Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
2011
1
Neg Handbook
Articles by:
Jim Hanson and Aaron Hardy
West Coast
2011
2
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
3
Neg Handbook
Table Of Contents
Table Of Contents ..........................................................................................................................................................3
Arguing Negative On The Space Topic ...........................................................................................................................9
Topicality .....................................................................................................................................................................12
The...........................................................................................................................................................................13
United States ...........................................................................................................................................................14
Federal Government ...............................................................................................................................................15
Should .....................................................................................................................................................................16
Substantially ............................................................................................................................................................17
Increase ...................................................................................................................................................................18
Its .............................................................................................................................................................................19
Exploration And/Or Development Of ......................................................................................................................20
Space Beyond The ...................................................................................................................................................22
Earths Mesosphere ................................................................................................................................................23
China Cooperation Neg................................................................................................................................................24
1NC Technology Transfer DA 1/2 ............................................................................................................................25
1NC Technology Transfer DA 2/2 ............................................................................................................................26
Technology Transfer DA Uniqueness ...................................................................................................................27
Technology Transfer Impact US-China War..........................................................................................................28
Technology Transfer Scenario Military Modernization ........................................................................................29
Technology Transfer Scenario Proliferation .........................................................................................................30
1NC US-Japan Relations DA 1/2 ..............................................................................................................................31
1NC US-Japan Relations DA 2/2 ..............................................................................................................................32
1NC US-Indian Relations DA ....................................................................................................................................33
1NC Topicality Its .................................................................................................................................................34
Politics DA Link The Plan Hurts the Agenda .........................................................................................................35
Politics DA Link Congress Will Backlash at the Plan .............................................................................................36
Inherency US-China Cooperation Now .................................................................................................................37
AT: Relations Advantage The Plan Isnt Key to Relations .....................................................................................38
AT: Relations Advantage Other Issues Outweigh Relations .................................................................................39
AT: Relations Advantage Negotiations Impossible ...............................................................................................40
AT: Exploration Advantage ......................................................................................................................................41
Lunar Colony Neg.........................................................................................................................................................42
A Presidential Directive Solves ................................................................................................................................43
International Cooperation Is A Better Approach ....................................................................................................44
International Cooperation Is A Better Approach ....................................................................................................45
The Risk Of Backcontamination Is Low....................................................................................................................46
Claims Of A Moon Race Are Overblown ..................................................................................................................47
Claims Of A Moon Race Are Overblown ..................................................................................................................48
STEM Workers Will Not Rush For The Moon ..........................................................................................................49
A Lunar Base Fuels Militarization ............................................................................................................................50
Lunar-Based Astronomy Benefits Are Exaggerated ................................................................................................51
Economic Motives Will Be Counter-Productive ......................................................................................................52
A Moon Base Is Too Expensive ................................................................................................................................53
A Moon Base Is An Unnecessary Failure .................................................................................................................54
A Moon Base Is An Unnecessary Failure .................................................................................................................55
West Coast
2011
4
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
5
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
6
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
7
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
8
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
9
Neg Handbook
Current plans for space exploration and development are adequate the Obama administration
is refocusing efforts on making US space policy more efficient, better driven by the private sector, and
encouraging a focus on science. The negative could also argue that other countries will ensure solving
the affirmative harms in the future, for example by colonizing space.
Focusing on space is the wrong focus there are many problems with Earth, and time and
resources devoted to space exploration may not pay off for hundreds of years, if at all. There is not
necessarily anything pressing about science experiments performed in zero gravity.
Be prepared to really go after the solvency of affirmative plans. Remember, the topic only allows
affirmatives to increase exploration or development not guarantee that the results of that exploration
will be productive. The affirmative must defend that their plan will actually work or succeed at reducing
the harms. To win that they solve many of the largest impacts, this will require the affirmative to win
that many new technologies are developed, that the economics will work out in favor of their program,
and that it is even possible to do things no human being has ever done before (such as land on Mars). If
any of these programs were simple or guaranteed, we likely would have done them by now. This also
means that many of the problems with current space policy are also potential solvency attacks against
affirmative plans. Failed past projects and things which reputable scientists have failed to support as too
pie-in-the-sky are just two examples of the types of evidence you can use to support your solvency
arguments. Remember, you should both show why the affirmative proposal wont work and why it will
make things worse. This will make your solvency arguments as strong as possible.
As the year progresses, new affirmatives will emerge and you will need to research and strategize to
defeat them. Use the arguments presented here to jumpstart your research. Against any new
affirmative, be sure to defend the status quo, attack the significance of the affirmatives harms, and
attack the affirmatives solvency. This strategy is sure to put you in a good position to win a debate over
the affirmatives case.
West Coast
2011
10
Neg Handbook
Disadvantages
Here are disadvantages you and others might prepare against increasing space exploration:
Politics disadvantage: The plan could be argued to either help or hurt Obamas political agenda.
Space policies are frequently unpopular because they are perceived as too expensive, or irrelevant to
most peoples lives. On the other hand, space programs can be very popular when they successfully
inspire the imagination of a large section of the populace (as did the Apollo program in the 60s). Passing
popular or unpopular programs could give President Obama increased or decreased ability to pursue
other, potentially harmful policies.
Spending disadvantage: Almost all forms of space exploration or development are extremely
costly. The time, expertise, and technological sophistication required to launch even the smallest
satellite can run into the millions of dollars. The US is already running huge fiscal deficits and spending
a great deal of money which the US doesnt currently have could have negative effects on the US
economy.
Relations disadvantage: Since many other countries also have space programs, the US does not
operate in a vacuum when deciding how to explore space. Other countries might view US attempts at
space development as encroaching on their own space programs, or view them as US attempts to
hostilely control outer space. This could create the conditions for misunderstanding and conflict.
Militarization disadvantage: While the United States currently makes use of space for military
purposes, such as spy satellites and GPS, the US does not base any permanent weapons or defense
systems there. The affirmative, by increasing exploration, could lead to a greater acceptance of US
activities in space, or inadvertently develop technologies that could be used for ill by the US. This might
spark an arms race in space, or wars that could use even more devastating weapons than nuclear
bombs.
Counterplans
Here are counterplans on the Space topic:
Private Sector counterplan: instead of involving the government in space exploration and
development, this counterplan carries out the mandates of the affirmative via the private sector. This
could take the form of government provided incentives, or just fiat that another actor do the plan. This
counterplan has the benefit of avoiding politics and spending disadvantages by involving the
government, and might argue that private companies would be better equipped to explore space.
West Coast
2011
11
Neg Handbook
Military counterplan: This counterplan argues that instead of involving any of the elected
branches in the plan, the military should use its own space expertise (garnered through the
development of military technology) to explore or develop space. This would avoid any disadvantage to
having Congress or the President act on their own.
Advantage counterplans: since so many affirmatives on the topic share the same goals
exploring and colonizing space, for example, there will be many affirmative ideas which could be re-used
as counterplans when debating a different case. For example, against a case which built a human
settlement on the Moon, the negative might read a counterplan to build a base on Mars instead, and
argue that a Moon base would be detrimental.
Plan-inclusive counterplans: this is an entire category of counterplans, rather than one specific
plan. These counterplans advocate part of the affirmative plan, while excluding the rest and claiming the
benefit of excluding the parts of the plan that link to disadvantages. For example, a plan-inclusive
counterplan against an affirmative which cooperated with India and China on the International Space
Station might exclude cooperating with India, and argue that US-India relations are bad because they
come at the cost of US-Pakistan relations.
Kritiks
What kinds of kritiks may be run on this years topic? Here goes:
Security kritik: this kritik argues that affirmative plans which attempt to avoid security impacts
such as wars by exploring space and trying to change how we view the earth are just contributing to a
cycle of insecurity through threat construction. This might extend to criticizing representations of
conflicts or security concerns. The kritik rejects this way of describing the world and says we should
instead use more positive representations or discourse.
Militarism kritik: This kritik argues that even though the affirmative ostensibly expands space
exploration for benign reasons, that it actually boosts the power of the military-industrial complex which
has been integral to the development of all US space policy. It argues that only a totalizing rejection of
the entire US military-industrial complex can address the root cause of militarism and prevent the US
from enacting violence as it expands out into the cosmos. The kritik rejects a militaristic way of viewing
the universe.
Capitalism kritik: this kritik argues that the root cause of problems on Earth is the existence of
capitalism. It argues that policy proposals which attempt to explore space without dealing with the core
problem on Earth will simply result in replicated the problems of Capitalism on a galactic scale, and that
the only way to truly solve is to reject the whole capitalist system.
Frontier kritik There will likely be specific critiques of the way we frame space as a new
frontier to explore and conquer. This kritik will argue that all past frontiers, such as the American
West, have come at the cost of massive violence and a negative way of viewing the world. They will
argue that only a rejection of this frontier mentality can prevent the root causes of violence.
Disposability kritik This kritik will argue that attempting to solve problems on Earth by moving
to a different planet or solar system will encourage us to treat the Earth as disposable. It will argue
that viewing the Earth as replaceable by space will just ensure that we always exploit resources at our
disposal, ensuring the long-term collapse of human civilization. Only learning to value Earth first can
solve.
West Coast
2011
12
Neg Handbook
Topicality
West Coast
2011
13
Neg Handbook
The
The Means Unique
Merriam-webster's online collegiate dictionary, 2007.
Accessed May 10, 2007, http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary
b -- used as a function word to indicate that a following noun or noun equivalent is a unique or a
particular member of its class <the President> <the Lord>
West Coast
2011
14
Neg Handbook
United States
The united states is the executive, legislative, and judicial branches
Princeton university wordnet 1997,
Online, accessed May 15, 2007, http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=united%20states
united states: 2: the executive and legislative and judicial branches of the federal government of the US
The united states is the 48 states plus hawaii, alaska and d.c.
The oxford encyclopedic english dictionary, 1991.
United States of America: a country occupying most of the southern half of North America and including
also Alaska in the north and Hawaii in the Pacific Ocean, comprising 50 States and the Federal District of
Columbia.
West Coast
2011
15
Neg Handbook
Federal Government
Federal government is administered by a union or confederation of states
Blacks law dictionary. 1979,
Black, Henry Campbell. p. 550
Federal Government: The system of government administered in a nation formed by the union or
confederation of several independent states.
West Coast
2011
16
Neg Handbook
Should
Should expresses obligation or desirability
Webster's new world dictionary, 3rd edition, 1988.
p.1242.
used to express obligation or duty, propriety, or desirability.
West Coast
2011
17
Neg Handbook
Substantially
Substantial means large
Oxford english dictionary, 2nd ed, 1989.
[substantial:] Of ample or considerable amount, quantity, or dimensions. More recently also in a
somewhat weakened sense, esp. fairly large.
West Coast
2011
18
Neg Handbook
Increase
Increase means to make greater
Random House, 2010, Increase, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/increase
verb (used with object) 1. to make greater, as in number, size, strength, or quality; augment; add to:
to increase taxes.
Make greater
Collins English Dictionary, 2009, increase, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/increase
vb 1.
West Coast
2011
19
Neg Handbook
Its
Its is the possessive form of the pronoun it
Random House Webster's College Dictionary (1991)
Its: the possessive form of IT (used as an attribute adjective) The book has lost its jacket. I'm sorry about
its being so late.
West Coast
2011
20
Neg Handbook
it
appears advisable to design an experimental program for the development of space solar power
in concert with the further human exploration of the Moon and Mars, just in case there are no other viable solutions to the problem expected
increase drastically due to dwindling reserves. Furthermore, human space flight is expected to continue during the next century exploring and developing of space resources. Thus,
for the second half of the next century and thereafter. Its technical feasibility and economic viability must be periodically analysed. - Past experience has demonstrated that it requires several
Of is a preposition
Dictionary.Com, 2011, of, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/of
preposition 1. (used to indicate distance or direction from, separation, deprivation, etc.): within a mile
of the church; south of Omaha; to be robbed of one's money. 2. (used to indicate derivation, origin, or
West Coast
2011
21
Neg Handbook
source): a man of good family; the plays of Shakespeare; a piece of cake. 3. (used to indicate cause,
motive, occasion, or reason): to die of hunger.
