The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
3 Points

money wasted on space exploration

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/30/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 713 times Debate No: 74513
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




I am doing this debate for my semi final and honestly I want some reasons for both sides. Ok so here is my side of the debate...

That 5 million years have came. The sun is about to explode. All life on earth (and earth) is dead. The only way to save our lives is to move planets. But, in 20015, everyone gave up on exploring space because it costed way to much!!!!!!!!!!
This could happen. Or over population. We NEED to find a planet like earth.


I agree to this debate. I'm not sure on the standards to if this is just an acceptance round or not but I will give you the benefit of going first even though you never stated that I couldn't start earlier.
Debate Round No. 1


That's ok!!!!! Acceptance round.

I just want some points. It's not really a debate, just research. But please do rebut and please do argue.
So how's this point...
Space exploration is interesting. We could find where we started, and even time travel.
Can we just make points, and not explain it too much.


Okay. I am confused about this a bit sorry. So am I against space exploration or for it. I thought I was for money wasted on space exploration and I think I am. Con is for against the cause so if you are the con side for money wasted on space exploration you are against money wasted on space exploration and you are giving points for my side of the debate. You should be against the cause of money wasted on space exploration.
Debate Round No. 2


Honestly I just want some info for my debate for school, u could give points for both for all I care


Okay. I am guessing that you are for the side that I am on, so I will give some points that go against money wasted on space exploration

1) It costs a lot of money
It's not like money grows on trees. America is already in debt with China a whole ton, and if China finds out we are starting to spend a whole ton of money on space exploration they might get mad. It might even cause them to attack us knowing that

a) if we do this it's certain they aren't getting their money back (even though it's already pretty certain we won't get the money back to China)

b) if we spend a lot of money on space exploration we won't be using as much of our money towards our armed forces.

And another thing about money. America already owes a lot of money to China, so will other countries even help us pay for it knowing that we haven't ever paid China back.

2) Will we even be able to find a place like Earth
We have tried to find places like Earth for a long time. We tried the moon and Mars. And so far we haven't found conditions able to live in. Even if we somehow get this money, where would we look. And this brings up my next issue.

3) Technology
Do we have the technology to be able to get somewhere even if we find a planet. We had to send a robot to Mars, if we even end up finding a planet would we be able to get all of the people of the world, food and water.

4) Time
I don't know if you are right about the sun blowing up as soon as it will but if it is going to blow up soon will we even have time to find a planet and get resources their before the sun blows up. This is going to take a long time to transition from a planet we have been on our the whole life of man.

I hope this helps you and send me a message on how you did with the debate.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by GoOrDin 3 years ago
I propose all knowledge regarding space is flawed, and I can give a better illustration of the working of our atmosphere and solar system then is commonly accepted in accordance with my religion(creationist) which is a necessary component of it's plausibility:

The entity of any planetary body, or asteroid in space has a 100% capacity for energy. As energy always fallowed the path of least resistance, energy would go around objects, and they would become stable not over saturated < determined by molecular state.

Therefor, As Earth has a Morning and an Evening, absorbing energy and discharging energy is an equal equation.

If you've guested it. i do not believe in space travel. I think leaving the atmosphere will inevitably destroy anything of life that leaves the planet. Radiation and re-molecularization would obliterate lifeforms, kill battery cells and change the laws of satellite communication.

In order to transgress the barriers between our world and space, a method can be applied, and it would be relatively cheap. The problem with this method, is it would require a substantial amount of trial runs.
With modern technology I would argue it would not be too costly.
Check the technology regarding the new rockets designed in New Zealand. I just discovered them and find them intriguing.

I would suggest that if our Sun were to expire, and a new planet was an immediate requirement;
a fleet of shuttles would be able to survive, and any and or all planets would become a suitable resource.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by salam.morcos 3 years ago
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 wasn't a debate, and pro was kind enough to provide support to his arguments. Pro provided several reason to support his argument.