The Instigator
XStrikeX
Pro (for)
Winning
25 Points
The Contender
joshpleco23
Con (against)
Losing
12 Points

The United States should explore space.

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 7 votes the winner is...
XStrikeX
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/29/2010 Category: Science
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 6,533 times Debate No: 11579
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (7)

 

XStrikeX

Pro

I'd like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate.
According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, space is "the region beyond the world's atmosphere," not like the space between two objects. Also, explore is "to investigate or search." Just felt like clarifying even though it was pretty simple.
I am on the Pro side stating that the US should explore space.
I'll let my opponent go first. :)
joshpleco23

Con

Hello, I am Joshua Pleco.
I would like to thank my opponent for starting this debate, I am sure it will be enlightening.

First off, I would like to clarify that I am not against the exploration of space, in fact I think that the survival of our race may one day depend on it.

I shall start my side of the argument by defining country and government:
Definition of Country
•state: a politically organized body of people under a single government;
•the territory occupied by a nation;
•state: a politically organized body of people under a single government;
•the territory occupied by a nation;
SOURCE: http://www.google.com...=

Definition of Government:
Government: "gov-ern-ment n. The authoritative administration of public policy and affairs of a nation, stare or city; the system or policy by which a political unit is governed; any governed territory, district, or area."
SOURCE: Webster's Pocket Dictionary and Thesaurus of the English Language

1.) It's a waste of government money to explore space or fund organizations that explore space. The US is still in a fragile economic state, and it isn't wise to waste money on exploration.

2.) There is no reason for the United States to explore space (besides the search for habitable planets, which I shall cover later on in the debate)

3.) Any government should focus more on other, more important, affairs it's own body.
Debate Round No. 1
XStrikeX

Pro

Thanks for accepting this debate! :)
I agree to those definitions.

Refutation

1. "There is no reason for the United States to explore space or fund organizations that explore space (besides the search for habitable planets, which I shall cover later on in the debate." Is that not a very good reason to explore space? You basically admitted yourself why we should explore space with that single statement! As long as we have a reason, we should do it. Plus, there won't be just one reason for space exploration. I'll cover that in my points.

2. In your first argument,you constantly state the word "waste." Later on in my own contentions, I will show that it's not wasting. Plus, you didn't even state why it's a waste.

3. "Any government should focus more on other, more important, affairs it's own body." Could you state what other important affairs? I'd like to name an important affair that the US somehow deems valuable. Twice the budget of NASA has been spent on household pets! That's plain ridiculous. (NASA's budget is 18.7 billion dollars)

My Arguments

1. Space needs to be explored because there are many disasters that exist in its boundaries. When a massive star dies, it blow up in a process called a supernova. It may then leave behind a monumental, destructive black hole or neutron star. Even worse, there are radioactive gamma ray bursts that can have a negative effect on our safety. Disasters that we don't even know about can happen! A recent study of Mars showed that it may have once contained water to support life, but now Mars if dessicated, frigid, airless, and dead. What happened to this planet that may have once flourished with living beings? Scientists do not know and could find out if space exploration was funded. Lastly, solar flares exist in space that could destroy our expensive satellites that power our devices. For further information, I recommend reading this document. http://www.windows.ucar.edu...

2. It is proven that space provides plentiful new technology. Over the past years, because we invested in space exploration, technology has sprung up all over the world. The once rare cell phone has become a common device worldwide. And we also invented the GPS! And you know what powers these devices? Satellites! And what taught us how to send satellites into space? Space exploration, of course! Since NASA was funded, it powered our home appliances, improved crops at the farm, better thermometers were developed, the safety of airplanes was increased, and treatments for brain cancer were discovered. Scientists and engineers were able to create safer navigation techniques, better communication systems, and created one of the best topographical maps ever. With NASA's aerodynamic testing facilities, strong and sturdy toy planes were created. Golf players also experienced better feel on their golf clubs due to NASA. Lastly, space benefits those with physical problems. Specials suits were made for those with skin problems and heart pumps were invented. Clearly, space exploration has brought wonderful technology to our world.

3. Perhaps one of the best reasons why we should explore space is because we cannot survive forever on Earth. The UK News predicts that by 2050, we will have to colonize two new planets in order to survive. So you see, we need to invest in space exploration or our lives as we know them are doomed. Stephen Hawking said in a 2001 interview, "I don't think the human race will survive the next thousand years unless we spread into space." Space exploration will help us move to a new planet and will help us maintain our legacy and survive.

