 7 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 414 times Debate No: 93748
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)

 

Joey888

Con

Hello. I am glad to be participating in this tournament and I hope that this will be a good debate. For Round 1, I will explain the rules and you will accept the debate. For Round 2, we will place down our arguments, and for Round 3, we will place down our rebuttals. For Round 4, we place any final arguments and rebuttals. Good luck, and may the better debater win!
lannan13

Pro

I accept this debate and wish my opponent good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
Joey888

Con

As of today, Earth is the only planet that we know of that holds life. Scientists have been talking about the possibility of colonizing Mars by 2033. In my opinion, it isn't worth it. The journey to Mars from Earth can take several months, and for that period of time, astronauts will be weightless. Astronauts lose their sense of up and down. In addition to that, astronauts can experience some serious negative health effects, including having their bones and muscles weaken (1). We do not know enough information that can help us protect our astronauts yet. Mars is a bad place for a second home. It is in the same solar system as Earth, so if Earth dies, Mars dies too. We should colonize a different planet that is in a different system. These kind of space missions are really expensive. For a 20 year program, the cost would be between $80 billion and $100 billion (2). We could be spending our money on something else. We still have a lot of problems here on Earth, including the war on terror, poverty, and lack of food and water. There are many people on Earth who need the basic things to survive, and we are going to spend billions of dollars for a manned mission to Mars?! Suppose the mission fails. We would have lost billions of dollars trying to colonize a planet in the same system that we live in. We also have to constantly be providing our astronauts with food and water, so that could also be expensive, since they will be spending time on Mars for a long time. Colonizing Mars is a bad idea because it is a bad place for a second home, mostly because it is in the same system as Earth. The cost is very high, and he money can be used for something else, and we still have many unsolved problems here on Earth, so we need to solve these problems first.

(1): space.com
(2): news.nationalgeographic.com
lannan13

Pro

You'll have to forgive me for such short arguments due to the character limit restriction.

Science Leadership

Over the next 10 years, we are expecting over an influx of about 10 million children to pass through our school systems and this plan, even if it inspires just 1% of them, we would see a massive boom in STEM jobs and as the world is progressing, these STEM jobs are becoming the key jobs of the future that are the engineers and the scientists. This plan to colonize Mars is expected to create 1 million jobs by 2033 [1]. The economic growth is obvious with the Apollo mission we saw a 6% economic growth from that program. The Mars mission will skyrocket the US economy significantly which is something that is massively needed for the US to finally exit the lingering 08 crisis [2]. This program will help solve the current issue as many our STEM jobs are from abroad. There is a key issue that comes here and that is our economy is at risk in the short term while in the long term it is our national security as we will fall behind an aggressive China. Mars is filled with tons of minerals, as I will get into later, and some will help lead to biomedicine and help possibly lead to new cures. If this plan isn't enacted, then we risk a war with China. China is becoming more and more aggressive as seen by their actions in the South China Sea and against Japan. If they reach this and begin to rival US, this would lead to war as Chinese leadership has even been talking about using nuclear weaponry against the US in a surprise attack if war is to break. The death toll from the fighting itself would be 200 million from the US and over half a billion from the Chinese, assuming no one else gets involved [3]. Mars must be colonized in order to prevent weakening US STEM power and a US-Sino War.

Colonization possible now

Contrary to popular belief, we are able to colonize now. Many people will constantly talk about how it would take forever to get there, but the Space-X Falcone-9 Rocket can get us there in 6 months’ time to begin colonization [4]. The cost of the rocket is $100 million per shuttle and this is key as it will help get things transported faster as we will have plenty of rockets to help colonize Mars quicker and faster. They can carry up to 17 metric tons which can help carry supplies and we can see they will be able to do this as many times as they want [5]. Many people are already lining up by the thousands to be the first to go and colonize Mars or even live there, so we already have an ample amount of people willing to go. NASA has already developed food that is able to be grown on Mars and the ability to make the Red Planet a hospital able one.