West Coast
2011
22
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
23
Neg Handbook
Earths Mesosphere
Earth is the planet, yo
Collins Dictionary, 2003, earth, http://www.thefreedictionary.com/earth
1. (Astronomy) (sometimes capital) the third planet from the sun, the only planet on which life is
known to exist. It is not quite spherical, being flattened at the poles, and consists of three geological
zones, the core, mantle, and thin outer crust. The surface, covered with large areas of water, is
enveloped by an atmosphere principally of nitrogen (78 per cent), oxygen (21 per cent), and some water
vapour. The age is estimated at over four thousand million years. Distance from sun: 149.6 million km;
equatorial diameter: 12 756 km; mass: 5.976 1024 kg; sidereal period of axial rotation: 23 hours 56
minutes 4 seconds; sidereal period of revolution about sun: 365.256 days Related adjs terrestrial,
tellurian, telluric, terrene
West Coast
2011
24
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
25
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
26
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
27
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
28
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
29
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
30
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
31
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
32
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
33
Neg Handbook
not to suggest that there is a space race underway, but it would be hard to deny
that the major Asian powers are each watching the others carefully (or, more accurately, that China
is being watched carefully by its neighbors). That space is a major potential arena for competition
among these states is highlighted by the Joint Declaration on Security Cooperation Between Japan and India, initialed by the
Japanese and Indian Prime Ministers on October 22, 2008 in Tokyo. The final mechanism of cooperation listed in the agreement was for
cooperation between the two nations space programs. Cooperation will be conducted between the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency
China through India. 39 US space cooperation with China might allay such concerns and signal that the US is not seeking to counter China
It might, however, be seen as double-dealing by the Indian government, which has its own
concerns about China stemming to at least the 1962 Sino-Indian War.
through India.
India's continuing involvement in Afghanistan is essential to that country's stabilization and long-term
success, and cooperation between the United States and India in Afghanistan has been close and
encouraging.
West Coast
2011
34
Neg Handbook
Violation The plan increases US-Chinese joint exploration, it doesnt belong to the
United States and the United States doesnt own the project.
Standards
a) Ground explosion allowing exploration by multiple actors leads to an infinite
number of permutations of actors. The plan could include every country, any number
of businesses or non-government organization. This makes it impossible for the
negative to prepare.
b) Grammar Only our interpretation has a precise meaning of its. Mooting any
word in the resolution dramatically changes the meaning.
c) Err Negative The affirmative speaks first and last, chooses the topic and has nearly
infinite preparation. Allowing the affirmative to run to the margins of the topic stacks
the deck too far in their favor.
Topicality is a jurisdictional voting issue. Evaluate based on competing interpretations
because reasonability is arbitrary and based on subjective judge beliefs.
West Coast
2011
35
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
36
Neg Handbook
Congress will backlash at any attempt for bilateral US-China space cooperation
William Martel, Professor of National Security and Toshi Yoshihara, Fellow @ Institute for Foreign
Policy Analysis, 2003, Averting a Sino-US Space Race, The Washington Quarterly, pg. 30
Meanwhile, a poisonous atmosphere of distrust continues to prevail as a result of allegations in the
past decade that Chinese espionage and illegal transfers of U.S. space technologies strengthened
Chinas military space program. For example, in the mid-1990s, after a series of launch failures, China
turned to Loral Systems, a U.S. satellite firm, for technical assistance. Subsequent investigations
revealed that Loral had released sensitive technical data to the Chinese that may have helped the PRC
improve its missile guidance capabilities. In 1999 a U.S. congressional investigation chaired by
Representative Christopher Cox (R-Calif.) concluded that the performance of Chinas launchers improved
as a result of those transfers. In another case, the Department of State recently charged that In the
1990s, the Boeing Company and Hughes Electronics Corporation violated up to 123 export restrictions
related to the transfer of missile and satellite data to China. As a result of these events, lingering
suspicions on Capitol Hill will impede efforts to spearhead bilateral cooperation in space and could
provoke a congressional backlash against attempts to try.
West Coast
2011
37
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
38
Neg Handbook
China wont get on board for exploration cooperation if they do, the next
administration will roll back the agreement
Taylor Dinerman, author and journalist based in New York City, 11-30-2009, Just how soft is NASAs
soft power going to be?, The Space Review, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1519/1
Atmospherics, however, are also important. If the US is seen as meekly asking the rest of the world to
please support the goals and ambitions of the exploration program, it will be treated with contempt.
This will not only make it exceptionally difficult to come up with acceptable international agreements,
but it will almost certainly ensure that the next Congress or the next administration will seek to
overturn any unfair, unequal, or humiliating deals made by the current leadership.
International space cooperation makes the US look weak undercuts any soft power
benefits
Taylor Dinerman, author and journalist based in New York City, 11-30-2009, Just how soft is NASAs
soft power going to be?, The Space Review, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1519/1
On the other hand, we know that the Obama Administration and Congress are chock-a-block full of
motivations, many of them contradictory or confused, but all of them expressed with passion. There are
political motivations: after all, Florida, Texas, and California are all big voter-rich states. There are
questions of prestige and international power. There are industrial, scientific, and technological
reasons why leaders in Washington think that this is important. There is a strong desire on the part of
both parties to use NASAs accomplishments as a way to inspire kids to study science and engineering. In
all of NASAs programs, ever since the Eisenhower days, there has been an element of soft power.
Some administrations have used it more effectively than others, but it has always been there. Yet this
kind of power is only a tool, not a goal in itself. If the US presents itself as too eager for partnership
agreements or too weak to explore the solar system without assistance, then the world and the
American people will only see softness.
West Coast
2011
39
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
40
Neg Handbook
Different tactics and no foundation for negotiations ensure that the plan fails
Dean Cheng, PhD, Senior Analyst for the Navy, 12-2009, Space and Defense: Reflections on Sino-US
Space Cooperation, Eisenhower Center for Space and Defense Studies, Vol. No. 3
In particular, the absence of a legacy of interactions goes to the heart of the Chinese approach to
negotiations. President Richard Nixons visit to China in 1972 and the subsequent establishment of
diplomatic relations in 1979, for example, was the culmination of nearly twenty years of meetings in
Geneva and Warsaw. 20 From the Chinese perspective, these *Ambassadorial+ Talks and the events
leading to the Talks established the boundaries within which the ultimate solutions were found. Like
building a stone house, a solid foundation for the relationship had to be laid, if the relationship was to
endure. 21 The absence of such a foundation means that any effort to foster cooperation in space
arena, which touches on sensitive issues of national capabilities as well as being potentially highly
technical, will also have to reconcile very different approaches to the process of negotiation.
West Coast
2011
41
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
42
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
43
Neg Handbook
In brief, we would see Moon pioneers working and studying to create an extraordinarily fundamental
shift in civilization: they would be seeking to fashion a novel and growing Moon society and to see it
incorporated, along with the one on Earth, into one united world societya two-body, Earth and
Moon, world society. In time, the people on Earth and the Moon would be living together in the only
living civilization in the Universea civilization that would be starting to learn how to expand,
successfully, outwards throughout the Solar System. Indeed, this would become the fundamental
raison detre for the conduct of the presidentially envisioned scientific space exploration program.
The how? of returning to the Moon partially determines the why? For example, if the timeline is too
long, the budget too large, the end goal too amorphous, and the whole project is run by the usual
suspects in the usual way, the end result will be an uninspiring, over-budget dead end like the
International Space Station (ISS). To make a Return to the Moon permanent, inspiring, economical and
beneficial to the taxpayers who pay for it all, we must do certain things: First, we must ignore the
whining of those who say they need a lot more money and time. We went from a standing start to
standing on the Moon in under ten yearsforty years ago! Keep in mind, when Kennedy asked the
NASA of that time if it could be done, they told him no, and then they went and did it when ordered
to.
On February 13, 2009, President Obama released his first National Security Directive. Titled
Presidential Policy Directive -1, it greatly expands the power of the National Security Council (NSC) to
oversee all executive departments and agencies. The Directive introduces new members into top level
NSC meetings including the Energy Secretary and the U.S. representative to the United Nations. Most
significant is that Obamas National Security Advisor, General James Jones (ret.), was given direct
authority to develop and implement policy throughout the NSC system. Under previous Presidential
administrations, a number of interagency committees were not chaired or controlled by the NSC.
Under Obama, according to one Foreign Policy analyst, the NSC chairs everything, though some
committees can and will be cochaired. Prior to his current appointment, General Jones was involved in
a secretive Boeing Corporation effort to declassify antigravity technology for commercial application.
Boeings declassification efforts were denied. Obamas Directive now gives General Jones a second
opportunity to have antigravity technology declassified for commercial development.
West Coast
2011
44
Neg Handbook
If the US had gone ahead and built a similar base other nations would, naturally, have expressed similar
fears about it. This may be why a few experts believe that a good future model for lunar governance would be the Antarctic Treaty, which
has kept the peace on that continent for more than half a century. All the worlds major power and almost all the regional
states have research stations there that perform valuable scientific work and also, with military
logistical support, keep a close watch on each other to insure that no one is building an effective
warfighting base.
near the lunar South Pole that are under consideration by NASA, such as
the rim of Shackleton crater and the plateau at the top of Malepert Mountain, would also seem appropriate for the lunar
facility. Given this head start, the cost of adapting the base to accommodate the survival sanctuary
would be greatly reduced. In addition, the governments of some developing nations also now have lunar
ambitions and would perhaps share the costs. In the past governments have not been reliable in sustaining long-term
projects, however, and the overall management of the purpose of securing the future of our species might
better be placed with a private, international organization supported by private philanthropy. Our
current prosperity (in comparison to the state of humanity through most of its history) is built upon the achievements of
technology. The preservation of this foundation of knowledge must surely rank near the top of causes to be supported, particularly by
individuals and corporations whose wealth has come from its applications. If presented appropriately, the preservation of our
civilization and species may be seen as the most worthy of all philanthropic purposes. A gift providing
even a small fraction of the ultimate cost would be enough to set the project in motion. Initial efforts could
concentrate on archiving, constructing an organizational infrastructure and designing an appropriate facility. Above all, an educational effort to
bring the project into public awareness would be needed, as an understanding of its goals and participation at the community level in placing
the repositories is essential. As
funds accumulated over the years, the more massive task of construction could
get underway.
West Coast
2011
45
Neg Handbook
Recent press releases seem to indicate that international interest in cooperating with NASA on
returning humans to the Moon does not exist. Some, such as the British, have clearly indicated they have
other plans. Based on statements made by NASA it would appear that in order for the initiative to
return to the Moon to be successful, international cooperation will be required. A meeting has been announced in the
spring to explore the interests of the international space community in joining the Vision. How many nations may sign up is problematic, with good reason, considering how the ISS
international partners have been treated in the past. Meanwhile, some are leapfrogging ahead to send missions to Mars, the indisputable scientific prize. ESAs ExoMars rover will be able to
The inclusion of two US Instruments on this spacecraft has provided further fillip to Indo-US
cooperation in the space arena. India, along with seven other countries, has signed a landmark
agreement with the United States (NASA) to carry out lunar exploration . The agreement was signed at American
space agency NASA's Ames Research Centre on July 28, 2008.
West Coast
2011
46
Neg Handbook
NASA requires that planetary protection procedures involving sterile items and sample processing
must be conducted in Class 100 clean rooms, as defined by federal standard (equivalent to ISO Class 5). Such clean rooms
feature laminar-air-flow systems to filter out contaminants; these systems work by keeping the air within a space moving in one direction along
parallel flow lines at a uniform velocity through very fine filters. Planetary
ambient air pressure to prevent microbiological recontamination. Air must flow from inside a pressurized microbial barrier toward the outside.
A barrier operating at ambient air pressure employs filters to protect against microbiological recontamination. These ambient filter systems
must be capable of retaining 99.97 percent of all particles or organisms greater than 3 10^ -7 ^ meter in size.
