Instigator / Pro

Humans should invest in technology to explore and colonize other planets.


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

Winner & statistics

After not so many votes...

It's a tie!
Publication date
Last updated date
Number of rounds
Time for argument
Two hours
Max argument characters
Voting period
One week
Point system
Winner selection
Voting system
Contender / Con

Rules for the debate:
The order of speakers must not be changed.
Interrupting a speaker is forbidden.
The audience must not participate in the debate.
After the debate, the chairs and audience have five minutes to share their impressions and opinions.
Then the audience vote yes and no for each team on Slid-O.
The team with the majority votes wins.
Round 1 Opening statement:
You will present your arguments during the lesson.
Your dress code, language and content are all academically appropriate.
You have ± 1 minute to present the arguments you have prepared.
Listen to the opposition and make notes of their arguments on your shared team doc. Also suggest how your team can respond.
Round 2 Rebuttals:
Each team member will present only ONE counterargument, along with valid reasoning.
You may pose any reasonable question to the opposition that you felt was not addressed.
Add this to your argument on the debate website, so that your teacher and classmates can review your counter claims.
Round 3 closing statement:
Add any final points or rhetorical questions that you want the audience to consider further. DO NOT introduce any new ideas at this point.

Round 1
Fellow colleagues, ms. renu; this team as today’s affirmative side have structured our case as follows:  
My team and I will be talking about the limitless reasons why we should colonize other planets. 

Space colonization has captured the public imagination. Ever since the 1800s science fiction writers have been speculating about what it would take to reach other worlds. But so far poor mankind has only managed to send a few representatives to the moon, our nearest neighbor in the Solar System. But is all this effort worthwhile? Should we really try to colonize other worlds? 
Reminding everyone that human culture is closely associated with the demise of many large species of animals. By transporting our ecosystem to other worlds we’ll increase the changes of survivability for many other species among plants and animals. We can recreate ancient environments where huge herds of now extinct or near extinct animals can thrive.
Another advantage is ensuring our own survival against stupidity and cosmic accidents. We don’t know when another massive asteroid will hit the Earth and we still don’t have the means of defending the Earth from such a threat. And many people also fear the prospect of nuclear global warfare. It’s unlikely anyone would survive such a war.
So what seems more practical today is the idea of creating space habitats that people, plants, and animals can share. These habitats will orbit the Earth, the Moon, Mars, Venus, and probably other planets. To build such habitats will require only minor advances in technology from where we are today.  And although we have many good reasons to spread out from the Earth, we still don’t yet have the technology to do this. And there are some problems we may never be able to solve if we don’t indulge in improving technology  so let's not forget that it is an essential tool that we cannot avoid or live without.
Thank you! 

To start off on why Humans should not invest in technology to explore and colonize other planets: (Tasnim)
  • Famine is a world wide crisis, with 690 million people starving and 9 million people dying each year. And yet NASA spends 199 million dollars on the space shuttle program and 20 billion dollars on cancelled projects. World hunger takes a minimum of 7 billion dollars and a maximum of 265 to end.
  • Scientific benefits of Space programs are exaggerated. NASA spends over one third of its budgets keeping the ISS and Space Shuttle working. Neither Russia nor China have made any claims that there is a scientific benefit to their missions.
  • It takes a great deal of time to build technology to send to space. The Hubble telescope took about 50 years to be researched,built ,and launched. The amount of time it took to finish this one project to be completed could have been utilized to end world hunger, global warming and many other catastrophes that exist in the world.
 Team, G. (2020, October 19). How Much Would It Cost To End World Hunger? Get The Facts. Learn - GlobalGiving.
The World Counts. (2021, February 6). The World Counts.
Billings, Linda. (2017). Should Humans Colonize Other Planets? No. Theology and Science. 15. 1-12. 10.1080/14746700.2017.1335065. 
Adhamy, A. (2018, August 13). Top 10: Wt are the top 10 most expensive space missions? BBC Science Focus Magazine.
NASA. (2020, April 24). About - Hubble History Timeline.

 Humans should not invest in technology to explore and colonize other planets for many reasons including:  (Layan)
  • Earth is the most hospitable planet. Whether it’s nuclear war or massive global warming, post disaster earth would be way more habitable than Mars. For example, we worry that the oceans on earth will get too polluted or rise up too high, but on Mars the only surface water is frozen in the polar ice caps. 
  • We would be hard pressed to ruin the water on earth so badly that it’s worse than what’s available on Mars, another reason is space funding would be better spent helping people on earth rather than wasted on other planets.  
  • Rather than probing Mars for life, and with individuals constantly in the news for attempts to traverse the globe in rowing boats, hot air balloons and tied to gliders, there are clearly enough ‘boundaries’ on this planet to keep even our keenest explorers happy. 
Ozimek, A. (2017, May 6). Sorry Nerds, But Colonizing Other Planets Is Not A Good Plan. Forbes.
Kennedy, F. (2019, December 19). To Colonize Space Or Not To Colonize: That Is The Question (For All Of Us). Forbes.

