The Instigator
reconsqurl
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
nmmk
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

private sector investments in human space exploration is preferable to public sector investment.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/1/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,815 times Debate No: 22223
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (11)
Votes (0)

 

reconsqurl

Con

This debate will be formatted as Public Forum round without CX, so therefore the first round will be used to ensure each debater understands the rules surrounding PF debate as well as ask eachother clarifying questions. with that being said I welcome any and all competition and good luck to all.
nmmk

Pro

I accept this debate and I am well aware of the rules of Public Forum debate. Ready when you are.
Debate Round No. 1
reconsqurl

Con

First I would like to define a key term in this debate that of human space exploration

From Daniel Lester at the University of Texas human space exploration
is humans physically conducting scientific research in space
and second the term of "investment" as it is defined by Merriam and Webster dictionary as: The action or process of investing money for profit or material result.

so with those definitions in mind we see in the wording of the task it is the burden of the pro to prove that private space investment is preferable to public sector investments and if the con can show in one way that public investment is preferable to private the con shall win this debate

Contention 1:Private Sector cannot do all that NASA can do. From Thomas Brannen in the journal of air law and commerce. There are three things that only NASA can do that the private sector can't to is 1) focus on deep space exploration which it has with voyager and Viking 2) encourage growth in private commercial space exploration and has with its COTS program 3) and finally develop cutting-edge technologies that enable human space exploration. and if we apply this to the private sector we see that indeed Space X has the abilities of one and two, we then have to ask ourselves what engendered this and that is the second point. according to SpaceX.com that "NASA's COTS program is a "pay for performance" partnership between the government and private industry. It is the first program of its kind where the government provides seed money to develop capabilities, but only pays for development after it has taken place. Further, the private company under a COTS agreement must "put its own skin in the game", meeting private capital financial milestones in addition to technical performance milestones. The COTS program is a win-win situation for both government and private industry." so in summery we see that private companies, such as SpaceX, reccevie money to develop technology. and after the company proves its technology to NASA, they sell their innovations to NASA for profit.

so, in conclusion when we look at today's resolution we see that though NASA cannot compete with Companies like SpaceX, the original investment of time, money, and energy was made by NASA and therefore all of the innovations made by private sector has been invested by the Public sector and therefore you must vote in negation of this resolution
nmmk

Pro

nmmk forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
reconsqurl

Con

After given three days to make an argument my opponent neglected the opportunity to do so. with that my arguments have gone without argument from the Pro, and therefore I win this debate.
nmmk

Pro

nmmk forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
reconsqurl

Con

After given three days to make an argument my opponent neglected the opportunity to do so. with that my arguments have gone without argument from the Pro, and therefore I win this debate.
nmmk

Pro

nmmk forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
reconsqurl

Con

After given three days to make an argument my opponent neglected the opportunity to do so. with that my arguments have gone without argument from the Pro, and therefore I win this debate.
nmmk

Pro

nmmk forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
Nasa < Private sector
Posted by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
lol
Posted by reconsqurl 5 years ago
reconsqurl
You know, all you people comment with arguments. Why dont you accept the challenge
Posted by SilverXD 5 years ago
SilverXD
Private sector has already did a lot of things better then the public sector. In the space aspect, currently corporation like SpaceX and Virgin Galactic have already broken the price market for sending a person to space. Unlike the NASA prices where over 1.2Billion dollars were spent on sending a small group of people to space on a space-craft model that has barely been updated since its predecessor in the 80's. Virgin Galactic can send anyone to space for about $200k, and has a much more durable and sustainable model (that also gives me a mind-gasm whenever I look at it).
Other then that, even Disney has invested in some space-programs, and was able to create an engine that is ten-times more efficient then the one that the Russians and Chinese use (and obviously NASA).
Lastly I'd like to add, that companies like Bigelow, have been developing a "space-hotel", and have created an awesome draft back in 2005.

The thing that most amazed me that these corporations have been competing for barely 7 years and already achieved more then what NASA was able to do in 20.
So yeah, private-sector rules, give them a few more years and you'll be drinking beers with your buddies in space.
Posted by WriterDave 5 years ago
WriterDave
I want investment and lots of it, and I don't care where it comes from. The only real argument I can offer against the resolution is that the spirit of exploration would make it preferable that the first words on Mars not be, "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for Starbucks."
Posted by reconsqurl 5 years ago
reconsqurl
it was good and I was good at it
Posted by WriterSelbe 5 years ago
WriterSelbe
Haha, I remember debating this forever ago.
Posted by reconsqurl 5 years ago
reconsqurl
I argued the same thing in October
Posted by jwesbruce 5 years ago
jwesbruce
Public Forum though?
Posted by Buddamoose 5 years ago
Buddamoose
lol love the profile pic
No votes have been placed for this debate.