West Coast
2011
47
Neg Handbook
The moon race is a myth. high attention to lunar activity does not mean space race
Dwayne A. Day, Staff Writer, November 12, 2007, Exploding Moon myths: or why theres no race to our
nearest neighbor, The Space Review, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/999/1
Assuming that the Japanese and Chinese spacecraft are still operating a year from now, lunar orbit is
going to get pretty crowded. This confuses the press, who look for big picture explanations for all this interest. Here are
the myths deconstructed. This is the most common myth about all the new lunar activity. Thats not surprising
considering that its the easiest explanation and the one that reporters are most familiar withthey think that they understand space races. All
that activity must be due to competition, right? It
While pressures for enclosure of the moon and the privatization of its resources are likely to
increase in the coming decadesat least until more specific management structures are developed and implementedthere
are reasonable grounds for believing that cooperative efforts may eventually succeed. The combined
effects of economic globalization, modern communications, increasing lunar mission transparency, and
the recent internationalization of large space activities (such as the International Space Station), should help facilitate these trends. Broader
international trends toward the adoption of rule-based behavior (such as in the World Trade Organization) and negotiated
approaches
to conflict resolution support institutionally based outcomes on the moon. Thus, while historys
lessons in regard to international cooperation on the moon may be pessimistic, specific differences
in the factors surrounding lunar settlement offer reasons to believe that the negative experience on
certain past frontiers may be avoided.
West Coast
2011
48
Neg Handbook
of these countries are Asian, leading many in the press to talk about an Asian space
race, even if they have no data to back it up. There is no Asian space race, and just because three
Asian countries are sending missions to the Moon does not mean that they are racing each other
there. Japan first launched a lunar mission in 1990. That mission had a string of bad luck. An Earth-orbiting satellite named
Hiten deployed a small spacecraft named Hagoromo, which failed to reach lunar orbit. The Japanese then sent Hiten on a slow trip to the
Moon, but it lacked sophisticated instruments or an imager, and has been largely forgotten. Throughout the 1990s the Japanese space agency
worked on a more sophisticated follow-on spacecraft called Lunar-A, which suffered from numerous managerial and technical problems and
was finally canceled early this year. Had Lunar-A not run into problems, then Japans lunar program would have appeared much more
methodical, with regular, if infrequent, lunar probes starting seventeen years ago. Instead,
theyre not racing each other, and there is every indication that they would
be pursuing the same policy even if their Asian counterpart was not.
The Obama administration unveiled a space policy that renounces the unilateral stance taken by Bush
administration (National Space Policy 2006) and instead emphasizes international cooperation across a wide
range of scientific, exploration and national-security projects. From navigation and earth observation
satellites to robotic spacecraft to reducing hazards posed by orbital debris, the new policy shows
willingness to share data for future programs. "No longer are we racing against an adversary; in fact,
one of our central goals is to promote peaceful cooperation and collaboration in space, which not only
will ward off conflict, but will help to expand our capacity to operate in orbit and beyond," Obama said.
For the first time, Obama's space and national-security advisers have opened the door to possible international cooperation on the existing
Global Positioning System satellite constellation, which is operated by the U.S. Air Force and serves military and commercial users world-wide.
Many of the current plans for exploring the Moon were developed with little regard to what other
countries are doing, and certainly not in response to them. In fact, thats part of the problem; theres
little coordination between the participants when coordination might produce complementary data
instead of redundant data. But there is some cooperation. The Indian spacecraft, for instance, will
carry American and European instruments. The Russian spacecraft, if it gets built, may carry Japanese impactors intended for
Lunar-A. The relevant space agencies are planning, or at least discussing, sharing their data. This is not a
space race by any definition.
West Coast
2011
49
Neg Handbook
Similarly, the public engagement theme argues that human lunar exploration program will encourage
students and help develop the high-tech workforce, another familiar argument for those who have
followed the various justifications for the space program over the years. Like international cooperation,
encouraging students to study math and science is important and a nice side benefit of any
exploration program, but hardly a justification for the program itself.
Even if many were inspired, they wouldnt get or stay in stem education programs
Dan Lips, Senior Policy Analyst in Education in the Domestic Policy Studies Department and Jena Baker
McNeill, Policy Analyst for Homeland Security in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies,
April 15, 2009, A New Approach to Improving Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Education,
Backgrounder #2249, http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2009/04/A-New-Approach-to-ImprovingScience-Technology-Engineering-and-Math-Education
Unfortunately, experience of the past 50 years suggests that such federal initiatives are unlikely to
solve the fundamental problem of American underperformance in STEM education--the limited
number of students who complete elementary and secondary school with the skills and knowledge to
pursue STEM coursework in higher education and succeed in many parts of the workforce. The
American education system is supposed to be a pipeline that prepares children in elementary and
secondary school to pursue opportunities in post-secondary education and in the workforce. It is well
known that this pipeline is leaky--that millions of children pass through their K-12 years without receiving a quality education. Too
many students drop out and, all too often, those who do earn a high school degree lack the academic
qualifications to succeed in STEM fields in college or in the workforce.
Trying to inspire new graduates obscures the systemic education problem, which is
empirically proven
Dan Lips, Senior Policy Analyst in Education in the Domestic Policy Studies Department and Jena Baker
McNeill, Policy Analyst for Homeland Security in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies,
April 15, 2009, A New Approach to Improving Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Education,
Backgrounder #2249, http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2009/04/A-New-Approach-to-ImprovingScience-Technology-Engineering-and-Math-Education
Policymakers and analysts concerned about American students' low achievement in STEM fields often
focus on the end of the pipeline--the percentage of American college students earning degrees in
STEM fields and the population of the workforce prepared for science, technology, engineering, and
math professions. But the situation does not look much better as students continue to higher
education. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported in 2006 that the percentage of U.S. post-secondary students earning
degrees in STEM fields has fallen over the past decade--from 32 percent in 1995 to 27 percent in 2004. A closer examination of the statistics
shows that the number of degrees earned by college students in STEM fields has essentially remained flat during this period, since the collegestudent population as a whole increased during that period. In addition, an estimated one-third of these STEM degrees were awarded to
students from abroad.
West Coast
2011
50
Neg Handbook
Any Moon base would, at least superficially, resemble the kind of military base that is expressly
prohibited by the OST. It will have to be buried in order to shield it from solar radiation and cosmic
rays, which of course implies that it will be fortified. Its supply and transportation system could
easily be considered a dual use technology since any transport vehicle traveling between the Earth
and the Moon could be used as an anti-satellite (ASAT) weapon. An in situ resource utilization (ISRU)
complex that provided liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen could also provide fuel for military space
vehicles of all sorts.
statements that "my language"i.e., Englishand not those of "another, bolder or more persistent culture" will be "passed down over the
generations to future lunar colonies." The first step will be a colony at the moons south pole, described by NASA in a December 2006
announcement. According to Bruce Gagnon of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, "In
U.S. government documents, like the air forces Space Operations Doctrine and its Space Commands
Strategic Master Plan, talk much about maintaining space superiority near Earth and even about
using weapons in orbit. But they remain silent about the Moon. There is nothing in air force planning
for the Moon, said Theresa Hitchens, vice president of the Center for Defense Information, a private
research group in Washington. Still, some analysts believe the Moon is part of a larger American
military plan and interpreted Bush's speech as unilateral in emphasis, with echoes of the cold war.
"The moon is a beachhead," said Alice Slater, director of the Global Resource Action Center for the
Environment, a private group in New York.
West Coast
2011
51
Neg Handbook
There are also hurdles to ponder. A layer of fine, particles, the consistency of talcum powder, covers
the lunar bedrock and reaches several feet thick. It can generate dense dust clouds. Unlike the
household variety, lunar dust is glass-like with a core of iron, giving it magnetic properties. Figuring out
ways to ensure dust-free instruments is a major priority. Another issue is levitated dust, which occurs
when the Sun's energy cause dust grains to become electrically charged. "I think we need to continue to
evaluate whether the Moon is usable for astronomy or not," said Paul Spudis of the Johns Hopkins
University Applied Physics Laboratory in Laurel, Maryland. "And finally we need to fill in the missing
pieces of knowledge and specifically we need to characterize this dust levitation and find out-does this
occur and what the real magnitude of the effect is."
Humans will return to the Moon no later than 2020, paving the way for treks to Mars and beyond.
When liftoff happens, astronomers don't want to be left in the dust. But currently, they are split over
the merits of lunar-based observatories compared with those in free space like the Hubble Space
Telescope, which has been a boon to astronomy during its more than 16-year life in low Earth orbit.
Pushing the scientific benefits of a moon exploration undermines support for human
exploration
Jeff Foust, Staff Writer, December 11, 2006, Moonbase why?,
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/764/1, The Space Review, p.np
The problem with relying on science as the primary reason for human lunar exploration is that, in the
eyes of many, science can be done for far less money by robotic missionswhich also dont put
human lives at risk. Manned moon flight may appeal to baby boomers, but it makes little scientific sense for most
space missions these days, the Los Angeles Times concluded in an editorial Sunday. Robots can now perform, or be
developed to perform, most of the tasks people would do at a moon station. Similarly, an editorial Saturday in
the Minneapolis Star Tribune stated, Todays best investments in space exploration lie in extending the reach of uncrewed probes like the
Mars Global Surveyor.
Human spaceflight advocates typically counter that humans are much more capable
than robots. Thats certainly true, but theyre also much more expensive, and for many missions the general public would be
perfectly satisfied with the lower, but less expensive, scientific output provided by robots. In some cases where the scientific stakes are
particularly highsuch as Mars and the search for past or present lifethere may be more support for human exploration, but thats less likely
to be the case on the Moon.
West Coast
2011
52
Neg Handbook
The moon is not the new economic frontier. high launch costs prohibit expansion
Jeff Foust, Staff Writer, December 11, 2006, Moonbase why?,
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/764/1, The Space Review, p.np
Under economic expansion, NASA
makes the argument that a Moon base and ancillary activities will provide
benefits to life on the home planet. That phrase sounds perilously close to the old, tired spinoff justification for the space
program, and, in fact, in the brief video associated with this theme the narrator mentions that lunar exploration also fosters innovations that
benefit our society and economy. Fortunately, though, NASAs vision here is broader than spinoffs: the agency is
best roles for government and industry at any particular stage of technology development," Pace told Xinhua in an email. "Commercial firms
can supply cargo to the International Space Station. Much
West Coast
2011
53
Neg Handbook
amount of balanced reporting can disguise is that such a mission to the moon is an
egregiously bad idea. As Morrissey's sources make clear, it will cost a staggering amount of money (an amount that
NASA, so far, has not bothered to calculate), deprive NASA's legitimate scientific missions of funding, and
accomplish exactly what the International Space Station has accomplished, which is nothing. "Nobody is clear
on what science the astronauts are going to do on the moon," Robert L. Park, a physics professor at the University of Maryland, told Morrissey.
"To invent the project and then look for the science to justify it is not the way it should be done." There
is important science to be
done in space. Observing our home planet, for example, is one such activity. Unfortunately, neglect of
an aging fleet of Earth-orbiting satellites is leading to a significant degradation of our ability to
measure changes in Earth's climate. Diverting NASA's attention and resources to establishing a moon
base will only exacerbate this problem.
How much will it cost? NASA said Monday it can build a moon base for about the $10 billion per year it
now spends on the (soon-to-be-retired) space shuttle and the space station. (The agency also says that the
international community will soon begin funding the space station, but no nation has agreed to this.) Considering that the space station and
shuttle cost about $10 billion per year, a moon base might cost much more. The
today's technology
allows for lunar-rated materiel to be built and placed on the moon at half the cost of the Apollo
project. This quickly gets you to a program cost of at least $300 billion to build the moon base.
West Coast
2011
54
Neg Handbook
creation of a society on the Moon is that creating one would provide the
worlds people with the insurance that would see it continue even if a catastrophe were to bring
human life to an end on Earth. But this insurance would be effective only if the people on the Moon
did not suffer the same fate. For distance provides no protection against physical conflict among the
Moons residents sufficiently grave to result in all of them being killed. This consideration introduces a final reason for people settling
the Moon that is more important that all the others.