For these reasons, we should explore space. I'll bring in new points the next round.
I look forward to the response.
joshpleco23

Con

I woild like to thank my foe for the reply.

Before spreading the jam onto the peanut butter of this PB&J, I shall define explore. I will use this previous debate as a lesson: http://www.debate.org...

First off, we cannot go into space and literally explore it... You use the term loosely as chuck_norris did in the debate I linked. I am not against the observation of space, and I think that our scientific community should examine the heavens. However, we do so from our planet, so it cannot be considered "exploring". Creating ships and shuttles with our limited technological knowledge is infact a waste of money, we can't really go to far with what we have now. So, it would be a waste of time and money.

I suppose it is time for me to cover the search for habitable planets... Hypothetically say we did have the technology, and we discovered a habitable planet... Would it be a Scientific discovery worth praising? Sure... However, with this discovery comes a major problem.

1.) Who gets the planet? There is no doubt that there would be political conflict with this discovery, and several countries would be fighting to get the biggest slice of the pie.

My point being this: Until our civilization has evolved to the point where we can govern ourselves under one political body, searching for a new home isn't a good idea. And even if our society gets to such a point (which I am sure it will), our technology will have to be advanced enough to get to the planet, otherwise it is pointless.

My opponent asks what sort of affairs are more important than space exploration... Well, there are foreign policies, hostile countries, terrorists, crime, financial and public affairs, scientific breakthroughs and observing space (notice I use the word "Observe", not explore) as well as trade.

There are many needs to our society that should tower over scientific achievements... What about the poor and the sick? We could be using such money to find cures for diseases and educate our youth.

Now I shall respond to my foe's arguments.

"1. Space needs to be explored because there are many disasters that exist in its boundaries. When a massive star dies, it blow up in a process called a supernova. It may then leave behind a monumental, destructive black hole or neutron star. Even worse, there are radioactive gamma ray bursts that can have a negative effect on our safety. Disasters that we don't even know about can happen! A recent study of Mars showed that it may have once contained water to support life, but now Mars if dessicated, frigid, airless, and dead. What happened to this planet that may have once flourished with living beings? Scientists do not know and could find out if space exploration was funded. Lastly, solar flares exist in space that could destroy our expensive satellites that power our devices. For further information, I recommend reading this document. http://www.windows.ucar.edu...;

As in the debate I linked, we find that human extinction can not be avoided. Say our species survives the destruction of our planet, and perhaps even our solar system? What then? There is always the threat of an alien invasion, but say we did what Master Chief did and dominate? What then? Well... Well, with our society's current understanding, our universe is like an elastic band, and it's continuously expanding! It will reach maximum entropy and collapse back to once it was, we won't survive.... Period.

"2. It is proven that space provides plentiful new technology. Over the past years, because we invested in space exploration, technology has sprung up all over the world. The once rare cell phone has become a common device worldwide. And we also invented the GPS! And you know what powers these devices? Satellites! And what taught us how to send satellites into space? Space exploration, of course!"

Irrelevant... It isn't space exploration... We are simply launching rockets up into our aptosphere to orbit around our planet and provide us with useful techological benefits. Exploration requires journeying to new frontiers, when these devices aren't even being used to observe space.

"3. Perhaps one of the best reasons why we should explore space is because we cannot survive forever on Earth. The UK News predicts that by 2050, we will have to colonize two new planets in order to survive. So you see, we need to invest in space exploration or our lives as we know them are doomed. Stephen Hawking said in a 2001 interview, 'I don't think the human race will survive the next thousand years unless we spread into space.' Space exploration will help us move to a new planet and will help us maintain our legacy and survive."

Human extinction is inevitable, so as stated before, it would only extend our species survival. This is basically a repeat of your first statement, my answer to that applies to both....

For these reasons, we should explore space. I'll bring in new points the next round.
I look forward to the response.
Debate Round No. 2
XStrikeX

Pro

Thanks for the response.
What I mean by exploring is to use astronomy, space technology, and machines to explore and go out there. Observatories are included.

Refutation
1. "Creating ships and shuttles with our limited technological knowledge is in fact a waste of money, we can't really go to far with what we have now. So, it would be a waste of time and money." It is not a waste of time and money. Actually, we're running out of time of our survival. We only have limited technological knowledge because America isn't currently finding the program as valuable as before. If we did find it as important and funded it as much, it would be much better and would be much more useful. It does not at all waste money and I will later explain it.

