Should the Government pay the expenses of Space Exploration
Debate Rounds (5)
Just to start, I would like you to mention how it is crucial for life on Earth in your opening argument because that is your basis for why space exploration needs to be paid for by the government. Also, I would like you to specify on which governments you are talking about and why those governments should have the burden to pay for this exploration.
It is crucial to human life as it helps us. The Sun will soon die and future generations of the Homo-sapian sapian species will die out and be extinct. I am talking about all governments in general. The world is expanding and the bigger it gets the faster it will expand. There are many planets like earth out there and they may help in finding a new planet for future generations.
"It is crucial to human life as it helps us."
-You have yet to state how space exploration will help us.
"The Sun will soon die... species will die out and be extinct."
-Regardless of the grammatical errors, there is a huge flaw in your argument. The use of the word "soon," as if you qualify 6 BILLION years soon . However,  also states that the Sun will not explode, and any astrologer knows that the Sun will not "die," it will just continue through its life as a star, though it will not be able to sustain life as it is now.
"I am talking about governments in general."
-There are hundreds of governments in the world , and by saying "governments in general" you are giving all governments an obligation to help fund this space exploration.
"The world is expanding..."
-I will need you to expand on this idea in the next round because I do not know what you mean. Do you mean expanding in population? Expanding in area? If you mean either, I would like to point out that 80% of 8.7 million species on this Earth has been undiscovered , meaning that their habitats have been yet to be discovered by humans.
My Argument: It is too costly.
"The launch of a space shuttle costs $450 million and there have been about 130 of them. It cost $1.7 billion to build just one of the five-strong fleet ." As you can see, it costs hundreds of millions of dollars, even billions, to successfully create and launch space shuttles for space exploration. And using the earlier argument, you are saying that you would split this huge amount of money through "governments in general"? What about governments that want no part in space exploration? Do they still pay the cost? Do the people under said government have the right to live on a new planet, if'
Second of all, this research goes toward saving the species of humans left in this world, the homosapian sapians. It is all very clear that the sun will die in 5.5 billion years. By that time the earth would be polluted and a wreck therefore finding other planets to live on is a reasonable point.
Do you want our human kind to go extinct so that life does not exist? It is put out there that people recommend money being put in by the government for space exploration for it is important to society, many people say well why don't we use the money for the country we live in. What is the point when printing more money makes the money less in value.
Other reasons for space exploration is that it is a way to explore how the world works and how it is essential to our life. Asteroids and meteors make become a problem overtime and will continue to become a natural threat to human kind. There are many more reasons to put out there but this is all for now.
"The Sun will will turn into a white dwarf and yet it will turn into a black hole or explode into a nebula."
Although it was rude for you to say that I do not know what I am talking about, I will have to suggest that you do not know what you are talking about. As my source states, which you must have not read, "First, there’s no possible way that the Sun will ever explode. It might seem huge to us, but the Sun is a relatively low mass star compared to some of the enormous high mass stars out there in the Universe. When our Sun runs out of hydrogen fuel, it will expand up as a red giant, puff off its outer layers, and then settle down as a compact white dwarf star; slowly cooling down for trillions of years... But let's say that our Sun has about 10 times as much mass. Now we're talking an explosion. " This clearly states that the Sun has no possible way of exploding, all the Sun will do is expand and cool. The Sun simply does not have enough mass to explode.
My opponent argues that space exploration is needed to keep humans and other organisms from extinction.
Through my findings, I have found a lot of inhabitable planets, one system being Kepler-62.  tells that "Kepler-62, a five-planet system about 1,200 light-years from Earth." Now, you can simply Google the translation into miles and find that the distance between this system and Earth is 7.05419978 × 1015 miles (7,054,199,780,000,000 miles from Earth, just to show relative data). Now, we all know that it would still take hundred of years to travel this at the speed of light, but because it is scientifically impossible to travel at the speed of light through space and survive , how do you suggest that humans make it to the planets before their lives expire?
My opponent argued that my sources are not reliable as they are "out of date."
I see two predominant flaws with this argument.
1. All sources that I used in my argument are 2 year old, therefore still reliable.
2. Many people use the Constitution and Declaration of Independence as sources in many debates such as abortion and gay marriage. If a 237 year old document can still be used as a source for debate, a TWO year old document can share the same purpose.
I would like to note that my opponent added sources but did not clarify where the source was to be accounted for. I would also like to note that my opponent reiterated that she believes all governments should pay for space exploration because they are being saved, yet did not answer the question on how this would be possible. She failed to show her reasonable plans for funding these space explorations and consistently mentioned that humans would become extinct without space exploration.
VanessaLo forfeited this round.
VanessaLo forfeited this round.
JacobAnderson forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.