Manned moon flight may appeal to baby boomers, but it makes little scientific sense for most space
missions these days. Robots can now perform, or be developed to perform, most of the tasks people
would do at a moon station. And even if the world shares the goal of landing astronauts on Mars, this
is a roundabout way to achieve it. Why re-create the old technologies for going to the moon when
they are of no use to get to Mars? For too long, NASA has been overspending on manned flight and
under-funding scientific study. Vital missions to study the Earth's climate, for example, have been
delayed for years or indefinitely. An unmanned scientific mission to scan for Earth-like planets in nearby solar systems, scheduled
to launch in 2011, has been postponed until 2015.
West Coast
2011
55
Neg Handbook
NASA does not have the expertise to create a permanent moon base
Thomas F. Rogers, Ph.D., a physicist and former Defense Department deputy director, 2006, Magnifying our
world: Why we must extend civilization to the Moon, Space Policy, vol. 22, pp. 128132
When it comes to imagining how to proceed with the kind of space exploration activity involving the
Moon outlined here, the most important thing to appreciate is that neither NASA nor the USA in
general is at all presently prepared to undertake such a programme (nor are other countries). The
creation of a new Earth-related lunar civilization requires that brainpower, experiences and skills
which do not exist in NASA all be involved in space-related studies and activities. The expertise
required to conduct the requisite pioneering exploration research includes purposeful political
science, foreign affairs, economics, anthropology, history, law and sociology. None of these is in great
evidence in current civil space ventures.
West Coast
2011
56
Neg Handbook
Some space entrepreneurs agree that resources on the moon and other celestial bodies won't be used
to their full extent unless companies have explicit property rights and title. "You have to really own
the ground upon which you've placed these really valuable facilities," Robert Bigelow, founder of Bigelow
Aerospace, told SPACE.com. Bigelow Aerospace is drawing up plans for a quick-deploy lunar base, using the company's expandable space
habitats. "You
have to instill the ingredients of profit and benefit into the equation."
Pieters said lunar scientists have a good idea how lunar rare earth elements became concentrated, it
occurred as part of the moon's magma ocean differentiation sequence. But it is now also recognized
that "early events disrupted and substantially reorganized that process in ways we are still trying to
decipher," she added. With the recent, but limited, new data for the moon from the international fleet
of lunar orbiters with remote sensing instruments from Europe, Japan, China, India and now the United
States, "we are beginning to see direct evidence for the activity of geologic processes that separate and
concentrate different minerals," Pieters said. On the moon, these areas and outcrops are local and
small. Exposure is largely dependent on using impact craters as probes to the interior. Current data
are only sufficient to indicate the presence of some concentrations of minerals, but are inadequate to
survey and map their character and distribution, Pieters observed.
While the Outer Space Treaty likely allows mining, it does not set up a system granting explicit title to
the extracted resources, according to Nelson. That ambiguity may not cause problems during mining
operations, but it could be an issue when companies try to sell the resources. "If you're pouring
billions of dollars into extracting something of value, you don't want the risk that a bunch of people
are going to sue you, or boycott you, or sanction you if you take it to market," Nelson said. White
thinks that companies probably can claim ownership, under the Outer Space Treaty, of the ice they mine
from a lunar crater. But he agrees that there is a bit of fuzziness and fuzziness is daunting to bigdollar operations. "If you really are talking about a multibillion-dollar endeavor, if I were the lawyer
for that company, I would say, 'Don't make that investment until we have legislation in place,'" White
said.
West Coast
2011
57
Neg Handbook
Establishing a peaceful framework for lunar governance will be important, because hostile
international relations on the moon are likely to lead to conflicts elsewhere in space and, possibly, on
Earth. Such patterns regarding new frontiers have plagued the history of international relations for
centuries. Indeed, despite frequent hopes for cooperation, most unclaimed territories historically have become
sources of international conflict rather than serving as peaceful lebensraum. Typically, and consistent with realist predictions
about international politics, states have had a built-in penchant to pursue relative gains over their rivals and therefore have sought to seize and
defend new resources to their own advantage. On
The Moon is dusty, grimy, and potentially hazardous to your health. Ultra-tiny dust grains can gum up
the works of vital hardware on the Moon. And there's also a possible risk to health from gulping in the
lunar dusta toxicological twist to "bad Moon rising." Thanks to the Apollo program there's firsthand
knowledge about the Moon being a Disneyland of dust. Moonwalkers were covered from helmet to
boot with lunar dust. Also tagged as the "dirty dozen," astronauts on the various Apollo missions
worked long hours in the lunar environment, setting up science equipment and collectively bagged 840
pounds (382 kilograms) of rock and other surface material for shipment back to Earth.
West Coast
2011
58
Neg Handbook
some experts are hoping the space agency will look beyond the moon for the future of human
spaceflight, and instead push deeper into our solar system than ever before. "We've done the moon
we understand it better than anything else," Buzz Aldrin, lunar module pilot on the Apollo 11 mission and second man to
walk on the moon, told SPACE.com. "We've got to stop thinking of short-term hurrahs and start thinking of longterm investments."
A moon base is a pipe dream that diverts from all other space efforts. robots and
probes could do all the science
Gregg Easterbrook, Staff Writer, December 8, 2006, Moon Baseless, NASA can't explain why we need a lunar
colony, Slate, http://www.slate.com/id/2155164/?nav=tap3
Coming under a presidency whose slogan might be "No Price Too High To Accomplish Nothing," the
West Coast
2011
59
Neg Handbook
many professional interests in addition to the natural sciences. Imaginative and vigorous technological, market and institutional measures
should be adopted that would see the USA and much of the rest of the world beginning to be a two-body society, involving both the Earth and
the Moon, by the end of the second civil space half-century.
There is no guarantee knowledge from the moon would translate to mars preparation
Jeff Foust, Staff Writer, December 11, 2006, Moonbase why?,
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/764/1, The Space Review, p.np
The exploration preparation theme makes the case of using the Moon as a proving ground for the
technologies and techniques that would be used on missions to Mars and other destinations. On the
face of it, this seems to make some sense: better to learn that a particular system doesnt work as
expected when youre only a few days from Earth, rather than six months or more. However, theres an
open question about how useful the Moon is as an analogue for Mars: what works on the Moon wont
necessarily work on Mars, and vice versa. This rationale also suggests that the Moon is only a means to
a more distant end, and once weve learned all that we can about exploration there well pack up and
leave (something that would probably suit some Mars exploration advocates just fine.) Some might
conclude that the permanent Moon base wouldnt be so permanent after all.
Don't we need a moon base to go to Mars? No! When George W. Bush made his Mars-trip speech almost three years ago,
he said a moon base should be built to support such a mission. This is gibberish. All concept studies of Mars flight
involve an expedition departing from low-Earth orbit and traveling directly to the red planet.
Stopping at the moon would require fuel to descend to the lunar surface, then blast off again, which
would make any Mars mission hugely more expensive. The launch cost of fuel that is, the cost of placing fuel into
orbitis the No. 1 expense for any manned flight beyond Earth. The Lunar Excursion Module, the part of the Apollo spacecraft that touched
down, was two-t hirds fuelall exhausted landing and taking off again from the moon. Rocket technology hasn't changed substantially since
the 1960s, so a large portion of the weight of any Earth-to-Moon-to-Mars expedition would be dedicated to the fuel needed for just the
layover. This makes absolutely no sense, and the fact that administration officials get away with telling gullible journalists that a Mars mission
would use a moon base shows how science illiteracy dominates the big media. (It is imaginable that a moon facility could support Mars
exploration by refining supplies from the lunar surface and then using automated vessels to send the supplies to the red planet, or to
rendezvous with an expedition en route. But that's pretty speculative, and at any rate,
West Coast
2011
60
Neg Handbook
Mars Neg
West Coast
2011
61
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
62
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
63
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
64
Neg Handbook
in a global innovation environment it is no longer true that basic research performed in the United
States will necessarily benefit American firms or American workers. Rather, the economic benefits depend on the
degree to which universities (together with entrepreneurs, venture capitalists, and corporations) can translate the results of basic research into
marketable innovations. The
West Coast
2011
65
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
66
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
67
Neg Handbook
to know what to do with a community on Mars (other than basic science). When we go, we will be ready to establish a sustainable, productive settlement, based on what we learned
in Earths environs.
They cant solve the impact space settlements impossible and we solve climate
James A. Vedda, Senior Policy Analyst, Center for Space Policy & Strategy, 9/18/2007, Humans to
Mars: Logical Step or Dangerous Distraction? http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/372849main_Vedda%20%20AIAA%202007.pdf
Population pressure will not be directly remedied by spaceflight advances in the next few decades. We
are already at the stage where migration to off-world settlements would need to number in the tens
of millions in order to provide any significant relief on Earth obviously impractical for a long time to come.
However, within this century humanity could make substantial contributions toward solving global
problems if we persistently direct our attention and resources to doing so. Areas where we could see advances
include: Collection and distribution of energy. The idea of gathering solar energy in space and beaming it to the
terrestrial power grid has been around for four decades, spawning a variety of advanced design concepts and subsystem prototype
demonstrations. Like communications signals, beamed energy is a weightless electromagnetic product that has near-universal demand on Earth. A concerted effort could
make this energy source an important addition to the energy mix, supplanting some of the
environmental impact of fossil fuel use. Other approaches that have been suggested include relay satellites to transmit power from point-to-point on Earth
(allowing redirection of surpluses to areas in need), and mining of helium-3 on the Moon to power fusion reactors on Earth, should this method of power generation prove feasible.
New space missions trade off within the NASA budget tanks solvency.
Norman R. Augustine et al, chairman of the Aeronautics Committee of the NASA Advisory Council
and served on the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, 2009, Seeking a Human Spaceflight Program
Worthy of a Great Nation, http://legislative.nasa.gov/396093main_HSF_Cmte_FinalReport.pdf
In the case of NASA, one result of this dilemma is that in order to pursue major new programs, existing programs
have had to be terminated, sometimes prematurely. Thus, the demise of the Space Shuttle and the birth of the gap.
Unless recognized and dealt with, this pattern will continue. When the ISS is eventually retired, will
NASA have the capability to pursue exploration beyond low-Earth orbit, or will there be still another
gap? When a human-rated heavy-lift vehicle is ready, will lunar systems be available? This is the
fundamental conundrum of the NASA budget. Continuation of the prevailing program execution
practices (i.e., high fixed cost and high overhead), together with flat budgets, virtually guarantees the creation of
additional new gaps in the years ahead. Programs need to be planned, budgeted and executed so that development and
operations can proceed in a phased, somewhat overlapping manner.
West Coast
2011
68
Neg Handbook
Disease makes travel to Mars impossible and this takes out all their colonization
impacts.
Tudor Vieru, science editor at Softpedia, 10/30/2009, Diseases Are 'Major Barrier' to Space
Exploration, Softpedia, http://news.softpedia.com/news/Diseases-Are-Major-Barrier-to-SpaceExploration-125699.shtml
When people think of space travel, often the vast distances are what come to mind first, but even after we figure out a way to
cover these distances in a reasonable amount of time, we still need to figure out how astronauts are going to
overcome disease and sickness, French researcher Jean-Pol Frippiat, from the Nancy University, in France, explains. He is
also one of the co-authors of a new report on the matter, which appears in the latest issue of The Journal of Leukocyte Biology. The team
reveals in the paper that microgravity
West Coast
2011
69
Neg Handbook
Budget DA Links
Mars exploration massively expensive causes long-term program collapse.
Norman R. Augustine et al, chairman of the Aeronautics Committee of the NASA Advisory Council
and served on the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, 2009, Seeking a Human Spaceflight Program
Worthy of a Great Nation, http://legislative.nasa.gov/396093main_HSF_Cmte_FinalReport.pdf
The preliminary estimates of the cost of Mars missions are far higher than for other scenarios, all in an
era when budgets are becoming highly constrained. If astronauts were to travel to Mars under these
circumstances, it would require most of the human spaceflight budget for nearly two decades or more,
and produce few intermediate results. When we finally reached Mars, we might be hard pressed to
maintain the financial resources needed for repeated missions after the first landings, recreating the pattern
of Apollo. For these reasons, the Committee found that Mars is the ultimate destination for human exploration of the inner solar system, but
is not a viable first destination beyond low-Earth orbit.