Rare Earth Metals


Platinum is a rare metal that is included in many technologies from military satellites down to a cellular device. Prices of REMs have increased by well over 100%. China, who owns 95% of the world's REMs supply has begun to clamp down on the exports due to new environmental regulations and their new crack downs on illegal mining laws. There will be a 48% increase of demand of REMs by next year and the shortages of some of these key metals are not helping the prices [6]. The current price of Platinum is $1,084.30 per ounce. The reason this is important that the US gets to Mars first is when they begin to mine there is 170 million tons of Platinum on Mars and when you do the math, this comes out to $167 quadrillion in platinum and platinum alone which would shatter the Chinese monopoly and be enough to be used for the entire world for nearly 500,000 years [7]. At the end of the last decade, China placed an REM embargo with Japan effetely cutting them off from a huge amount of key resources. The US would need to lessen Chinese dependence and by doing this, the US could be able to avoid a 1973 Oil Crisis-like event on REMs. Such an event could lead to a US-Sino War in order for the US to acquire these resources when China will bar them from us. Colonization and the mining of Mars is the only way to solve this issue.

Sources
1. (http://tinyurl.com...)
2. (http://tinyurl.com...)
3. (http://tinyurl.com...)
4. (http://tinyurl.com...)
5. (http://tinyurl.com...)
6. (http://tinyurl.com...)
7. (http://tinyurl.com...)

Debate Round No. 2
Joey888

Con

If you think about it, the US school system is very easy to get past compared to countries around the world. According to Pearson, the United States is ranked fourteenth out of fourth countries in "cognitive skills and educational attainment" with a score of 0.39. Just for comparison, the highest score is 1.39, which is South Korea's (1). This means that we are nowhere close to having many scientists and engineers performing at high levels. Risking a war for a planet is not understandable. I do not understand why China would declare war on us for a planet that we have not even set foot on. We should learn to share the resources that we happen to find on Mars and make everyone prosper. Finding new cures should not be an arms race. Everyone in the world should make a contribution. What makes you say that casualties would be higher for China than the US if there was a war between us? Mars shouldn't be for the US, but for the world. Six months in space is quite some time. Being weightless for six months can have a serious affect on our time that it takes for us to regain the ability to walk again. Suppose the mission fails. We would have lost hundreds of millions of dollars that we could have used to spend on problems that we have here on Earth. Who cares about mining for precious metals in order to make other businesses bankrupt? We certainly should not do that to China's economy, or it could have an affect on the economies of other countries, since China is a main factor in the world of business. Like I mentioned earlier, we should not focus on individual wants, but we should work together as a whole. I look forward to my opponent's response.

1: WordPress.com
lannan13

Pro

For this round I shall first address my opponent's points and then move on to my own.

Opponent's Case

My opponent's case is just a big block of text, so I will attempt to refute what I believe is the most important points he makes and then refute them.

My opponent first attacks the astronauts saying that they will be weightless and face problems. This is quite true, but we have astronauts willing to do this and ready to do this. Right now, there are over 400 astronauts willing to go through the impossible in space and face even death in order to be the first to colonize Mars [1]. These Astronauts do not care about these issues as they are putting their safety aside for the betterment of their nation.

If Earth dies, we would have Mars as a safety net. Just because Earth dies doesn't mean Mars does. Sure we could be spending the $80-100 billion on something else, but we have to see that we would be getting $167 quadrtillion in platanum which offsets costs and it can solve for Con's issues by helping other domestic issue once the payload is returned. By Con's own logic, we can see going to Mars is better than not. My opponent keeps bringing up the 'what if' Mars fails. NASA, JAXA, ERS, Space-X and several other space companies/agencies have been working on these plans and have done so before. Before the plan launches, they will be sure it will be fool proof.

Science Leadership

I have already stated that the US is falling behind in STEM, but STEM is quite important when it comes to jobs and innovation and with the US constantly losing ground, the US is doomed. STEM has to deal with US world hegemony and weakening it will lead to Chinese rise to power. A loss in US hegemony, which is, in this case, linked to Technological advantage, will result in the US falling behind in the cyber and tech arms race resulting in a US-Sino War [2]. The reason China's causalties are higher, outside it was the projections given by my source, is due to their military ground game is similiar to Russia's where they send waves and waves of men to see if they can win. This also accounts for, if the US fights in China, that the Chinese population dencity is extremely high.

