Instigator / Con
20
1731
rating
167
debates
73.05%
won
Topic
#3239

Resolved: A space race between China and the U.S. would cause more benefits than harm

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
9
0
Better sources
6
4
Better legibility
3
2
Better conduct
2
2

After 3 votes and with 12 points ahead, the winner is...

Intelligence_06
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
One week
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Pro
8
1546
rating
7
debates
57.14%
won
Description

BoP shared.
Pro: As the title says
Con: A space race between the US and China would cause more harm than benefits(or equal amounts of both)

This is intended to formulate an IRL debate tournament, as a result, semantical K's are discouraged and if I use it feel free to take conduct off of me. You obviously understand what the title means.

For those who do not understand:

Space Race: An international cold(non-frontal) conflict that involves at least two parties competing about either which party has better technology dealing with the zone outside the Earth and its atmosphere(extraterrestrial zone), or which party has better or more control over said extraterrestrial zone, or even both.

China: The nation that currently occupies the land prescribed in this image (https://th.bing.com/th/id/OIP.2otZKzEbx_3ojzENO-pVaAHaFM?pid=ImgDet&rs=1). Taiwan is also counted towards the idea of "China" in this debate.

U.S.: The nation that currently occupies the land prescribed in this image (https://th.bing.com/th/id/OIP.8vpN-OLMeG_Al0-rv6kOpQHaFL?pid=ImgDet&rs=1). Overseas territories, despite not shown explicitly, are also counted towards the idea of "U.S." in this debate.

---------------------

China and the US are not limited to competing over extraterrestrial areas, so what else the space race might bring is also something to bring up in this debate.

US=United States=America=U.S.
China=People's Republic of China

The nations' powers are to be considered initially to be its present form(2021??). Speculation about the future is allowed but is never as authentic as existing statistics.

-->
@Barney

Thanks for voting.

-->
@Intelligence_06

Profoundly sorry for the late response. I've been out of touch for the past week in the remote high country - no internet service, so I've just now realized on my return that I have totally blown this debate. Yes, I zoned out that, as instigator, you were Con. The high majority of debates has Pro as instigator [about 92%], and I just missed it. Even you track the same percentage of Pro instigations, also 92% of all your debates, so it appears to be typical.
No excuse; I blew it. On my next round, having blown away round two because of my trip, I will concede the debate to you.

-->
@949havoc

My tag is red here, yours is green. I am Con, you are not. You have written the whole thing as if I was Pro and you were Con.

I don't know what to say. Maybe thanks for your arguments?

-->
@949havoc

Are you sure you are arguing for Pro?

-->
@Intelligence_06

I look forward to a good, robust debate. It is a really good subject in my book. Best of luck.

-->
@Intelligence_06

Good luck with your debate.

I do advise against the semantic tactic of benefits not being 100% assured (unless you add "definitely" into the resolution). That said, that there are costs in trying to reach whatever space destination, are absolutely assured, and the weight of many of the benefits are somewhat mitigated by uncertainty.

-->
@Intelligence_06

So, [insert something that wasn't said (e.g. a straw man, etc.)]. I know your ways.

-->
@dfss9788

So, going to the moon is not a waste of money.

-->
@Intelligence_06

We choose to build a post office in the challenger deep. We choose to do that and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.

-->
@dfss9788

Considering the pressure withstanding needed to build an office at the bottom of the deepest trench in the entire world, we might as well just not build one. After all, who would go there? Not only that, it would literally promote risk-taking suicidal events, seeing that eventually the bottom of the trench becomes a sort of tourist attraction, the same way Mount Everest is now.

Going to the moon would, on balance, be much more net beneficial than this, which is negative.

-->
@949havoc

Perhaps we should build a post office at the bottom of the Mariana Trench because of all the incidental benefits.

-->
@dfss9788

Then so was your home computer, your cellphone, your tablet, your ipod, earbuds, Bluetooth, all your apps...
In general, rocket tech, miniaturization tech, satellites, global communication network, contemplation of Earth at a distance.
Some other spin-offs:
wireless hand-held power tools
fire protection
nutritional advances and conveniences
medical advances
electronic circuitry miniaturization
science advances
future potential
probably one of the biggest: prevented the cold war going hot

possibilities for going back:
paper-thin solar panel technology - impossible [so far] on Earth, easy on the moon - energy increase on earth by simple trnsmission
moon-based radio astronomy
moon tourism & colonization

cost benefit of going to the moon 50 years ago:
every dollar spent has a return of up to $70 value.

That's just off the top of my head. Not worth it? Maybe not to you

-->
@Barney
@whiteflame
@oromagi
@Sum1hugme
@Nyxified

please

Going to the moon was a waste of money.

-->
@oromagi

What is your take?