West Coast
2011
70
Neg Handbook
with an immediate post-Apollo national decision (and a reasonable budget) to send astronauts to
Mars, it would not have proven possible by 1982, or 1989, or even perhaps anytime in the century if the task
proved too politically damaging in the face of setbacks. Heres the way Ive come to see it. It should have been
no surprise that On-To-Mars never happened. The reasons directly affect todays chances of tackling
the task in the near future. First, since Apollo had gloriously succeeded in its major purposerestoring
American status as the leading high-tech nation in the worldthe political support for further spending evaporated in
the face of new, more urgent challenges. Apollo had worked. Making the point again on a different
stage would have added little if any value.
West Coast
2011
71
Neg Handbook
for Space Exploration 5 (VES) was investigated by polling 1029 US citizens by phone between August and November 2004 [4]. The results showed
general awareness of space programs and that the majority of men and women are supportive. The attitude toward the VSE was to support ISS
completion, robotic missions and the return to the Moon. Citizens were, however, opposed to human
missions to Mars and in particular the associated risks. Similar to Europe, US citizens are totally unaware about the costs of NASA in US
budgetary perspectives. The public also perceived that public outreach is poorly executed. In 20052006, 450 US citizens aged 1824 participated in
another study and were contacted via internet tools [3]. Only 50% were aware about the VSE, 27% expressed doubts that NASA went to the Moon, 39% said that NASA does not do
anything useful and 72% thought NASA money should be better spent elsewhere.
West Coast
2011
72
Neg Handbook
space exploration vision is neither sustainable nor affordable unless NASAs leadership of the
exploration vision is deemed credible by the public and Congress. NASA will continue to operate
under a bright light of scrutiny. They must embrace best practices of program management, certainly from the public sector, but
also from the private sector. At all levels, NASA must be relentlessly innovative and institutionally nimble enough to embrace good ideas
arriving from any direction, especially from outside the proverbial box.
West Coast
2011
73
Neg Handbook
will not
reach Mars on the power of peripheral arguments about science, national pride, or technological spin-offs. Advocates of a
human program need to articulate the core values of human spaceflight and justify their missions accordingly, even if they are difficult to
measure.
West Coast
2011
74
Neg Handbook
study were positive for space exploration, it revealed some troubling signs when broken
down by age group. With the exception of robotic Mars missions, which received good support across
all ages other than those over 75, the youngest age group showed little enthusiasm or interest in space
exploration endeavors. The greatest concentration of support came from the baby boomers, who will reach retirement age in 20102029, precisely the time when the exploration effort needs sustained momentum.
Robotic missions link less to budget arguments prefer our comparative evidence.
Norman R. Augustine et al, chairman of the Aeronautics Committee of the NASA Advisory Council
and served on the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, 2009, Seeking a Human Spaceflight Program
Worthy of a Great Nation, http://legislative.nasa.gov/396093main_HSF_Cmte_FinalReport.pdf
Robotic activity in space is generally much less costly than human activity and therefore offers a major
inherent advantage. Of even greater importance, it does not place human lives at risk. Astronauts
provide their greatest advantage in the most complex or novel environments or circumstances. This will
be the case in the exploration of planetary surfaces and in repair or servicing missions of the type
undertaken for the Hubble Space Telescopes primary mirror. In contrast, the value of humans in space
is usually at its minimum when they are employed transporting cargo. The bottom line is that there are
important roles to be played by both humans and robots in space, and America should strive to maintain
a balanced program incorporating the best of both kinds of explorers.
West Coast
2011
75
Neg Handbook
question that needs to be addressed in current planning for human exploration is whether science is a
primary or secondary goal. If it is a primary goal, there will be plenty of work for people to do on the Moon, but little or none to do
elsewhere for a long time to come because sending robots will be a far more efficient use of resources. In other words,
as the sophistication and productivity of robots improve, there is no scientific rationale for sending
humans to Mars that justifies the added risk and expense. Having scientists working on site is the preferred approach
when the costbenefit analysis makes sense. It is reasonable to believe that this will be the case on the Moon in the foreseeable future, but we
lack the knowledge and experience to make a credible estimate of when this will be true of Mars.
The scientific rationale for the Mars trip is dubious at best. As James Van Allen, the physicist considered
to be one of the founding fathers of space exploration, put it on Monday, the United States could explore
Mars robotically "at far less cost and far greater quantity and quality of results." Even if a manned
Mars mission promised rich scientific rewards, however, there are serious doubts about the nation's
ability to pay for it. Like his father, who in 1989 proposed but did not push for funds for sending people to Mars, Bush hasn't even
begun to suggest how the nation could afford the estimated $1-trillion cost over the next few decades. That's not to say that the space agency
can't benefit from presidential direction. NASA is still saddled with three grounded space shuttles and a leaking, low-orbit space station. The
agency is a shadow of its former Cold War self.
West Coast
2011
76
Neg Handbook
CP Lunar Base
Lunar base solves best key to long-term Mars exploration.
Norman R. Augustine et al, chairman of the Aeronautics Committee of the NASA Advisory Council
and served on the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, 2009, Seeking a Human Spaceflight Program
Worthy of a Great Nation, http://legislative.nasa.gov/396093main_HSF_Cmte_FinalReport.pdf
What about the Moon first, then Mars? By first exploring the Moon, we could develop the operational
skills and technology for landing on, launching from and working on a planetary surface. In the process, we
could acquire an understanding of human adaptation to another world that would one day allow us to
go to Mars. There are two main strategies for exploring the Moon. Both begin with a few short sorties to various sites to scout the region
and validate lunar landing and ascent systems. In one strategy, the next step would be to build a lunar base. Over many
missions, a small colony of habitats would be assembled, and explorers would begin to live there for
many months, conducting scientific studies and prospecting for resources to use as fuel. In the other
strategy, sorties would continue to different sites, spending weeks and then months at each one. More equipment would have to be brought to
the lunar surface on each trip, but more diverse sites would be explored and in greater detail.
Doesnt link to politics new Republican Congress will want to maintain moon
control.
Paul D. Spudis, Senior Staff Scientist at the Lunar and Planetary Institute, 11/6/2010, Can NASA Get
Its Groove Back? Air and Space, http://blogs.airspacemag.com/moon/2010/11/can-nasa-get-itsgroove-back/
The latest buzz in the space blogosphere is about the recent midterm election results and subsequent
changes in House committees with Republicans in the majority. After these new committee chairs take charge, will
they set new priorities? Only time will tell but past statements by those mentioned to fill these positions give some
clues. They seem less inclined to sell the farm, thereby giving control of U.S. space access to foreign
entities. They seem to be cautious about handing the reins of LEO access to commercial start-ups,
preferring to have them prove themselves first, while at the same time guaranteeing that NASA
retains the infrastructure necessary to assure our national interests in space. Will their priorities for NASA rest
more with the agency staying as a national economic and security asset and less as an international outreach program, heavily influenced by
Earth science concerns? Much rests on the decisions made and the money appropriated by the incoming Congress.
West Coast
2011
77
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
78
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
79
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
80
Neg Handbook
The problem is way broader than the aff as long as fossil fuels are cheap, theres no
renewable silver bullet to solve warming
Seth R. Hawkins, 10-8-2008, No silver bullet, Utah Statesman,
http://www.usu.edu/ust/index.cfm?article=31004
Despite technological advances in alternative and renewable energy sources, there is no silver bullet
to solve the nation and worlds energy needs, said New York Times energy and transportation
correspondent Matthew Wald, Tuesday *Oct. 7+ in the TSC Ballroom. We are going nowhere, Wald
said. We have made terrific technological strides but we have not used them for carbon or for oil
efficiency. We are not on track, at this point, to meet any of our goals. Wald said there are many
renewable energy sources available that could be put to good use and the only thing holding them back
is the market and simple economic principles like supply and demand. Calling the energy crisis the
nation and world are facing a steep hill, Wald said the people have to make the decision with their
dollars to make a switch to alternative energy sources. This is a steep hill and its got to be climbed
by market economics, Wald said. The government is just not big enough or powerful enough to
subsidize massive amounts of electricity. Cost effectiveness plays a major role in the current energy
crisis, Wald said, citing the use of gasoline and other carbon-emitting fuel sources as being more
affordable and consistently available than renewable energy sources.
West Coast
2011
81
Neg Handbook
environmental quality is a global public good, but; (e) this is most likely to be secured as a consequence of
growth as a consequence of the technological innovation that both creates and is created by growth together
with the rising scarcity and prices of the most environmentally degrading energy sources. So, (f) there are no meaningful limits to
growth from either the scarcity of energy, or from negative environmental externalities from
economic production, since in the medium run, those externalities are positive.
many other forces also spurred the invasion. Notably, Iraq felt insecure with its only access to the sea a narrow strip of land sandwiched
between Kuwait on one side and its archenemy Iran on the other.) In the end, Saddam
Too much CO2 has already been released cant prevent warming
Robert Longley, 7-11-2010, Global Warming Inevitable This Century, NSF Study Finds,
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/technologyandresearch/a/climatetochange.htm DA
Despite efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, global warming and a greater increase in sea
level are inevitable during this century, according to a new study performed by a team of climate modelers at the
National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colo. Indeed, say the researchers, whose work was funded
by the National Science Foundation (NSF), globally averaged surface air temperatures would still rise
one degree Fahrenheit (about a half degree Celsius) by the year 2100, even if no more greenhouse gases were
added to the atmosphere. And the resulting transfer of heat into the oceans would cause global sea
levels to rise another 4 inches (11 centimeters) from thermal expansion alone. The team's findings are published in this week's
issue of the journal "Science." This study is another in a series that employs increasingly sophisticated
simulation techniques to understand the complex interactions of the Earth, says Cliff Jacobs of NSFs
atmospheric sciences division.
West Coast
2011
82
Neg Handbook
aerospace market has held up better than most experts anticipated. In fact,
despite a couple of weak spots, predominantly in business and regional jets, it could be considered one of the best sectors
of the current economy. Aerospace has been shockingly strong given the rest of the economy, says
Richard Aboulafia, vice president of The Teal Group, Fairfax, Va. He expects demand for materials to hold up well, which is good news for
producers and distributors of aluminum, titanium, stainless and superalloys. There
According to a report, the general aerospace and defense market is forecasted to register a
Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of over 5 percent during 2011 - 2013. The Global Aerospace
industry has witnessed an impressive growth in the last few years, with civil aviation segment emerging over
commercial aviation segment as the biggest contributor towards the growth of the industry. The US and European countries are
the dominant markets for the aerospace industry and are acting as catalyst for the overall industry growth. Increasing
demand for civil aircrafts from emerging countries and a continuous increase in military spending are the key drivers of the aerospace industry.
According to a report, US is the largest aerospace manufacturer, despite the financial crisis in 2009
and is expected to remain the leader in 2010, closely followed by European Union and Canada. However,
the future belongs to the emerging nations like China and India. These two nations have emerged as the most promising countries as far as
aerospace industry is concerned.
West Coast
2011
83
Neg Handbook
expenses in the production phase of a program, is no longer viable. Key personnel are leaving or retiring, and retaining and recruiting new high-quality technical and management people are
difficult.
West Coast
2011
84
Neg Handbook
helped by misleading
metaphors of decline. Declinists should be chastened by remembering how wildly exaggerated U.S. estimates
of Soviet power in the 1970s and of Japanese power in the 1980s were. Equally misguided were those prophets of unipolari ty who argued a decade ago that
the United States was so powerful that it could do as it wished and others had no choice but to follow. Today, some confidently predict that the twenty-first century will see China replace the
United States as the world's leading state, whereas others argue with equal confidence that the twenty-first century will be the American century. But unforeseen events often confound such
projections. There is always a range of possible futures, not one. As for the United States' power relative to China's, much will depend on the uncertainties of future political change in China.
