Instigator / Con
3
1634
rating
13
debates
80.77%
won
Topic
#1944

Space Exploration Ought to be a Top Priority in the Near-Term

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Winner
3
0

After 3 votes and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...

Jeff_Goldblum
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
One week
Max argument characters
7,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Winner selection
Voting system
Open
Contender / Pro
0
1470
rating
50
debates
40.0%
won
Description

Resolution: Space exploration ought to be considered a top priority for humanity in the near term.

Definitions:

Space exploration - Human activity in space with scientific, exploratory, and/or resource-extraction motivations. I exclude planetary defense (i.e. asteroid defense) from this definition.

Top Priority - This is admittedly a vague term, and in a way I mean it to stand in for "Very Important." For specificity's sake, let's say a "Top Priority" means top 3 most pressing issues. If a prospective opponent wants to loosen this standard, they can haggle with me in the comments.

Near Term - Next 50 years. Hopefully our arguments don't require such a specific number, but there it is.

Round Structure:

R1 Con opening remarks
R1 Pro opening remarks (do not rebuttal Con's R1)

R2 Con rebuttal to Pro R1
R2 Pro rebuttal to Con R1 (do not rebuttal Con R2)

R3 Con rebuttal to Pro R2
R3 Pro rebuttal to Con R2 (do not rebuttal Con R3)

Yeah, its a shame that the mars rover recently had its funding cut a bit.

-->
@Discipulus_Didicit

Thank you, I'm glad another person is interested in this subject.

I will keep your offer in mind.

-->
@Jeff_Goldblum

Yo Jeff, after you are done with this debate if you wish to have a forum discussion or second debate on this topic please tag me. I don't want to go into any details at the moment that would give unfair help to either side in this current debate but would like to discuss this topic.

-->
@Jeff_Goldblum

Oh sorry forgot to read the description. So it is 50 years.

-->
@Jeff_Goldblum

Define how long it is "near term". It could either be a hundred years, or it could be a few days and anything in between. How long is that?