2. "Until our civilization has evolved to the point where we can govern ourselves under one political body, searching for a new home isn't a good idea. And even if our society gets to such a point (which I am sure it will), our technology will have to be advanced enough to get to the planet, otherwise it is pointless." You stated that our technology will be advanced enough. The only way it will be advanced enough is if we invest in space exploration. We should do it now, rather than later when our deaths will be closer. No civilization has ever evolved to the point where it is a perfect society, and everyone will be able to cooperate when they realize that their lives are on the line.

3. 'What about the poor and the sick? We could be using such money to find cures for diseases and educate our youth." Space exploration has learned how to treat brain cancer for the sick. Educating the youth is a good idea, and I'm not against that, but I'm not saying all of America's money is going to space exploration. Some can go to these important things and I'm positive that many of America's activities are not currently important. I'll be getting to that later. And the poor can find jobs in the space exploration. Economical benefits do come from space, which I will later explain.

4. My opponent has stated that no matter what we do, we will always die out in the end. That doesn't mean we just give up and let ourselves be enveloped in mass destruction! Who knows? With space exploration, we might even discover a possible way to survive forever and live our legacy instead of giving up and dying as a coward.

5. My opponent has stated that getting new technology from space is not space exploration. True, it may not be exactly the same, but it is certainly linked. When we went to the moon and explored space, it taught us how to send satellites into space. These satellites then powered new appliances such as phones and GPS. And to quote my opponent, "We are simply launching rockets up into our aptosphere (atmosphere I assume) to orbit around our planet and provide us with USEFUL TECHNOLOGICAL BENEFITS." He clearly states himself that there are technological benefits that are useful.

6. "Human extinction is inevitable..." That does not mean that the human race should give up and just believe that it's the will of the universe. We should actually do something about it and may even discover a solution.

7. Sorry that I'm skipping around. My opponent also asked "who gets the planet?" Well, this topic is not about other countries, it's about us. The United States. If other countries see fit to invest in space exploration, that's a good idea, but it's irrelevant due to the topic.

I'd like to point out that my opponent has only stated why my points are invalid, but has never clearly stated why we shouldn't explore space. The entire time my opponent has been disapproving me, but not furthering his own case.

I'd also like to point out that my opponent is right that education and foreign policies are important issues. I believe these are valuable things we need to discuss. However, he is speaking so that all the money of the US will be poured into the US. That's not what I'm saying. Currently, only Out of a $2.4 trillion budget, less than 0.8% is spent on the entire space program! That's less than 1 penny for every dollar spent. The average American spends more of their budget on their cable bill, eating out or entertainment than this yet the benefits of space flight are remarkable. It has been conservatively estimated by U.S. space experts that for every dollar the U.S. spends on R and D in the space program, it receives $7 back in the form of corporate and personal income taxes from increased jobs and economic growth. Thus, not only can important issues be take care of but we can also gain money from space. http://www.thespaceplace.com...

Own points

1. Space exploration links to valuable new technology. Around half the world's population has a cell phone, and we wouldn't have had cell phones if there were no satellites. And space exploration taught us how to send satellites into space. It has in fact helped the sick and the physically weak, too, as I later mentioned. e.g. Brain cancer treatments, ultraviolet suits that protect skin, and heart pumps.

2. *NEW* Space exploration, no matter how hard it is to believe, does actually help our economy. As I mentioned in my rebuttal, for every dollar invested in space exploration, 7 dollars returns to us as benefit. Valuable jobs are also created in this rough economy that are necessary for America to get back on track.