Barring any political upheaval, China's size and high rate of economic growth will almost certainly increase its relative strength vis--vis the United States. This will bring China closer to the
United States in power resources, but it does not necessarily mean that China will surpass the United States as the most powerful country-even if China suffers no major domestic political
the more likely are those in which China gives the United States a run for its money but does not surpass it in overall power in the first half of
this century. Looking back at history, the British strategist Lawrence Freedman has noted that the
marriage and abortion, polls show an overall increase in tolerance. Civil society is robust, and church attendance is high, at 42 percent. The
country's past
cultural battles, over immigration, slavery, evolution, temperance, McCarthyism, and civil rights, were arguably
more serious than any of today's.
West Coast
2011
85
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
86
Neg Handbook
2068 with chance of impact currently at approximately three-in-a-million. As with earlier orbital estimates where
Earth impacts in 2029 and 2036 could not initially be ruled out due to the need for additional data, it is expected that the 2068
encounter will diminish in probability as more information about Apophis is acquired.
West Coast
2011
87
Neg Handbook
Two and a half years to Jupiter system; six months to Mars. Now, these problems are subject to a variety of approaches including medical
ones: does it matter if cosmic radiation causes long-term cumulative radiation exposure leading to cancers if we have advanced side-effect-free
cancer treatments? Better still, if hydrogen sulphide-induced hibernation turns out to be a practical technique in human beings, we may be able
to sleep through the trip. But even so, when you get down to it, there's not really any economically viable activity on the horizon for people to
engage in that would require them to settle on a planet or asteroid and live there for the rest of their lives. In general, when we need to extract
resources from a hostile environment we tend to build infrastructure to exploit them (such as oil platforms) but we don't exactly scurry to move
our families there. Rather, crews go out to work a long shift, then return home to take their leave. After all, there's no there there just a
howling wilderness of north Atlantic gales and frigid water that will kill you within five minutes of exposure. And that, I submit, is the closest
metaphor we'll find for interplanetary colonization. Most of the heavy lifting more than a million kilometres from Earth will be done by robots,
overseen by human supervisors who will be itching to get home and spend their hardship pay. And closer to home, the commercialization of
space will be incremental and slow, driven by our increasing dependence on near-earth space for communications, positioning, weather
forecasting, and (still in its embryonic stages) tourism. But the
wand or two to do something about the climate, or reinvent a kind of human being who can thrive in an airless, inhospitable environment.
Colonize the Gobi desert, colonise the North Atlantic in winter then get back to me about the rest of the solar system!
Space colonization is impossible distances are too big and planets are inhospitable
Donald F. Robertson, freelance space journalist, 3-6-2006, Space Exploration, Space News,
http://www.space.com/spacenews/archive06/RobertsonOpEd_030606.html
Two largely unquestioned assumptions long ago took root within the space community. As we prepare to voyage back to Earth's Moon
and on to Mars, it is time to question them both. The first assumption is that exploring the Moon, Mars, or any part of the
solar system, can be accomplished in a generation or two and with limited loss of life. The second is that we can use robots to
successfully understand another world. Both assumptions are almost certainly wrong, yet many important elements of our civil space
program are based on one or both of them being correct. To paraphrase Douglas Adams, even within the space community most people don't
have a clue how "mind-boggingly big space really is." Most of the major
We and our woefully inadequate chemical rockets are like Stone Age tribesfolk preparing to cast off in
canoes, reaching for barely visible islands over a freezing, storm-tossed, North Atlantic.
Colonization impossible
Giancarlo Genta, Technical University of Turin, and Michael Rycroft, International Space University,
2003, Space, The Final Frontier? p. 309-10
The colonisation of nearby, or even more distant, planetary systems is
West Coast
2011
88
Neg Handbook
European Union will probably approve a proposal to collaborate on a manned space effort with Russia. Russia will soon launch rockets from a base in South America under an agreement with
the European company Arianespace, whose main launch facility is in Kourou, French Guiana. Japan and China both have satellites circling the moon, and India and Russia are also working on
lunar orbiters. NASA will launch a lunar reconnaissance mission this year, but many analysts believe
to the moon. The United States is largely out of the business of launching satellites for other nations, something the Russians, Indians, Chinese and Arianespace do regularly.
Their clients include Nigeria, Singapore, Brazil, Israel and others. The 17-nation European Space Agency (ESA) and China are also cooperating on commercial ventures, including a rival to the
U.S. space-based Global Positioning System. South Korea, Taiwan and Brazil have plans to quickly develop their space programs and possibly become low-cost satellite launchers. South Korea
and Brazil are both developing homegrown rocket and satellite-making capacities. This explosion in international space capabilities is recent, largely taking place since the turn of the century.
While the origins of Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Israeli and European space efforts go back several decades, their
-- sending humans into orbit, circling Mars and the moon with unmanned spacecraft, landing on an asteroid and visiting a
comet -- are all new developments. A Different Space Race In contrast to the Cold War space race between the United States and the former Soviet Union, the
global competition today is being driven by national pride, newly earned wealth, a growing cadre of highly educated men and women, and the confidence that achievements in space will bring
The planet-wide eagerness to join the space-faring club is palpable. China has
sent men into space twice in the past five years and plans another manned mission in October. More than any other country besides the United
substantial soft power as well as military benefits.
States, experts say, China has decided that space exploration, and its commercial and military purposes, are as important
as the seas once were to the British empire and air power was to the United States.
are working on the hardware needed to realize orbital generators as a form of clean,
plans to complete a prototype in about 20 years. The concept of solar panels beaming down energy
from space has long been ponderedand long been dismissed as too costly and impractical. But in Japan the seemingly far-fetched scheme has
renewable energy, with
received renewed attention amid the current global energy crisis and concerns about the environment. Last year researchers at the Institute for Laser Technology in Osaka produced up to 180
scientists in Hokkaido began ground tests of a power transmission system designed to send
energy in microwave form to Earth. The laser and microwave research projects are two halves of a bold plan for a space solar
power system (SSPS) under the aegis of Japans space agency, the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA). Specifically, by 2030 the
watts of laser power from sunlight. In February
agency aims to put into geostationary orbit a solar-power generator that will transmit one gigawatt of energy to Earth, equivalent to the output of a large nuclear power plant. The energy
Were doing
this research for commonsense reasonsas a potential solution to the challenges posed by the exhaustion of fossil
fuels and global warming, says Hiroaki Suzuki of JAXAs Advanced Mission Research Center, one of about 180 scientists at major Japanese research institutes working on
would be sent to the surface in microwave or laser form, where it would be converted into electricity for commercial power grids or stored in the form of hydrogen.
the scheme. JAXA says its potential advantages are straightforward: in space, solar irradiance is five to 10 times as strong as on the ground, so generation is more efficient; solar energy could
be collected 24 hours a day; and weather would not pose a problem. The system would also be clean, generating no pollution or waste, and safe. The intensity of energy reaching Earths
surface might be about five kilowatts per square meterabout five times that of the sun at noon on a clear summer day at midlatitudes. Although the scientists say this amount will not harm
the human body, the receiving area would nonetheless be cordoned off and situated at sea.
West Coast
2011
89
Neg Handbook
not looking for a quick fix that will suddenly make solar power satellites
feasible in the near term. If I can close this deal on space-based solar power, its going to take a long time, he
said. The horizon were looking at is 2050 before were able to do something significant. The first major
milestone, he said, would be a small demonstration satellite that could be launched in the next eight to ten years that would demonstrate
power beaming from GEO. However, he added those plans could change depending on developments of various technologies that could alter
the direction space solar power systems would go. That 2050 vision, what that architecture will look like, is
carved in Jell-O.
necessary
pre-requisite for the technical and economic viability of SBSP was inexpensive and reliable access to
orbit. However, participants were strongly divided on whether to recommend immediate, all-out attack on this problem or not. We are back
to the old question: is the technology ready or nearly ready to allow for the development of a successful reusable launch vehicle
(RLV)? For the last three or four years the answer from NASA and from the US military has been No. They are waiting for a
breakthrough similar to the one that shifted most aircraft propulsion from piston engines to jet turbine ones. For those experts who want
to gain a good understand of where things stand, Appendix D of the SBSP study provides an interesting look at where the NSSOs experts think
the Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) now stand. In order to have routine access to low Earth orbit (LEO) to achieve this goal the study
examines a three-phased approach. Phase one proposes a strategy that will Develop new, fully-reusable two-stage, rocket-powered space
access systems (aerospaceplanes) for passengers and cargo transport. The mission is to Transport passengers and cargo with aircraft-like
safety and operability. The report claims that for such systems the TRL is 69 for a vehicle with a gross weight of 1400 tonnes with the
capability of delivering a bit more than 11 tonnes of payload to LEO. A TRL of 6 to 9 leaves a lot of questions unanswered. Do the authors of the
study think that we are closer to 6 or to 9? If we are close to 9 for the overall system then it would be worth it for the US government to go
ahead and begin work on such a system. If the answer is closer to TRL 6, though, then a more prudent approach would be wise. The DoD (NASA
is in no position to fund such work) should conduct wide-ranging science and technology development work on structural materials, new
propulsion, and on ultra-efficient control systems. Investments in RLV sub-components and technology will invariably pay off in other areas,
but non-space technology research programs should be mined for useful applications in space. The Defense Department is making major funds
available to develop new types of lightweight armor for vehicles that will be exposed to enemy fire and to IEDs. The Air Force should not
hesitate to join with the Army in working on any of these new materials that would fit into a future RLV program. This will require leaders who
not only can get beyond any not invented here problems, but that can push the Air Force or DARPA to spend money on projects that would
The need for low-cost reliable access to space has not gone
away. The slow pace of the Operationally Responsive Space (ORS) program is not going to change any time soon. Money
otherwise just be funded out of the Armys R&D budget.
is short and the Air Force is losing many of its best people due to the draw down. This is all the more reason to find ways to leverage as many
interesting outside technology projects as possible.
West Coast
2011
90
Neg Handbook
in space-utilizing
enterprises (government or commercial) will depend upon the prior existence of assured availability of reliable
launch services at the lower prices. So, in order to make space solar power possible, what has to be done about space
transportation? In the case of conventional transportation infrastructures, low cost has always been achieved through reuse of vehicles and the
deployment of general-purpose infrastructures that can be used many times by multiple customers, such as canals, railways, roads, and
airports. It is hard to imagine how automobiles, aircraft, ships, or any other modern transportation system might somehow be produced so
cheaply that the transport could somehow be disposable after each use. In
performance per year. Compare that to ground based units that are guaranteed to provide 90 % power after 12.5 years, or a loss of 0.8
%/year. We can see that even if a space solar panel receives 8 the insolation of a ground based unit, it will in fact produce less energy over its
much shorter lifetime. The wikipedia article claims a lifetime of 20 years but that is not realistic. The
arrays that are designed for long periods of operation are more likely to be
impacted by space debris. The potential for impact is greater as the size of the satellites is larger.
When space debris collides with active solar arrays, may cause generation of high-density plasma
induced by impact. Then plasma grows up by surrounding plasma, and the phenomenon called discharge might
take place. Space debris poses an obvious mechanical damage hazard to space assets, and may also
precipitate a catastrophic electrical discharge that disrupts or disables onboard systems [1]. This discharge results
in short circuits on the solar array and current does not flow into the satellite. This fact yields to the reduction of electric power of the solar array, and the impact influences on the satellite
missions. Many debris and dust impacts were confirmed on fuselage of retrieved satellite SFU and solar array of satellite Eureca. Generation of the discharge phenomenon by debris impact is
not yet confirmed, but such possibility will be increasingly important. For example, the discharge phenomenon called sustained arc is suggested as a cause of trouble of geostationary
satellite Tempo-2.
