The Instigator
american5
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
lannan13
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

colonization of the moon would fail and not be worth it to humanity

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
lannan13
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/12/2011 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,794 times Debate No: 19815
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (3)

 

american5

Pro

I believe that colonization of the moon would be useless to humanity and major waste of resources. The moon has nothing to offer but space and we could have no gain of resources, not only that but we would have to give everything from water food and air to it the entire idea would be a waste of time and resources.
lannan13

Con

I accept. funny this is the policy debate topic, so I have a lot of it even though I run astriod mining.
1. moon has He3 which is rare on Earth. He3 can slow down the cancer (not stop it)
2. Hegemony, the United States needs to keep being a world power and if we don't colonize the moon first China or India will and surpass us as a world power.
3. steping stone to Mars.
4. Earth is overpopulated
5. costs will be worth it and easily paid for. He3 and endorsements can easily pay back the costs and turn into a benefit.
Debate Round No. 1
american5

Pro

I believe that this He3 material would not be worth a colonization because if it simply slows cancer all your doing is buying them time for their unstoppable death so why would people buy it to make their lives a bit longer.

Also China and India are no threat to the United States military don't get me wrong the Chinese are strong but the United States has better infantry and commanders Chinese infantry would not stand up to a Marine or Navy Seal or a West point graduate, and India has a no recorded historical of any invasion of another country proving American military might is most likely superior to the Indian forces. As history shows it dose not matter how great your technology and society is if the other guy kills you or at least beats you down. Second China is overflowing with people to the point were they are limiting how many kids they can have which is hurting their farming communities they are to busy juggling their own problems to be a super power.

As for over population the UN believes that the earth could hold another three billion people before it peaks.

I also don't believe the moon could be a stepping stone to mars because I don't believe that we would even be able to build a major city on the moon given the fact that asteroid's are constantly smacking into it and humanity has very little experience with space travel trying to build a nasa base on a unstable piece of land would be very risky.
lannan13

Con

1. He3 can be used to help to detect the smuggling of nuclear wepons. He3 is in a low supply and is mainly found in Nuclear wepons.
2. India may not have attacked anyone yet, but there nuclear and biological wepon arsinal is full. China: look at the Chosin Resivor the Chinesses dominated the U.S. and UN forces. Also look at the Chinesses SuperComputer it can do 2.5 tasks a second while U.S. SuperComputer can do .5. U.S. is also in threat of EMPs and the DOD and GBLs can't do much about it.
3. NASA is active and will be going to Mars in 2030 and an astriod in 2025 according to Obama. The threat of an astriod colison is nearly impossible even Apothis won't hit when it makes to passes in the future. NASA is also using the Orion rocket to get to the moon. (Earth's moon or Luna if you prefer.)
Debate Round No. 2
american5

Pro

1. I still find moon colonization as over doing it for a single resource unless this thing will shoot so far into the technological future that it will cure aids cancer and make us immortal than not really worth it.

2. I also fail to see the evidence of India as a threat sure they have the weapons but they have no motive to use them and no one on the earth wants to pick a nuke fight with the winners of the cold war. As for China whoopdy dooo they have a smart computer I'll be concerned when it picks up a weapon and starts commanding armies until then its no concern.

3. My point stands that the moon's colonization would be more costly than profitable not just in resources but in human lives no matter what frontier it is people die wether it is Egypt taking the Sahara Rome in Germania and England the Pilgrims coming to America the Pioneers moving west many lives were lost in all of them and this is a new frontier its not building a new city in a far away land its not sailing across the ocean to a new place its leaving our planet for the first time to an unstable are lives will be lost many of them and Humanity dose not have the can do spirit as much anymore we took Earth we colonized every last bit of it with our blood sweet and tears and since Humanity put that flag in that one little piece of unclaimed land our want to explore and to die for knowledge. I don't think the moon a rock flouting around in space is worth the hundreds maybe even thousands of human lives lost in the process of taking it.
lannan13