Have Technology now

I have already addressed this in my refutation of my opponent's arguments.

Rare Earth Metals

We are not going to bankrupt China, but to get off of Chinese REM-dependency. Even if it does fail, we have to do cost-benefit analysis, we can sacrafice $100 billion and get nearly $167 quadrillion in platanum alone, this doesn't even account for all the other REMs on Mars. The cost is completely offset by teh benefits that come out of this plan.

Sources
1. (http://tinyurl.com...)
2. (http://tinyurl.com...)
Debate Round No. 3
Joey888

Con

The problem with selling these rare metals is, who would buy them? It is true that the price will be much lower, but if the country who is buying the metals knows that this purchase will offset the cost for the space missions, they probably wouldn't buy it because it would be doing the country selling the metals a favor. As for the higher casualty rate, why does it have to be China who sends their troops to the US and not the other way around? Despite the fact that the Chinese population is much denser, they can still attack us while we are crossing the ocean. This Mars mission shouldn't be for the nation, but it should be for the world. We should no be so selfish about our goals and desires, but we should work as a whole to achieve them. When Earth dies, Mars will still die when the Sun dies. It does not make much difference since the Sun will swell and make Mars warmer. There have been major accidents with the space program including the Columbia and Challenger space craft explosions. We are not ready. Although it is an exciting prospect, we are just not prepared for the challenges ahead. This is the final round, and may the best debater win and move on to the next round. By the way, if one of us wins, what do we do for the second round? How will the competition organizer know who won?
lannan13

Pro

The free market will work its way out and people and/or businesses will purchases these metals. I do not see why people wouldn't buy it since they are seeing it as a favor. That makes no sense since if you need something, you need to buy it no matter who it's from. The whole Chinese numbers was from my source. I don't have to explain all of this to you and if you want to do this then we can do an AOW debate later. It will be millions and millions of years before the sun swells enough to engulf Earth and Mars. I'm reffering to the nuclear holocaust that would result out of a war between US and China, which my opponent has dropped, as it would happen well before the sun expanded to massive purpostions. My opponent lists two examples, but if his logic was true then we should abandon the space program all together, but we have sent many probes into space since then and many people to the ISS and they have made it there and back just fine. Thus negating my opponents arguments.


With that I thank you and urge you to vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by fire_wings 7 months ago
fire_wings
But look at the opponent difference Adam...
Posted by Adam_Godzilla 7 months ago
Adam_Godzilla
This is going to be a tough one Lannan. With Fire, he had 200 years. Using so much money to colonise Mars in 2033? Hmm...
Posted by yellow65 7 months ago
yellow65
if mars had water on it mars would be a winter planet because mars is further away from the sun and colder than earth. the equator of mars might be temperate though where they could grow food. they would have to turn the crust of mars into water and atmosphere to colonize mars because water and atmosphere are required for life on mars.
Posted by Adam_Godzilla 7 months ago
Adam_Godzilla
Following
Posted by lannan13 7 months ago
lannan13
You know I'm Pro on this topic right?
Posted by fire_wings 7 months ago
fire_wings
:/ looking forward to this...
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Lexus 7 months ago
Lexus
Joey888lannan13Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: I end up voting pro. It's pretty much impossible for me to vote con because of the way that the arguments are being presented. The arguments regarding astronauts being harmed is non-essential because we have so many that are willing (per pro), the whole 'system' argument is disregardable as if the earth dies doesn't mean Mars does too (per pro), and the cost impact is completely turned because of the massive amounts of mining that are able to be had on Mars (quadrillions, per pro). Pro's 'possible now' argument is on the defense, not offense, so I don't weigh it (doesn't provide a way for him to win if he wins that point). Pro's point about a nuclear holocaust from China isn't ever really responded to, just a vague sense of "I don't know why ..." so it's essentially dropped, there isn't substantiave response. And the STEM impact is a way to increase quality of human life, and the response of that the US can get better in STEM is non-responsive as well. So, death vs. nothing, vote