Humans should not invest in technology to explore and colonize other planets for many reasons including: (Nardenia) 
  • Space launches can have a hefty carbon footprint due to the burning of solid rocket fuels. Rocket engines release trace gases into the upper atmosphere that contribute to ozone depletion, as well as particles of soot.
  • Global warming is likely to be the greatest threat of the 21st century. The increase of temperatures and the climate disrupts the ecosystems, the melting of ice increasing sea level at a huge rate, and the scarcity of resources and climate change that are changing life habits and migratory cycles of animals. Are few of the many negative effects of Global warming.
  • A microbiologist at The University of Tokyo conducted a study that suggested that microbial life could travel between planets unprotected by rock. Which means if any harmful bacteria were to come back with a rover then we may unleash the next deadly plague. 

Conclusion on why humans should not invest in technology to explore and colonize other planets for many reasons including: (Malak)

 - Humans destroy earth to have a good reason to leave it and move to another planet. Humans have destroyed a tenth of Earth’s remaining wilderness in the last 25 years

- There is sufficient room for exploration here on earth. Almost 95% of the oceans on our planet are not yet discovered. Some research showed that certain types of bacteria use volcanic vents on the ocean floor as sources of energy, a discovery that made many scientists looking for life on Mars reconsider. 

- One of the biggest issues surrounding space exploration is ethical. Some of these issues show that by exploring and trying to colonize other planets, we are messing with yet undiscovered life. Another major ethical issue is how wealthy people can easily buy a ticket and leave our troubled planet behind, and how people who get put out of work here on earth will be left behind. 

Billings, Linda. (2017). Should Humans Colonize Other Planets? No. Theology and Science. 15. 1-12. 10.1080/14746700.2017.1335065. 

Round 2
welcome again, the other team has skillfully explained their points but a certain one struck me, they talked about global warming and how it is likely to be the greatest threat of the 21st century. but that just supports my teams argument. global warning is killing our earth slowly and has reached a point were we cant entirely fix it  we should invest in technology and explore other planets for the betterment of human beings. 
thank you 
Since the 16th century, humans have driven at least 680 vertebrate species to extinction. Human activities that influence the extinction and endangerment of wild species fall into a number of categories, unsustainable hunting and harvesting that cause mortality at rates that exceed recruitment of new individuals, land use practices like deforestation, urban and suburban development, agricultural cultivation, and water management projects that encroach upon and/or destroy natural habitat, intentional or unintentional introduction of destructive diseases, parasites, and predators, ecological damage caused by water, air, and soil pollution. Those are many of the few reasons why animals and plants are going extinct. So why not restrict these activities to stop the extensions of animals. If we keep walking this very dangerous  there may not be any plants or animals to move to mars. 

We should invest in technology to protect our planet from the disastrous actions caused by us humans and other disasters that threaten our home planet. Spending billion on technology to colonize other planets while NASA has found a radiation belt around our planet which prevents us from leaving to other planets is illogical and a waste of money.

I want to oppose what the other team has said about over population . It's true that earth is over populated but this is because earth contains everything we need in order to survive and this makes earth the most habitable planet in the solar system.

 I would like to rebuttal a point a fellow speaker from the opposing team stated. We can not pollute the Earth, moving to other planets has proven difficult and technology to achieve this goal has not been yet developed. We should protect our home planet and try to save it. Instead of throwing all the trash on it based on hopes and dreams that have proven impossible to yet achieve . 

Round 3
Closing speech: 
I want to thank everyone who participated in today's fruitful debate and re stress on the importance of improving our technology and colonizing other planets for the betterment of the human race. So today I will not address you as friends or opponents, today I will speak to you from one human living on this earth to another. I want you all to think about all the damage humans have done to this world, do you think it has the ability to  survive more? The answer should be obvious, and for that i continue to emphasize on the importance of colonizing other planets, thank you!  
So esteemed chair, fellow speakers, and honored audience, what have I told you today? Firstly the large spread of famine around the world that could be ended if the money needed is not spent on projects to explore and colonize space. Secondly the limited scientific benefits of space exploration, and lastly the immense amount of time it takes to build the technology can be utilized to fix many of the greatest struggles faced today. Time is something that we can not take back. So are we willing to spend it paying for rockets instead of saving our people and planet? So this motion must fall.