The Instigator
Akemi_Loli_Mokoto
Con (against)
Losing
14 Points
The Contender
rougeagent21
Pro (for)
Winning
19 Points

Vortex is a waste of Tax Payers money

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
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 6 votes the winner is...
rougeagent21
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/20/2010 Category: Sports
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,050 times Debate No: 12055
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (6)

 

Akemi_Loli_Mokoto

Con

I've read several things showing peoples distain for the Government paying for the Vortex Project. For those who dont know what it is, Vortex stands for "Verification of the Origins of Rotation in Tornadoes Experiment" and what it is, is basicly a field projects study tornadoes. The Vortex 2 was originally slated for about $12 million. With the government supplements that came out last year, I'm not positive, but I think we're in the $14 million range, for the two year project. Some People say this is a waste of money. I say bull. If it is a waste, I'd love to hear how its a waste.
rougeagent21

Pro

Good luck to my opponent. To begin, I will define a key term.

Sccording to wordnet.princeton.edu,

waste- to use inefficiently or inappropriately

===========
Contention 1
===========

First off, VORTEX is quite inefficient at its job. It seems to report on things that are less than useful. One report I found concluded that "The data shown in Figs. 1a-d show that there is excellent temporal continuity in the locations of the cyclonic vortex signature associated with the mesocyclone/tornado at low levels." [1]

Another study from VORTEX2 simply atated that there was a very low correlation between temperature and tornado activity. [2] (This data, for the record, was taken in a record-low year for tornado activity)

All of the obtained data were already known. This seems like a waste of taxpayer dollars.

==========
Contention 2
==========

The VORTEX program is also a waste of money due to the causes the money could be going to.

-There are currently 35.0 million people in the US living below the poverty level. [3]

-There are currently 11,028,000 people who have cancer. [4]

Any of these causes deserve money more than tornadoes, since no useful data has been gathered from the VORTEX studies. Some interesting data have shown up, but none that can compare to the problems going on elsewhere.

[1] http://www.essl.org...
[2] http://www.essl.org...
[3] http://www.soundvision.com...
[4] http://www.cancer.org...
Debate Round No. 1
Akemi_Loli_Mokoto

Con

Actually my friend, VORTEX is quite useful. You see, Severe weather warnings improved after the research collected from VORTEX 1 and many believe that VORTEX 1 contributed to this improvement(1)
Also Doppler weather radar was greatly improved with the VOTEX 1 Project. VORTEX research allowed the National Weather Service to provide tornado warnings to residents with a lead time of 13 minutes.(2) A federal research meteorologist, Don Burgess, estimates that the "false alarms" pertaining to severe weather by the National Weather Service have declined by 10 percent.(3)

1- http://www.newson6.com...
2- http://bbsnews.net...
3- http://www.enidnews.com...
rougeagent21

Pro

"Actually my friend, VORTEX is quite useful. You see, Severe weather warnings improved after the research collected from VORTEX 1 and many believe that VORTEX 1 contributed to this improvement(1)"

My opponent does not seem to realize the existence of confounding variables. Correlation does not equal causation. In 1800s Massachusetts, the importation of alcohol increased directly after the amount of Puritan ministers increased. Many believed this to mean that Puritan ministers caused a rise in alcohol. Sound ridiculous to anyone? Coincidences happen. Scientific advancements happen all the time, regardless of extraneous studies.

"Also Doppler weather radar was greatly improved with the VOTEX 1 Project. VORTEX research allowed the National Weather Service to provide tornado warnings to residents with a lead time of 13 minutes.(2)"
Here is a quote from his source:
"VORTEX findings are credited for improving National Weather Service tornado warnings, which now have a lead time of about 13 minutes."

My opponent fails to tell us what the lead time was before this study. Could it have been 5 minutes? 10 minutes? 12 minutes?

I can say that due to a recent telecommunications advancement, AT&T's 3g network now covers 96% of American soil. I am being misleading because the previous coverage zone was 95%.

Moreover, even if the previous lead time was much lower, 13 minutes is hardly enough time to do anything about the situation. 13 minutes does not give one time to move a trailer house. Besides, I think people in tornado-prone areas are smart enough to look outside and see if there are vortexes forming.

"A federal research meteorologist, Don Burgess, estimates that the "false alarms" pertaining to severe weather by the National Weather Service have declined by 10 percent.(3)"

Again, this is someone's opinion. Note, in the article my opponent cites the meteorologist says that he thinks the study "helped" bring the rate of false alarms down. This hardly seems to be conclusive evidence for the effectiveness of the program.

