The Instigator
Con (against)
The Contender
Pro (for)

Should there be a man mission to Mars?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
jiangyi8048 has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/21/2017 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 396 times Debate No: 106043
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




Should there be a man mission to Mars?


My main ideas when it comes to colonization of planets, is that it is vital for securing the future of humans and our prosperity, and any argument that is against this proposition is simply ignorant to the fact that there is so many dangers to one measly planet. Take just probability, if we colonized the solar system, our odds of survival our spread throughout all the planets and moons we have colonized, aswell as the fact in the future (albeit a very long time, but still with forfthcoming events even before this specific one) our sun will expand into a red giant, creating a more outer habitable zone, meaning by atleast then we would have had to move to that zone. Economic struggles are generally the main argument against this, however by moving and colonizing people to the moon first, we can grow said economy by mining it and spreading out our influence and coverage. This means every time we colonize a certain planet or moon, it needs to have some economic or naturalistic intent, this is interesting with particularly our solar system, as by branching an economic system of interspacial objects it makes it safer to continue doing so. In the future, if we do (hopefully) colonize even a fifth of our galaxy, we can cherry pick those that have the most economic or naturalistic intent. So my main argument is that colonizing planets and moons has an obvious naturalistic intent, by safeguarding the human race and creating a more widespread probability of survival in the future, and my rebuttal of economics is that through colonizing it is easily economically maintained through more resources.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by lannan13 2 years ago
I'll take it if it's a colonization of Mars debate.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.