Instigator / Con
4
1518
rating
15
debates
40.0%
won
Topic
#3271

(Context in the description) We should accept Elon Musk's offer to colonize Mars.

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
3
Better sources
2
2
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
1
1

After 1 vote and with 3 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
10,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Pro
7
1731
rating
167
debates
73.05%
won
Description

CONTEXT:
You are the UN (United Nations) and Elon Musk makes an offer to us to colonize Mars. If you accept, the first colony on Mars will be a private one.
Motion: We should accept Elon Musk's offer to colonize Mars.

(Motion taken from the World Scholars Cup Regional Round, Dubai-1. I think it's a really debatable topic.)

I mean, I would prefer it if NASA is the one doing the colony thing, but I think if it is handed to Musk, then it would still turn out OK.

-->
@Barney

Thanks for voting. I understand the reasoning behind your vote. Looking back, I didn't really focus on the argument that well. I'll practice and try to get better.

I'll try to vote on this one.

-->
@ComputerNerd

I don't have the time or the energy to do a formal debate. Sorry.

-->
@TheUnderdog

Take your facts, put them in a debate, and get out of my comments.

-->
@Intelligence_06

"A long-term Antarctica city will kill millions of people due to flood because of ice caps melting. Unless it is a colony large enough to house the entirety of a large country, the costs outweighs the benefits."

Antarctica isn't melting that much, especially near the south pole. The record high for the south pole isn't even at 0 degrees Celsius.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_ice_sheet states Antartica has 26.5 million(26500000) cubic kilometers of ice and(https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/20100108_Is_Antarctica_Melting.html) states Antarctica is only losing 100 cubic kilometers of ice per year since 2002. This means at the current rate ice is melting in Antartica, it would take 265000 years to melt all of the ice. If Ice was melting 10x as quickly, it would take about 26500 years to melt all the ice.

"The running of NYC saves much many more people than kills, based on the structures. Capital child workers not counted."

How? And if it does, how is some 10 million person city in Antartica any different?

"The running of NYC saves much many more people than kills, based on the structures. Capital child workers not counted."

There are buildings in Antarctica that have adapted to rising snow levels.

"Unless you are building on the edge, in that case, it is just a very cold windy city, which still isn't desirable."

There are people who like the cold that would be fine with living there.

Antartica is more habitable than mars is, so I'd rather send people to Antartica to colonize than to Mars.

-->
@Intelligence_06

Sorry if I seemed snarky. I completely respect the effort you and all the other debaters on this site put into your debates and I see you all as worthy opponents. Please, take all the time you need! I understand exams can be tough, and I don't want you drifting away from your real life duties.

-->
@ComputerNerd

I am a HS student with 4 AP's at the end of the term and a monthly exam tomorrow yet I am willing to sit hours in front of the computer to type an argument. That is all that I can say.

Also, sorry for not putting enough efforts in to the last round. I was preparing other things at the night when I wrote the argument.

After writing my 2nd argument, I'm feeling really tired. How'd I do?

-->
@TheUnderdog

Keep in mind in some places, icecaps are KILOMETERS thick, so by building, the melting of the ground would be devastating.

Unless you are building on the edge, in that case, it is just a very cold windy city, which still isn't desirable. To make the conditions desirable, ice must melt at a consistent rate and that would be absolutely devastating to the climate or the sea level.

For the rest of the world, I think Mars is better. At least all it takes is just making all the people a little bit poorer, but not making the people hot or flooded.

-->
@TheUnderdog

Many cities are coastal. A long-term Antarctica city will kill millions of people due to flood because of ice caps melting. Unless it is a colony large enough to house the entirety of a large country, the costs outweighs the benefits.

The running of NYC saves much many more people than kills, based on the structures. Capital child workers not counted.

"How would some 10 million-person city on the south pole lead to Antartic ice caps melting?"
pollution.......................

"nobody is saying that because NYC pollutes a lot, that means that NYC shouldn't exist."
yea...... that would be stupid

-->
@Intelligence_06

How would some 10 million person city on the south pole lead to Antartic ice caps melting? I mean, nobody is saying that because NYC pollutes a lot, that means that NYC shouldn't exist.

Moreover, Antartica is very windy, so it's possible that wind power can power any city we put on the continent.

-->
@BigPimpDaddy

To better prepare us for colonizing Mars. If we are to be colonizing this cold planet, it makes sense to get people acclimated to the extreme cold first.

-->
@TheUnderdog
@BigPimpDaddy

Well, we should NOT, because the urbanization of antarctica would lead to the melting of ice caps, which is a bad thing.

-->
@TheUnderdog

why would we colonize colonizing anarctica?

We should colonize Antarctica before Mars. It would be easier as Antarctica is more habitable.

Washington Post link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/being-rich-wrecks-your-soul-we-used-to-know-that/2017/07/28/7d3e2b90-5ab3-11e7-9fc6-c7ef4bc58d13_story.html

-->
@Intelligence_06

Thanks for accepting. I'll have an argument in a few hours.

-->
@Intelligence_06

A way to view it is like a company,
"A privately held company or private company is a company which does not offer or trade its company stock to the general public on the stock market exchanges, but rather the company's stock is offered, owned and traded or exchanged privately or over-the-counter."
-Wikipedia
My reasoning is that the colony can only be accessed by trusted officials of Elon Musk or anyone he allows in.

How “private” is it? Is it only open to americans or what?

-->
@Barney

Understandable. People retire because they have had enough, and you have been such a prime part of this community, I'd understand you getting tired.

-->
@ComputerNerd

Good luck on this debate. It's the first time in awhile I've been genuinely tempted to accept one; but I have to remind myself that I retired for good reasons, and this is going to be a busy few weeks for me with work.

If anyone wants to debate, say so in the comments and I'll choose one person. The reason I'm doing this is to filter out novice/bad debaters.