Continued space exploration is vital for the advancement...

It doesn't have to be asteroids... It could be a giant comet.....

lol, oh my, wow. Why don't you post some about the extremely close outside impact possibilities that we have barely escaped from recently

i need evidence. My whole case must be factorialy supported (is factorially a word?, lol)

Can u tell me some websites that have this subject on it
For my debate team, im the only one who is working on this particular topic and i need a little help can you give me some websites to go to to check this subject out?

it's a word, but you probably meant factually.

Advancement of civilization
NOTE: Civilization is commonly used to refer to HUMANS. Humans eat meat and/or plants. The whole carnivore vs. vegetarian thing.

Advancement:A forward step; an improvement.
Development; progress

Advancement doesn't mean saving the lives of Earth's 6 billion people. It means advancing technologically, artistically, theoretically. Whatever. It's my belief that people are misconstruing the topic. Advancement doesn't necessarily mean finding another planet because the time of Earth is coming to an end. The topic doesn't say we have to save the human species.

However if that's the way you choose to see it then fine. Here's a question: If we do have to move off planet Earth and continued space exploration is VITAL to civilization (notice there's not advancement of), what do you do if you DON'T find an inhabitable planet and accidently kill millions maybe billions of people in the attempt? What then? "Oops"?

Another question: Even if you DO find a new planet, what if there isn't any water? Or proper O2? If there's not consumable water then we're all going to die anyway. And if there is oxygen but we have to wear space suits for the rest of our lives then I can guarantee the suicide rate with shoot up.

Another thought: What about the bunnies? They can't wear space suits. Neither can cows. And how are plants going to grow and live in these new conditions?

In English: We're screwed if we do, we're screwed it we don't.

Any comments?

In response to Drea... that idea of advancement and blah,blah, blah... is WAY far out of the box... a little too far.... don't think so deep into the resolution that you lose all relevence to the topic... that's all. ttyl! (i'm not trying to be rude... just give a bit of advice! enjoy!)

at least she got the topic back on track.

Drea
Drea just sort of went off on a tangent about finding another planet or something, and that idea is interesting, but it truly doesn't have any relevence to the resolution. That's all.

but, it is a possibility that has the ability to advance civilization. Plus, setting out after that sort of goal will force technological advances that would not otherwise be made

hey, I'm a LD-Debater...been in it since last year...pretty interesting, this topic ..i don't like it, because of the word "vital"..of course its not! There are far better things any country can use its money on, and besides, manned space shuttles pose much more of a risk now, i mean, is it really okay to risk someone's life without even the guarentee that somehting even slightly good will happen? but, yea...e-mail me....

interesting....
That is very interesting. I'm going to a tournament on Saturday and was wondering if anyone had some neg. philosophy to run... ideas for neg. value/criteria... help? Also, what is the definition of 'planet'... that would really help determine some things... you know? I just thought of that. I mean, does a planet have land masses like earth and H2O and O2 and stuff? or is it just a big blob out in space with deadly elements and gases that would be uninhabitable?

I do believe that needs to be explored!

actually, a planet is (I believe) a mass orbiting around a star, regardless of atmospheric content. In that above quote I gave, it stated an aproximation of how many of those planets may have life supporting environments. I believe it was a million billion. That's a lot!!! lol

oh, and here is a wacky idea for neg. take or leave.....

v. justice
cri. cost-benefit analysis

many times people go agains cost-benefit analysis with a stance that you cannot place a value on human life. Go with that. Find stats on cost of space exploration, cost of feeding one starving person for a year (relatively low) and compare the two. If aff brings up advancements such as heart-pacers, etc. that space exploration has brought to society, you can not only say that it is unsure whether those advancements wouldn't have been made anyways, and you can also say that, for cost, our first responsibility is to our poor, or some sappy crap like that.

ya dig?

hype

Thanks. OK... Do you understand why I asked what exactly the definition of 'planet' is? I mean, you really could eliminate a bunch from the topic saying that none of these "planets" are inhabitable... even if they exist... you know?I mean, there's no point in doing anything with them because they wouldn't do anything but kill us off. am i right? it kinda goes back to what Drea was saying; about living on different planets and stuff, That's funny..."sappy crap..." It's true though. I understand what you're saying.

Thanks. OK... Do you understand why I asked what exactly the definition of 'planet' is? I mean, you really could eliminate a bunch from the topic saying that none of these "planets" are inhabitable... even if they exist... you know?I mean, there's no point in doing anything with them because they wouldn't do anything but kill us off. am i right? it kinda goes back to what Drea was saying; about living on different planets and stuff, That's funny..."sappy crap..." It's true though. I understand what you're saying.

good. plus, even if no other planet was habital NOW, doesn't mean it couldn't be made that way with technological ADVANCEMENTS. Have you ever seen the scenario on how they colonize Mars? It is really interesting, they greenhouse it until an atmosphere is built up that supports life. Yes, it would be time consuming, but it would be an advancement. Now, you just have to prove vitality.

I understand that... about the living on the planets later.... but why would bother if there are other advancements that are more necessary for our planet now? oh, by the way, what's a courtesy clerk? lol...

a courtesy clerk is a really souped up term that our company used to refer to grocery store sackers. Actually, i am going to update that. I was a checker for almost 7 months, and am now a chef in the Italian Kitchen. Market Street ROCKS!!!!!!! lol

good thinking, you have to show that the affirmative can't prove that it is VITAL to the advancement of civilization for space exploration to continue. That is the whole point. Showing that the affirmative can't prove there case without a reasonable doubt