The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
7 Points

Should mankind invest in the exploration of space?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/10/2009 Category: Science
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,424 times Debate No: 8208
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (19)
Votes (1)




Basic background on the topic:The space programmes of both the USA and the USSR became perhaps the most important prestige projects of the Cold War. From the launch of Sputnik - the first artificial satellite - in 1957, through to the first human space flight by Yuri Gagarin in 1961, the first moon landing in 1969, and beyond, both superpowers invested huge amounts of money in order to outdo each other in the so-called ‘space race'. At the time, this was a convenient project to choose: while it allowed the two nations to compete in a supposedly peaceful area, proving their scientific achievements, the work on rockets also fed directly into work on the inter-continental ballistic missiles which would allow them to strike at each other with nuclear weapons in the event of war.
Since the end of the Cold War, however, the future of space exploration has become less clear. Russia no longer has the resources to invest in a substantial space programme; without an enemy to compete with, the USA has also cut back on its exploration programmes. The emphasis is now on missions which are ‘faster, better, cheaper' – grand projects such as the Voyager missions of the late 1970s seem unlikely to be repeated. In particular, the American commitment to manned exploration of space has diminished, especially after the 2003 Columbia disaster, when all seven astronauts on the Space Shuttle died during reentry. Bush when president committed NASA to a return to the moon with a long term aspiration of an expedition to Mars, but this seems unlikely to be realised with NASA's present resources. On the other hand, China has been developing an active space programme in recent years with several manned flights, while India is also beginning to launch its own rockets.
The proposition in this debate will be proposing a renewed commitment to the exploration of space

1.Mankind must always struggle to expand its horizons. The desire to know what lies beyond current knowledge, the curiosity that constantly pushes at the boundaries of our understanding, is one of our noblest characteristics. The exploration of the universe is a high ideal - space truly is the final frontier. The instinct to explore is fundamentally human; already some of our most amazing achievements have taken place in space. No-one can deny the sense of wonder, world-wide, when for the first time a new man-made star rose in the sky, or when Neil Armstrong first stepped onto the moon. Space exploration speaks to that part of us which rises above the everyday.

2.The exploitation of space has directly changed our world. Satellites orbiting the Earth allow us to communicate instantaneously with people on different continents, and to broadcast to people all over the world. The Global Positioning System allows us to pinpoint our location anywhere in the world. Weather satellites save lives by giving advance warning of adverse conditions, and together with other scientific instruments in orbit they have helped us understand our own world better. Research into climate change, for example, would be almost impossible without the data provided by satellites.

3.Space exploration has also led to many indirect benefits. The challenge and difficulty of the space programme, and its ability to draw on some of the finest minds, has brought about great leaps in technology. The need to reduce weight on rockets led to miniaturisation, and so to the micro-chip and the modern computer. The need to produce safe but efficient power-sources for the Apollo missions led to the development of practical fuel-cells, which are now being explored as a possible future power-source for cleaner cars. The effects of zero-gravity on astronauts has substantially added to our knowledge of the workings of the human body, and the ageing process. We can never know exactly which benefits will emerge from the space programme in future, but we do know that we will constantly meet new obstacles in pursuit of our goals, and in overcoming them will find new solutions to old problems.

4.Space exploration is an investment in the future. Our world is rapidly running out of resources. Overpopulation could become a serious worldwide threat. In this position, it would be foolish to ignore the vast potential of our own solar system – mining resources on asteroids or other planets, or even the possibility of colonising other worlds. If we fail to continue to develop the ability to take advantage of these possibilities, we may in the future find it is too late.


No we shouldn't look Otto space for the answers. If man kind knows too much about space and things. mankind will tamper with it to make it better , and that always might not go to plan the way they wanted it to be. IF we go to outta space and search for aliens and things and we find them or something , mankind will want to explore the new thing , and try to bond with it. If you was a alien space craft came to us we would go MENTAL! its probz the same with aliens!
Debate Round No. 1


Oh my.

first my opponet states that we shouldn't want to fix things in space. because it might not turn out so good. She has absolutly no evidence to support that.

second she talks about "aliens"- agian no concrete evidence to hold her claims.

Then she says if we were a alien space craft that we would go mental- made no sense whatsoever. and agian no evidence to support any of her claims.

She also ignored my intire case.
So I extend my arguments.
Thank you.


DeannaMason forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2





DeannaMason forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


Thats a shame.

Extend my aguments.


DeannaMason forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Justinisthecrazy 7 years ago
god damn it deanna talk about how if we expand into space it causes predators to come (aka) Aleins do it for kicks I mean shes setting herself for it really just do it
Posted by Rob1Billion 7 years ago
You know, come to think about it the only way we are going to survive this mess is to load a ship up with bacteria(lots of ships) and send them out into space. Bacteria live forever, unless they are struck by chance cosmic rays. A large batch could survive hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions of years before each bacterium is struck down by the hard gamma rays. When the ships land, they will spread and consume the bad things in the planet and create oxygen as a by-product; and then evolve into us again. Then the people will come along and swear it was an invisible man in the sky who is jealous and omnipotent.
Posted by Justinisthecrazy 7 years ago
well I would take this and go ALIENS on it with legit sources
Posted by tastytaco 7 years ago
well duh, we're not going to last here forever. ; )
Posted by Tatarize 7 years ago
"Over what time period, and by what standard?"

I looked and couldn't find the original source for you. I'm pretty sure it was a measure of the industry taxes taken in from those industries which found their origin with Apollo and the entire span of history since the missions, but without the source, I'm not sure.

It is pretty clear that satellites are absolutely critical infrastructure for us today, if nothing else we need space age travel to keep all our technology working.
Posted by Rob1Billion 7 years ago
We should invest a lot more money into our space program. This star is about to explode in a mere 4 thousand million years and I don't want to be anywhere near it when it does. Plus, Ragnar wants to ship all the poor people out to space where they can be useless and not be a pain to anyone else, so we better devise a good way of getting it done.
Posted by Justinisthecrazy 7 years ago
aliens that is all i am saying lol
Posted by rangersfootballclub 7 years ago
probably from the fact that if your using a satalite to watch t.v your paying an average of i dont know say £30 for a normal cable package or $50 just a figure not sure , hes probably classing all the money spent on tv supscriptions and sat and navs. also your monohlty internet , so i wouldnt be suprised if it was more like for every $1 you get $50
Posted by Volkov 7 years ago
If we didn't have the space programs, we wouldn't have satellites and the vast communications networks that you're currently using to type to us. I think that was his point, but I am interested in how he got that "$1 invested means $20 back" figure.
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 7 years ago
"However it also turns out that every dollar put in the Apollo program had about a 20 dollar return on investments."

Over what time period, and by what standard?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Justinisthecrazy 7 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07