West Coast
2011
91
Neg Handbook
Spending DA Links
SPS will cost an arm and a leg launch costs
Robert McLeod, Computer Science Prof, 9-12-2006, Entropy Production, Solar Power Satellite,
http://entropyproduction.blogspot.com/2006/07/solar-power-satellite.html
The biggest overall drawback to any sort of space power solution is the cost of launching material into
orbit. At the top end of the chain, NASA's Space Shuttle or the Titan booster cost approximately $10,000/kg to reach low earth orbit. Getting
up to geosynchronous orbit requires an additional booster and increases the cost by a factor of 5-6. Programs such as SeaLaunch or the Russian
Proton booster are cheaper but by less than an order of magnitude. Realistically, in
necessary
pre-requisite for the technical and economic viability of SBSP was inexpensive and reliable access to
orbit. However, participants were strongly divided on whether to recommend immediate, all-out attack on this problem or not. We are back
to the old question: is the technology ready or nearly ready to allow for the development of a successful reusable launch vehicle
(RLV)? For the last three or four years the answer from NASA and from the US military has been No. They are waiting for a
breakthrough similar to the one that shifted most aircraft propulsion from piston engines to jet turbine ones. For those experts who want to gain a good understand of where
things stand, Appendix D of the SBSP study provides an interesting look at where the NSSOs experts think the Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) now stand. In order to have routine access to
low Earth orbit (LEO) to achieve this goal the study examines a three-phased approach. Phase one proposes a strategy that will Develop new, fully-reusable two-stage, rocket-powered space
access systems (aerospaceplanes) for passengers and cargo transport. The mission is to Transport passengers and cargo with aircraft-like safety and operability. The report claims that for
such systems the TRL is 69 for a vehicle with a gross weight of 1400 tonnes with the capability of delivering a bit more than 11 tonnes of payload to LEO. A TRL of 6 to 9 leaves a lot of
questions unanswered. Do the authors of the study think that we are closer to 6 or to 9? If we are close to 9 for the overall system then it would be worth it for the US government to go ahead
and begin work on such a system. If the answer is closer to TRL 6, though, then a more prudent approach would be wise. The DoD (NASA is in no position to fund such work) should conduct
wide-ranging science and technology development work on structural materials, new propulsion, and on ultra-efficient control systems. Investments in RLV sub-components and technology
will invariably pay off in other areas, but non-space technology research programs should be mined for useful applications in space. The Defense Department is making major funds available to
develop new types of lightweight armor for vehicles that will be exposed to enemy fire and to IEDs. The Air Force should not hesitate to join with the Army in working on any of these new
materials that would fit into a future RLV program. This will require leaders who not only can get beyond any not invented here problems, but that can push the Air Force or DARPA to spend
Money is short and the Air Force is losing many of its best people due to the draw down. This is all the more reason to find ways to leverage as
many interesting outside technology projects as possible.
West Coast
2011
92
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
93
Neg Handbook
But
theres also another factor at work: navet. Space activists tend to have little understanding of military space, coupled with an idealistic
impression of its management compared to NASA, whom many space activists have come to despise. For instance, they fail to realize that the
military space program is currently in no better shape, and in many cases worse shape, than NASA. The
Developing SPS would require lots of political capital no support to pay for it
Rob Mahan, founder of Citizens for Space Based Solar Power, 12-28-2007, SBSP FAQ, http://csbsp.org/sbsp-faq/#06
The political solution will most likely be the biggest hurdle to the development of space-based solar
power because so many areas have to be negotiated and agreed upon, not only within the United States, but with our
allies around the world, too. Strong energy independence legislation is the first step that needs to be taken immediately. Treaties and
agreements for the military and commercial use of space must be negotiated and put into place. Universal safety measures must be agreed
upon and integrated into related legislation and treaties. Getting
implementation is a small problem compared to the much larger obstacle of getting people to
understand the potential benefits. Building such a system could provide cheap and limitless power for the entire planet, yet
instead of trying to find a way to make it work, most people shrug it off as being too expensive or too
difficult. Of course existing energy providers will fight, too. It only makes sense that coal and oil lobbies
will continue to find plenty of reasons for our representatives in Congress to reject limitless energy
from the sun.
West Coast
2011
94
Neg Handbook
Launches DA Links
SPS requires hundreds of satellites to offset energy use
Al Globus, space expert, Spring 2008, On The Moon, Ad Astra, http://www.nss.org/adastra/AdAstraSBSP-2008.pdf
While it has been suggested that in the long term, space solar power (SSP) can provide all the clean, renewable energy Earth could possibly need (and then some), there has been less
discussion on the most economic way to produce that power. If we want to build two or three solar power satellites, one obvious approach is to manufacture the parts on the ground, launch
high launch rate. The cost issue is obvious: the cheapest launches today run thousands of dollars per kilogram to low Earth orbit (LEO), and we need to get the materials all the way to
geosynchronous Earth orbit (GEO), which is significantly more expensive. The cost of launch goes up very quickly with the change in velocity, which is measured in meters per second (m/s). For
each increase in velocity, additional fuel is needed, and even more fuel to lift the additional fuel, and heavier structures to hold the increased fuel, and even more fuel to lift the heavier
structures you get the idea. In any case, the velocity change from the ground to LEO is 8,600 m/s, but to GEO its 12,400 m/s. Paul Werbos (see references on page 36) estimates that launch
costs must come down to somewhere in the neighborhood of $450/kg for SSP to deliver energy near current prices (5-10 cents/kw-h). Fortunately, a high launch rate drives prices down, just
also a
effect? We dont know. Theres reason to believe the problems wont be severe, but the studies conducted so far are inadequate.
of the
hurdles to them is the transportation of SSPSs to the operational geostationary Earth orbit (GEO). The objectives of this
study are to examine the transportation of SSPSs, and to give a reference transportation scenario. This study presumes that the SSPSs have a
mass of 10,000 tons each and are constructed at a rate of one per year. Reusable launch vehicles (RLVs) are assumed for the transportation to low
Earth orbit (LEO), and reusable orbit transfer vehicles (OTVs) propelled by a solar electric propulsion system for the transportation from LEO to GEO. The payload element delivered to LEO by
each launch is individually transferred by each OTV transportation service to GEO, where the elements are assembled into a whole SSPS. The OTV round-trip time is assumed to be a year.
With these operations and reasonable estimations for the OTV subsystems, the OTV payload ratio was obtained. This, with an
SSPS element mass, gave the total mass that has to be launched by RLVs. The result indicated that about 300 times of launch are
required per year.
West Coast
2011
95
Neg Handbook
Japan CP Solves
Japan is the global leader on SPS already doing it
Asymmetric Threats Contingency Alliance, 6-13-2010, Japan Takes Lead in Wireless Power? Mi2g,
http://www.mi2g.com/cgi/mi2g/frameset.php?pageid=http%3A//www.mi2g.com/cgi/mi2g/press/1306
10.php
In the footsteps of Nikola Tesla, Japan intends to send its first solar-panel-equipped satellite into space that
could wirelessly beam Gigawatt-strong streams of power down to earth, each enough to power nearly 300,000
homes eco-efficiently. A Gigawatt is what a mid-size nuclear power station produces. Putting solar panels in space bypasses
many of the difficulties of installing them on Earth. In orbit, there are no cloudy days, very few zoning laws, and the cold
ambient temperature is ideal for causing the least amount of weathering and degradation in performance. The Ministry of Economy, Trade and
Industry (METI) and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency are leading the project. They plan
Japan is already the leader on SPS they could easily do large scale implementation
Hokkaido Shimbun, 2-8-2008, JAXA Testing Space Solar Power System, Pink Tentacle,
http://www.pinktentacle.com/2008/02/jaxa-testing-space-solar-power-system/
For decades, scientists have explored the possibility of using space-based solar cells to power the Earth. Some see
orbiting power stations as a clean and stable energy source that promises to slow global warming, while others dismiss the idea as an expensive
and impractical solution to the worlds energy problems. While
Earths surface. The satellites convert sunlight into powerful microwave (or laser) beams that are aimed at receiving stations on Earth, where they are converted into electricity. On February
JAXA will take a step closer to the goal when they begin testing a microwave power transmission
system designed to beam the power from the satellites to Earth. In a series of experiments to be conducted at the Taiki Multi-Purpose Aerospace Park in Hokkaido, the researchers will
20,
use a 2.4-meter-diameter transmission antenna to send a microwave beam over 50 meters to a rectenna (rectifying antenna) that converts the microwave energy into electricity and powers a
researchers expect these initial tests to provide valuable engineering data that will pave
the way for JAXA to build larger, more powerful systems.
household heater. The
It doesnt matter who develops SPS it will spill over once someone does a
demonstration project
James Bloom, Guardian, 11-1-2007, Power from the final frontier,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/nov/01/guardianweeklytechnologysection.research
Space Island Group is a Californian startup with an ambitious strategy. Gene Meyers, its chief executive, says the company has almost
completed financing for a test prototype launch at a total cost of $200m. "We
two years," he says. "It will be a 10-25MW system in low Earth orbit, using a microwave beam to deliver the energy to ground stations,
probably located in Europe." Their main competitors are Mitsubishi and an as-yet unnamed European
consortium. "Mitsubishi is more advanced in their satellite design, but are stymied by launch costs," Meyers says. Space Island will use Nasa fuel tanks and launch facilities built in the
1970s. "They are designed to handle a launch every week, so the capacity is there to scale up to a larger system," he says. The plan is to have a 100 gigawatt service in operation by 2025.
The Indian government has expressed interest in becoming a customer. Many rural areas are undergoing
development but do not have access to the national grid. There are also a large number of island nations paying excessive amounts to
distribute electricity. Leopold Summerer at the European Space Agency says: "I think we'll
West Coast
2011
96
Neg Handbook
Private CP Solves
The private sector solves space better than NASA
James Burk, VP of Artemis Society Intl, 6-3-2004, What the Moon-Mars Commissions Report Should
Say, Mars News, http://www.marsnews.com/articles/20040603what_the_moonmars_commissions_report_should_say.html
For too long, NASA has stifled creativity and entrepreneurialism on the part of non-governmental efforts
to pioneer space. In the late 1990s, many firms such as Rotary Rocket and Beal Aerospace were working on bringing SSTO/RLV
technologies to market, and NASA did everything to prevent their success. Firms like LunaCorp and TransOrbital were talking about private
lunar missions and NASA did everything to stifle them, including spreading rumors of a new NASA moon probe, which ultimately amounted to
future projects. Let NASA set the direction & goals, but let the private sector implement them and create wealth & commercial opportunities
from them. That is a much faster way to get into space, and also much cheaper for the public.
Its just economics anyone can provide the money to spur SPS
Rob Mahan, founder of Citizens for Space Based Solar Power, 12-28-2007, SBSP FAQ, http://csbsp.org/sbsp-faq/#06
Let me start by saying that I believe there are three solutions to every complex problem. First, the technical solution - how are we going to solve
the problem (often the easiest). Second, the financial solution - who is going to pay for / profit from the solution. And third, the political
solution will initially be dependent on developing low cost and reliable access to space, but later we could use resources mined from Moon and
The financial solution will admittedly be very expensive at first, so there must
be an early adopter, like the Defense Department, to provide a market and rewards for those willing to invest
in space based solar power and the supporting technologies. Engineering and scientific advancements and the
commercialization of supporting technologies will soon lead to ubiquitous and low cost access to
space and more widespread use of wireless power transmision. Economies of scale will eventually make space-based
solar power affordable, but probably never cheap again, like energy was fifty years ago. Eventual Moon based operations will reduce
near Earth objects like asteroids.
costs significantly, since it takes twenty-two times less energy to launch from Moon than from Earths gravity well and the use of lunar
materials will allow heavier, more robust structures.
DOD doesnt need to run the program they just want to be a customer for anyone
who produces SPS
Alan Boyle, Science Editor, 10-12-2007, Power from Space? http://qwstnevrythg.blogcity.com/power_from_space_pentagon_likes_the_idea.htm
Even then, the economic equation still doesn't add up, due primarily to the high cost of launching payloads to orbit. But in the near future, the
U.S. military could become a potential "anchor tenant customer" for space-generated power, the report
says. "The business case may close in the near future with appropriate technology investment and risk-reduction efforts by the U.S.
government, and with appropriate financial incentives to industry," the report says. Smith said the military would
prefer to buy its power from a commercial space provider, rather than operating the system itself. "It
is our goal to move this entire project out of DOD [the Department of Defense] as quickly as possible," he said.
