Before I write my argument, I want my opponent to accept so she can write her opening argument first so I know what I'm up against. By the way, she is my friend, just so you know I ain't cheating.
Should we be "spending" money on space exploration? Well, that is the name of the debate because, according to politicians and scientists, space exploration is significant to them.
But more significant than the development of world economy? I don't believe so. And I think many people would agree. Don't you think it is absurd that people care more about the discoveries of the universe rather than people in third-world countries, who suffer from starvation and dehydration, and sickness, etc.? I shudder to think if you disagreed with me. People who don't even have the necessities to live, children who are dying every single day of the week, while scientists and politicians complain we need to have the luxuries to explore space. It is indeed absurd.
I agree with you, learning is not a waste. But what do you think should be our first priority? What is more significant? Astronomical discoveries, or the welfare of ill, unprovided for people who reside in third-world countries?
The government shouldn't be wasting their time with space exploration as a first priority. Sure, it can be up there on their list, but it shouldn't come first. What should come first is, again, the welfare of people in third-world countries, and also people who require help in ours. They deserve the luxuries that we enjoy. Science can wait.
People in third-world countries can relate plenty to this debate. Why can't they? I agree with you on one point, however, my side is different to yours. I will continue to involve welfare in this debate.
Why should people have to spend their money on astronomical affairs? That in itself is ridiculous. They shouldn't have to waste their money on something that really doesn't matter to them. It should be their choice, but that's another debate.
Global warming? I didn't say stop paying scientists in general. Space isn't, in particular, very significant at this time. Global warming is a big issue, so, yes, use money on that, but not on astronomers who don't really need to use taxpayer's money on something that isn't really important.
If a meteor was heading for the Earth, and the apocalypse was near, everybody would be willing to pay the astronomers. But right now, nothing is necessary. And right now, we don't have to worry. I think the media has echoed too much of a sentiment on global warming.
Economic development is indeed important. I debated someone on that very topic, actually. It is more a significant issue right now than astronomy. Let the astronomers wait. It shouldnt be our top priority. That's the bottom line.
To deserve the treatment they've been given? Hardly any 3rd class people HAVE been given treatment, let alone they have to sure they're limited supply with hundreds of people after being given it. Also, what have they done to deserve this treatment? They have had to suffer, and we, in our 1st class nations can only choose to ignore them. That is unfair, unjust, and immoral.
No, you have misunderstood me. Astronomers obviously care, but do we? Why on Earth do they have to use taxpayer's money to investigate the origin of the universe? I'm sure if it were put on hiatus it wouldn't hurt.
Again, a misunderstanding. They wouldn't have to wait all that long. A certain amount of funds should go the astronomy, but why does it have to be our first priority? To save our lucky asses from certain death while a dictatorship government can't be bothered to save their own citizens? I mean, who are we to say that they don't deserve the same?
Plus, what are the chances that we'll have created hundreds of spacecraft to fly to another planet? I'm sure, even if all money went to astronomy, it would take more then the time it would take for an asteroid to impact Earth.
"Astronomy's just one subject" - exactly my point. For all the people who will actually read this before voting, do we really want to spend all our money on something that isn't remotely important to us. If you weren't an evil dictator, I'm sure you would much rather use your money for a better cause.
Your first statement put me on edge. How on Earth can you criticise people who are worse off than you. Put yourself in their shoes, if it's possible. They would probably be excluded from a space-trip to another planet to save humanity, because apparently "they haven't done anything". But the important people, including to astronomers, would be allowed to ship themselves to a distant area of space and be praised for saving less than three quarters of humanity? Astronomy can wait, I assure you. Why do you pride yourself on supporting a system where people's money is taken to be used for ridiculous astronomical matters, which just creates a worse financial crisis? You have hit a dead end here.
Where are we safe from danger? Right now, we are safe. The world isn't crippling beneath our feet. It is just an overreaction. What evidence do you have that a meteor/asteroid is heading for Earth, anyway?
As for children and their dreams, what stops them from becoming an astronomer? If it is truly their ambition, they should stop at nothing to pursue that dream. Besides, in the future, we would just have more things to worry about, so why do you say astronomers shouldn't wait when really, (and I know you'd agree with me), the waiting period would get them to pursue another job, which could help society in a more significant way. Astronomers are clever people. They would have more than one profession. Things are just getting worse, yes, and by that I don't mean outside Earth's atmosphere.
"The 3rd class are already being treated with food, clothes, shelter and they are already starting to get a better education."
What evidence do you have of that? In some nations, work has been started, but many of the 53 nations in Africa and also some in Europe and Asia are left untreated. I don't expect them to be "instantly cured". When did I imply that? "Saying I don't care about these people is completely out of it. I haven't specifically said I hate them or anything of the like." (Notice the "specifically"). "I'm just trying to arguing my case here". And what is that case? Is it that astronomy is more important than dying humans? Because that is definitely not true. That is out of the question.
"And even if the astronomy is put on a hiatus. The people who have studied this have a lot of harm done, it could affect them mentally and maybe physically." There is a possibility, but a small one at that. They are scientists, for god's sake! If they weren't willing to work for another division they shouldn't have to be payed sabbaticals out of taxpayer's money.
"They haven't done anything isn't to be taken into literal meaning. They haven't even tried taking up a job which can help them survive independently." Have you recently heard of a job offer in one of those places. By the looks of it, you have meant it quite literally. They have to survive. That is they're job. And it is all-hours, everyday of the week. The pay: nothing. We live, they survive.
"So the astronomers provide their field of knowledge about space to the mechanics and with enough funds, which is a lot so people should be putting this in 1st priority, they can build many transportation to and fro, even for the 3rd class." The mechanics? It's too little, too late. Besides, do you think astronomers run the 3rd world governments? No. And why do you think dictators would be so kind as to save them? "And plus, it's not even them paying." You definitely DO have something against the 3rd class. They don't have the money to pay! Where would they get it from? Getting a job? That's not really possible, and even if it was, they would probably be payed peanuts.
What evidence do I have there isn't an asteroid heading for the Earth? That wasn't my question. I was asking you if there was any evidence it was. If there is, I would like to see it.
Why are you singling out Asians only? That is a very racist comment. There are many other nations that have people who excel at astronomy. Not every single Chinese person wants to commit themselves to astronomy. Where did you get that statistic from?
"It helps to build a longer civilisation." Really? Or is this this a hypothetical dramatisation? Again, I would like to see your evidence of an asteroid. If there is none, the civilisation will be as "long" as is possible. Is it fair to say otherwise without any reasonable evidence? No.
Why hasn't my opponent rebutted my arguments? Has she concluded the debate?
Often, my debates never seem to have opponents who are fully committed. Other times, however, it is possible to enjoy the debate.
This isn't one of them. My opponent has failed to respond, yet she is winning 5 to 1, and now, the voting is at a standstill, even though it can still be seen on the "newest" debate list.
Perhaps I am impatient, or perhaps I am right. Please respond.
It stuns me that my opponent has 7 votes while I have 1, yet she STILL hasn't rebutted my latest real arguments.
This is immoral. I can indeed take a loss, but I will only take it if it is justified and fair. And this simply isn't fair. This debate cannot really be classed as over, my opponent has failed to rebut and is definitely not fully committed.
People are not reading the arguments and this has become a poll.
It has to stop.