Con

it's to late in the game so I guess I'll use a plan text
THe U.S. Federal government should substantially increase exploration and or developement beyond the Earth's mesosphere by colonizing Mars.
1. the moon has several resources besides He3. It could also hold REMs that are used in the green economy in the military. without the REMs the U.S. military wouldn't function well.
2. India would start a Nuclear hollicost if it where to happen. ANy country would and there'd be no surrvivors. Chinesse Supercomputer is important it tecnically runs the country. So if China is faster than the U.S. they would be able to fight us better.
3.Global Warming, famine, deforestation are all reasons to move to the moon and even Mars in the late future acording to the www.futuretimeline.com
Debate Round No. 3
american5

Pro

Because the Chinese are two seconds faster than us dose not make them a threat also global warming has very little evidence supporting it also famine deforestation the moon isn't really a great farming community and if you haven't noticed it has no forrest so that would be like saying lets go sailing in the desert also no country except maybe Arabic nations would go on a nuclear holocaust most of us like living and not killing our own people to kill the others. Also there is little known about the moons supply of resources so who knows if colonization would even give us anything besides a couple rocks of the resources.
lannan13

Con

1. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the moon was once part of Earth. Earth has resources, so the moon should have some aswell.
2. Supercomputer, being faster is everything. If you are faster you have a beter econ and military. Pro drops India arguement and doesn't refute the U.S. is low on Hegemoty.
3. Terriform the moon.
4. Pro states there is no evidense of GW, but if he was on www.futuretimeline.com, he would see the equations and there are even worse things that will happen if you continue to read into the future.
5. Pro claims Arabs would start a nuclear winter. Pro gives you a great reason there why to get off the Earth.
6. Oil dependcy causes terrorism.
Debate Round No. 4
american5

Pro

1. Yes the moon may have earthly resources but it dose not have trees nor farmland and once again we have no idea what amount of the resources the moon has it may not be a lot.

2. Speed is effective in warfare but their is so much more to it than that strategy strength equipment a computer will never win a war it may help but single handedly no it has no human factor.

3. Terriforming the moon would coast a ton with out getting half the resources back and not sure if the grounds stable for building and it being hit by space junk all the time there's no chance

4. also only one Arabic nation has nukes and they are about to get their asses kicked by the Israeli's also just because crazy people get their hands on nukes dose not mean we should evacuate the planet it means we should go to war.

5. Oil dependency dose not cause terrorism pissed off Muslims cause terrorism look at history the Arabs were being asses before oil look at Mohammad he told people to convert infidel's to Islam at all coasts even killing them and they have been oil dose not cause terrorism.
lannan13

Con

1. Pro agrees
2. Pro agrees
4. Pro agrees
Most of the agruements I make the Pro drops or agrees with me. Since the Pro agrees with me on most than I see mothing but a Con balot.
Thank you American5 for you time.
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by AlwaysMoreThanYou 5 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
This debate was all over the place. Mildly entertaining, though.
Posted by caveat 5 years ago
caveat
Terraforming the moon.
That's grand.
Posted by Skynet 5 years ago
Skynet
I would like to see the cost-benefit analysis of 3He mining on the moon. I doubt it would be worth it, but that's just my gut talking.
Posted by DanT 5 years ago
DanT
which moon? Our moon? Kind of hard to terraform the moon.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by phantom 5 years ago
phantom
american5lannan13Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con should have backed up some of his claims more, but pro dropped allot of what con said.
Vote Placed by Lickdafoot 5 years ago
Lickdafoot
american5lannan13Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: This debate was so off topic. Pro did nothing to support the burden of proof that his resolution required, and Con's contentions weren't exclusive to colonization and/or humanities benefits (Such as the resources- you can extract them without colonizing there.) Overall, con at least had some arguments so he wins.
Vote Placed by Stephen_Hawkins 5 years ago
Stephen_Hawkins
american5lannan13Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Both sides fail for making so many false statements and claims.