3. *NEW* Valuable scientific information comes from space exploration. One small example is the Hubble Space Telescope. Much maligned at first because of its flawed optics, it still produced better photographs than anything here on Earth. Once fixed, it has produced even more startling scientific data which we have only begun to understand and apply. One of the many spinoffs from the Hubble telescope is the use of its Charge Coupled Device (CCD) chips for digital imaging breast biopsies. The resulting device images breast tissue more clearly and efficiently than other existing technologies. The CCD chips are so advanced that they can detect the minute differences between a malignant or benign tumor without the need for a surgical biopsy. This saves the patient weeks of recovery time and the cost for this procedure is hundreds of dollars vs. thousands for a surgical biopsy. With over 500,000 women needing biopsies a year the economic benefit, per year, is tremendous and it greatly reduces the pain, scarring, radiation exposure, time, and money associated with surgical biopsies. The technologies that led to the computer bar codes in retail stores, quartz timing crystals and household smoke detectors were originally developed for NASA.
The Ergometer used by astronauts helps paralyzed men with muscle stimulations! The pacemakers used to treat cardiac patients as well as the remote monitoring devices for intensive care patients were derived from the telemetry systems that first monitored astronauts and spacecraft. Much of the portable medical equipment carried aboard ambulances has its roots in NASA's needs for such portable equipment in space.
These are but a few of the more than 30,000 secondary applications of space technology providing daily benefits in Earth-bound hospitals, offices and homes.

4. Survival is an extremely important issue our planet is faced with. My opponent has basically suggested that we're going to die anyway and we shouldn't do anything about it. That's an awful idea. By exploring space, we lengthen the amount of time for our survival and can even discover a way to live forever.

5. Because I am running out of space, my fifth point is about the dangers in space. Look back at my first point in Round 2 for reference.

Also, America has not spent enough on space exploration and 2x NASA's budget has been spent on household pets.
For these reasons, vote Pro, saying the US should explore space.

Thank you for a great match, joshpleco! :D
joshpleco23

Con

My opponent is using the term "exploration" incorrectly, since this is a debate he should have clarified earlier or used correct terms.

1.) My opponent is being a bit over dramatic, claiming that we are running out of time. He fails to realise that our society lives in the face of doom every day, and as stated before, human extinction is not avoidable.
My opponent is also making an assumption, he claims that we are limited in technology because America is finding the program America doesn't find the program as valuable as it once did. He has no evidence to support this.

2.) My opponent is making another assumption based on no evidence at all, claiming that we will not advance in technology unless we invest in space exploration. He fails to mention how space exploration helps us advance in technology, rendering this argument useless. My opponent seems to emphasize that our species survival depends on space exploration, this however is over dramatised. As far as our civilisation reaching a perfect utopia, I don't think it ever will socially, perhaps economically, but not socially, there will always be crime. But that is an irrelevant to this argument.

3.) Space exploration hasn't opened our eyes on how to treat brain cancer, research in medicine and medical care has. Space exploration has nothing to do with our advance in medicine and technology. Our country has spent over one hundred and fifty billion dollars in tax payer's money to get man into space (which can be considered real space exploration), much more then the twenty billion dollar average. I call that a waste of money, imagine how much more money we would waste if we tried to get across the galaxy with technology we don't even have. My opponent claims that the poor can find jobs in space exploration, this is yet another ignorant assumption. Such a job would require someone with alot of education, and with vast scientific knowledge. Poorer people can not afford the kind of education it would require, rendering this argument useless.

4.) My foe states that we might be able to let our legacy shine forever, this is again impossible. There is no physical way we can stop the natural actions of the universe, it would be like me trying to walk through a solid wall.

5.) "My opponent has stated that getting new technology from space is not space exploration. True, it may not be exactly the same, but it is certainly linked." My opponent clearly states that our technological benefits are not the same. He also fails to prove how they are linked in any way. He also states that the Apollo 11 mission taught us how to send satellites into space, this is ridiculous. The first man made satellite was Sputnik1, which was sent into space by the Soviet Union without the help of space exploration.

"He clearly states himself that there are technological benefits that are useful."
My opponent has misquoted me to prove his own argument correct, I never said that there were technological benefits to space exploration. I have also proved that satellite technology has nothing to do with space exploration.

6.) My opponent states that there is a possibility that we may find a solution to the end of the universe. It seems as though he is tugging on heart strings, because you would need to do something supernatural to stop the Universe does
naturally.

7.) My opponent claims that this topic is about us, while this may be true what other countries do can effect us. If we were to claim another planet and another country wanted it, it could cause conflict that could effect us.

My opponent claims I have only been disproving him, and not working on my own case, well I am sorry if he feels that way.

Now, moving on to my opponent's responses to my problems with space exploration:
As stated earlier the United states spend over 150 billion dollars in tax payer's money to get man into space, much more then it's average consumption. Even if we did have the technology, it would take a countless amount of money in order to make any sci-fi like achievements. Now, considering we don't have the technology, and wont be able to get it simply by sending people into space, it makes space exploration a waste of money.