My opponent has left my entire second contention untouched, and I need not restate it now. The resolution is affirmed.
Debate Round No. 2
Akemi_Loli_Mokoto

Con

It seems funny how my opponent thinks the articles are not reliable. I guess he thinks they lied or made it up or such, but the evidence is right there and every meteorologist would agree that the Vortex Project has helped the world greatly. It has saved many lives and with out the Vortex Project, many would die. You can not dispute this fact. The VORTEX1 project sought to understand how a tornado is produced by deploying around 18 vehicles that are equipped with customized instruments used to measure and analyze the weather around a tornado. VORTEX1 documented the entire life cycle of a tornado for the first time.(1)

Severe weather warnings improved after the research collected from VORTEX 1 and many believe that VORTEX1 contributed to this improvement(2). An important finding from the original VORTEX experiment was that the factors responsible for causing tornadoes happen on smaller time and space scales than scientists had thought. New advances will allow for a more detailed sampling of a storm's wind, temperature and moisture environment and lead to a better understanding of why tornadoes form – and how they can be more accurately predicted," said Stephan Nelson, NSF program director for physical and dynamic meteorology(3 & 4)

Ask ANY Meteorologist if Vortex was useful, and every single one would say yes. Its easy to ask a few, just call up your local News Team and ask to speak to there Chief Meteorologist.

1- http://www.msnbc.msn.com...
2- http://www.newson6.com...
3- http://www.kktv.com...
4- http://www.washingtonpost.com...
rougeagent21

Pro

Unfortunately, my counter arguments are largely untouched, and my second contention is still in tact. My opponent does not really seem to bring up new evidence this round, but simply restates his previous round. Following my opponent's advice, I did call up a good friend of mine. He is a meteorologist at the Air Force Academy. He said:

"Sure, VORTEX was useful. It helped achieve some minor things such as a few more minutes of warning time and possibly aiding in some radar advancements. Honestly though, for how much funding it had, it achieved very little...the money could be going to other, more affective areas."

Mr. Sutherland practically summed up my entire case. Did VORTEX have some useful attributes? Sure. Was it effective given its almost 12 million dollar budget? Not really. Could the money be going to other, more worthy causes that actually affect MORE of the taxpayers funding the program? Certainly. This is why the program is a waste of taxpayer money.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by rougeagent21 4 years ago
rougeagent21
The debate is over dude...
Posted by Akemi_Loli_Mokoto 4 years ago
Akemi_Loli_Mokoto
At the time of VORTEX, tornado warning lead times were 7-10 minutes. Now they are 14-15 minutes. But the minutes aren't the whole story - tornado warning SKILL is believed to have been improved as a result of VORTEX...fewer false alarms. Also, the biggest most important thing we learned is that there are very subtle things between the surface of the earth and the base of the thunderstorm that cause tornadoes to develop...weak boundaries, the relative humidity at the surface, or the way the winds feed the storm or kill it - so we're taking what we learned from VORTEX and will try to measure those things in more detail in VORTEX2
Posted by wjmelements 4 years ago
wjmelements
Waste implies that the government could find a better way to spend it.
Posted by Cody_Franklin 4 years ago
Cody_Franklin
Hey now, Brian. I live in Tornado Alley (specifically, Oklahoma). Those people who live in trailer parks probably screwed themselves over at some point during their lifetime. Let them suck on that.
Posted by brian_eggleston 4 years ago
brian_eggleston
Whenever we see pictures on the telly of the damage a tornado has wreaked, we always see images of devastated trailer parks.

If you live in Tornado Alley, surely it would be wise to invest in something more substantial than a fragile tin box to live in?

I mean, have these residents never read The Three Little Pigs?
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Valtarov 4 years ago
Valtarov
Akemi_Loli_Mokotorougeagent21Tied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 4 years ago
rougeagent21
Akemi_Loli_Mokotorougeagent21Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:05 
Vote Placed by TFranklin62 4 years ago
TFranklin62
Akemi_Loli_Mokotorougeagent21Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Akemi_Loli_Mokoto 4 years ago
Akemi_Loli_Mokoto
Akemi_Loli_Mokotorougeagent21Tied
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 Brandonmaciel333 4 years ago
Brandonmaciel333
Akemi_Loli_Mokotorougeagent21Tied
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 tthansel 4 years ago
tthansel
Akemi_Loli_Mokotorougeagent21Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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