My opponent again repeats himself by saying that space exploration is important for satellites and cell phones, I've already covered why it is not, and since I have limited space I don't think there is any need for me to repeat myself.
As I have pointed out before, the money spent sending us up into space alone, space exploration doesn't do anything to help our economy in any way.

Most of the information we have about space comes from observation, not exploration, contradicting what my opponent says.

All my opponent has done is use flawed scientific knowledge, flawed definitions, and assumptions in order to prove himself correct, proving a good amount of his argument wrong or irrelevant.

Space exploration is also a dangerous job, and creates great risks. Science might be worth dying for, but not unless we actually go somewhere with it. And in our case, we still have a long way to go before we can achieve that Star Trek effect.

space travel isn't as simple as it sounds. Most people who want to blast into the heavens and look for god don't put into account the materials, risks, estiments, and budget to do so.

Space exploration is still new to our society, and we shouldn't rush into it. Science is about what we know, and what we discovery, so lets start with that. Then, perhaps one day when our society is ready, we will be ready to take the leap my opponent suggests we take now.

My final conclusions:

1.) Space exploration wastes tax payer's money, and does not help our economy in any way.

2.) Space exploration itself does not help us. People make breakthroughs with intelligence, not by floating around in space.

3.) Space exploration has nothing to do with observation or technological conveniences given to us by satellites for the use of entertainment and navigation.

4.) Space exploration is dangerous and costly.

I would like to thank my opponent for the debate, I love him. I hope you all have enjoyed the debate as well.

Vote for Pleco!
Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by joshpleco23 6 years ago
joshpleco23
I'm actually against America exploring space in general, considering I think that America is corrupt in almost every form.
Posted by Ninja_Tru 6 years ago
Ninja_Tru
The way I see the Con arguments at the end of the round is like this: "Space exploration wastes a lot of money and hurts the economy. It also is difficult and does nothing for technology."

-The Pro definitely has that "$7 for every $1 spent" argument going for him (or her, I forgot to check the gender), so that takes out the economy argument. Like this, there aren't a lot of harms for the Con. Even if you, the Con, are winning lots of reasons why the Pro DOESN'T do as good a job as he says he (or she) does, you need reasons why the Pro also does BAD things.

-So, being generous to all of the Con's arguments and weighing in Pro arguments, I get a picture like this: "Exploring space kinda sorta vaguely helps find at least *some* technology, but it doesn't really do anything bad." So, even in this scenario, I vote for the Pro because he (or she) does at least *some* good, although I also did buy the survival arguments.

-By the way, I would have loved to see the Con shake it up a bit by saying "The US shouldn't explore space. Private corporations should do it instead." This would totally make things interesting...
Posted by XStrikeX 6 years ago
XStrikeX
Basically, space exploration taught us how to send satellites in space. Some phones are powered by satellite.
Posted by ZT 6 years ago
ZT
What's the link between satalites and cell phones?
Posted by joshpleco23 6 years ago
joshpleco23
Wooopsi! I quoted your argument on my page so I could respond to it more thoroughly and I forgot to delete that small part at the end of the second round! Please ignore that ^.^
Posted by Anarcho 6 years ago
Anarcho
All I am saying is to not prioritize it. Who knows what we could learn by exploring the oceans too?
Posted by arethusa668 6 years ago
arethusa668
HURRYUP AND POST Joshpleco23!!!
Posted by XStrikeX 6 years ago
XStrikeX
And we wouldn't have GPS either. Satellites are a big art of space exploration... It's brought us a lot of technology!
Posted by Anarcho 6 years ago
Anarcho
And?
Posted by FREEDO 6 years ago
FREEDO
If it wasn't for the moon landings we might not have cell-phones yet.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by XStrikeX 6 years ago
XStrikeX
XStrikeXjoshpleco23Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by twin 6 years ago
twin
XStrikeXjoshpleco23Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Vote Placed by arethusa668 6 years ago
arethusa668
XStrikeXjoshpleco23Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:70 
Vote Placed by Steelerman6794 6 years ago
Steelerman6794
XStrikeXjoshpleco23Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 
Vote Placed by Radicalguy44 6 years ago
Radicalguy44
XStrikeXjoshpleco23Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by Ninja_Tru 6 years ago
Ninja_Tru
XStrikeXjoshpleco23Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:60 
Vote Placed by Teleroboxer 6 years ago
Teleroboxer
XStrikeXjoshpleco23Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:30