"Energy is not our business. We want to be a customer."
West Coast
2011
97
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
98
Neg Handbook
$1,3 billion satellite is the first out of the four satellites projected for the Space Based
Infrared System (SBIRS), a project which outperforms and intends to replace the current Defense
Support Program satellites, which are still in orbit. Today, we launched the next generation missile warning capability, Air
Force Space Command commander Gen. William Shelton said in a statement. Its taken a lot of hard work by the government-industry team
and we couldnt be more proud. We look forward to this satellite providing superb capabilities for many years to come. The
satellite,
dubbed GEO-1, will circle the Earth in a geosynchronous orbit at about 22,000 miles its coverage area,
and provide enhanced early warning of incoming missiles though its infrared heat-sensitive
technology, gather intelligence, as well as situational awareness for military personnel. Officials say its main
feature is the fact that it can track multiple areas and potential threats at once, as opposed to the current attention deficit defense satellites
currently in orbit.
West Coast
2011
99
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
100
Neg Handbook
AT Proliferation Advantage
A more layered US missile defense system will cause China to modernize its aresenal
undermining global nonproliferation efforts
Jing-dong Yuan, PhD, Senior Associate @ East Asian Nonproliferation Program, Spring 2003
Chinese Responses to U.S. Missile Defenses, Nonproliferation Review, Scholar
Owing to its small size and its current deployment mode-in which nuclear warheads and the liquid-fueled ICBMs are separately stored and
launch preparation takes several hours--a limited U. S. missile defense system could neutralize China's strategic nuclear deterrent. 'While
the initial U.S. missile defense deployment seems moderate, the Bush administration has indicated that
it would be "a starting point for improved and expanded capabilities later." Indeed, unlike the limited
missile defenses planned by the Clinton administration, the layered missile-defense architecture the Bush administration
envisions includes multiple basing missile defense systems capable of intercepting incoming ballistic missiles during their
boost phase, mid-course, or terminal phase. Thus, while China's public rhetoric against U.S. missile defenses has
receded, its sense of vulnerability has not. U.S. missile defense systems, once operational, threaten the
very credibility, reliability, and effectiveness of China's woefully inadequate strategic nuclear arsenal.
Barring a significant breakthrough in achieving strategic understandings between Beijing and Washington, a U.S. decision to deploy
ballistic missile defense systems will force China to react in ways that could have farreaching
consequences for global arms control and nonproliferation and, consequently, regional stability.5 China
may embark on a nuclear modernization drive in both quantitative and qualitative terms unseen in
the past two decades. Unlike Russia, which hard economic realities may prevent from maintaining a
large nuclear arsenal (a number higher than the 1,700-2,200 range stipulated in the May 2002 Moscow Treaty), China has the
economic wherewithal to significantly expand and modernize its strategic nuclear force. While in relative
terms Chinese defense spending remains low as a percentage of its gross domestic product, it has risen at a doubledigit rate since 1990 as the
economy registers significant growth during the same period. In addition, China
broader implications for second-tier nuclear weapons states are that they will be less interested in
joining any multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations and instead will be developing their system
penetration capabilities. With second-tier NWS developing more and better nuclear weapons,
countries such as India and Pakistan will likely follow suit, having an overall negative impact on global
arms control.
West Coast
2011
101
Neg Handbook
AT Terrorism Advantage
The U.S.s space assets are secure- lack of technology and deterrence checks
Hui Zhang is a research associate in the Project on Managing the Atom at Harvard Universitys John F.
Kennedy School of Government. Action/Reaction:, Arms control today
2005. http://www.armscontrol.org/print/1943
Chinas Security The United States clearly has legitimate concerns about its space assets, given that
U.S. military operations and the U.S. economy are increasingly dependent on them. Satellites are
inherently vulnerable to attacks from many different sources, including ground-based missiles, lasers,
and radiation from a high-altitude nuclear explosion. However, it does not mean that the United States
currently faces credible threats from states that might exploit those vulnerabilities.[8] Most analysts
believe no country seriously threatens U.S. space assets.[9] Only the United States and, in the Cold
War era, the Soviet Union have explored, tested, and developed space weapons; Russia placed a
moratorium on its program in the 1980s. To be sure, a number of countries, including China, are
capable of attacking U.S. satellites with nuclear weapons, but such an attack would be foolhardy, as it
would almost certainly be met by a deadly U.S. response.
would be against military or governmental facilities, sites involved in military production, or command and control. The objective
would be to eliminate the possibility of future attacks or the support for those who would engage in future attacks. That such a response would
inevitably result in massive civilian casualties is sad. But such a response would not, by definition, be terrorism A nuclear retaliation Iran in
response to a terrorist nuclear attack would inevitably draw France, Russia, and China to enter the conflict. To believe this you
must
believe that France, Russia, and China will act irrationally. There is absolutely no reason to believe
that this is the case. All three nations know that their intervention against the U. S. would result in total
annihilation. There are other issues as well and lets examine the two distinct cases: Russia on the one hand and France and China on the
other. As a major non-Gulf producer of oil Russia would be in a position to benefit enormously in case of a disruption of Gulf
oil production or shipment. That being the case they would publicly deplore a retaliation against Iran but privately rejoice._ Both France
and China are in an extremely delicate position. A nuclear response by either would result in total annihilation and,
equally importantly, wouldnt keep the oil flowing. Lack of a blue water navy means that both nations are
completely at the mercy of the United Statess (or more specifically the U. S. Navys) willingness to keep shipments of oil
moving out of the Gulf. China is particularly vulnerable since it has only about two weeks worth of strategic oil reserves. Neither France nor
China has any real ability to project military force other than nuclear force beyond their borders. Theyd be upset. But theyre in no position to
do anything about it.
West Coast
2011
102
Neg Handbook
engages in
various forms of psychological warfare intended to shape U.S. policies and attitudes . This includes the
dissemination of information meant to gain support for Chinas position as well as the use of international law, or what is called legal warfare,
to shape opinion and otherwise forward Chinas goals.98
West Coast
2011
103
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
104
Neg Handbook
Spending DA Links
Space-based Missile defense is expensive and experts agree its ineffective
Space Daily 2006, Experts Debate Space-Based Missile Defense Assets
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Experts_Debate_Space_Based_Missile_Defense_Assets_999.html
The Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis, a Washington think tank, has issued a study saying the
implementation of plans for space missile defense is critical for U.S. national security and an effective system against at least some
intercontinental ballistic missiles from so-called rogue states should be in place no later than 2010. "The absence of a space strategy is a gap in national security," said Robert Pfaltzgraff,
president of the IFPA, during a roundtable on the new report hosted by the American Foreign Policy Council, a small conservative Washington think tank, last Friday on Capitol Hill. "Only space
can give us a global missile defense." The threat is even more immediate, many fear, following several missile tests on July 4 by North Korea. While their long range Taepodong-2 ICBM was
unsuccessful, several short range No Dong missiles appeared to work effectively in the tests. One of North Korea's main exports is weapons, and Pfaltzgraff said the United States should be
increasingly concerned that these short range missiles could end up in the hands of terrorists aiming to launch them from domestic shores. The IFPA analysts claimed that U.S. ballistic missile
defense must be revaluated in light of these developments. However, other analysts said the Bush administration has failed so far in adequately developing its BMD programs.
"This won't do anything for security and will blow the defense budget," said Craig Eisendrath, board
chairman for the Project of Nuclear Awareness and a former State Department analyst who dealt with
space and nuclear policy. Similar criticisms were prevalent following President Ronald Reagan's proposal of a Strategic Defense Initiative,
also known as "Star Wars," that originally conceptualized deploying nuclear missile defenses in space. The suggestion was revived again under the current Bush administration with the idea of
that U.S. withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2001 opened up additional options in the use of space-based weapons for missile defense. However, the Bush administration had
not adequately explored these options and current U.S. missile defense policies remained virtually unchanged since the Clinton administration, he said. "Bush will eventually be judged by
what he does in the next two years" of his waning presidency, he said. Eisendraft said U.S.withdrawal from the ABM treaty had been a negative move for the United States and that many of
America's missile defense challenges today stemmed from that pullout. Current ABM defense systems deployed in California and Alaska were inadequate, he said. Should a missile be
launched, the 11 ground-based midcourse interceptors currently deployed would probably be unable to distinguish between an actual threat and a decoy. The United States has also refused
to join in a treaty banning the use of space for missile defense. China, Japan, and the European Union are all willing signatories, Eisendraft said, who helped draft the original treaty. "This is
The plans price tag is astronomical most expensive defense R&D program
Associated Press 04-04-2005 Congress Mulls Funding for Missile Defense,
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,152339,00.html
Congress is weighing how much to invest in the fledgling ballistic missile defense system, which has
suffered setbacks and whose cost could easily top the $150 billion partial price tag the Bush
administration has estimated. The system is a political hot button because, at a time of budget deficit
pressures, it's the most expensive defense research and development program. President Bush wants lawmakers to
approve $9 billion for the system in the 2006 budget year $1 billion less than the administration previously planned The program is meant to protect the country by launching interceptors
from land or sea to shoot down missiles fired from overseas. The system is a substantially downscaled version of President Reagan's effort in the mid-1980s, which critics dubbed "Star Wars"
for its futuristic weaponry. Its first eight interceptors have been installed in underground bunkers in Alaska and California. Testing of the system and production of more missiles are
continuing. At a time of worries over the weapons programs of North Korea and Iran, many Republicans and Democrats say they think the system will eventually be an effective line of defense
and that a limited ability to shoot down missiles is better than none. These lawmakers fear Bush's latest request won't be enough to continue developing it at the current pace. "The threat
remains real. The American people want their homeland defended, and if they felt these reductions would jeopardize them, they would not be happy with us," said Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.,
West Coast
2011
105
Neg Handbook
Space-based missile defense is only being used to spur the military industrial complex
Joseph Gerson, Director @PAMS, July/August 2001 Z magazine,
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Militarization_Space/Dark_Times.html Since the end of the
Cold War, the words "nuclear weapons" and "nuclear war" have become disembodied from their cataclysmic meanings. Hiroshima and
Nagasaki were decimated half a century ago, and since the collapse of the Berlin Wall there has been little public debate about the dangers of
nuclear weapons and war. For many, nuclear weapons are abstract and dated. But, nuclear weapons-some 1,000 times more powerful than the
Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs-are not abstractions. They are built and deployed to be used, and despite arms control agreements, an
estimated 32,000 fission and fusion warheads remain deployed or in the nuclear power's stockpiles. Only
"Missile defense" architecture includes interceptor missiles, airborne lasers, ballistic missile
earlywarning radars, and multi-purpose satellites. These are to be deployed on the ground, at sea, in
the air, and in outer space-an approach that is based on politics as well as on anticipated technological
requirements. With this strategy, the Army, Navy, and Air Force, and their political and corporate
allies, each get a share in Star Wars' spoils and power.
West Coast
2011
106
Neg Handbook
has criticized U.S. plans for space-based weapons, saying they could trigger a new
arms race. Washington has resisted efforts by Russia and China to negotiate a global ban on weapons
in space. Reflecting Russia's suspicions about U.S. intentions, Solovtsov alleged Monday that the U.S. is considering the scenario of a first
Czech Republic. Russia
nuclear strike that would destroy most Russian missiles. A few surviving Russian weapons launched in retaliation could then be destroyed by
the U.S. missile defense system. Solovtsov said the concept was not feasible.
weaponization, last year the U.S. Air Force publicized its vision of how counterspace operations could help achieve and maintain space superiority, the freedom to attack as well as the
freedom from attack in space.*2+ Already the United States is pursuing a number of military systems*3+ that could be used to attack targets in space from Earth or targets on Earth from
space. To China, current U.S. deployment of a Ground-Based Midcourse Missile Defense system represents an intentional first step toward space weaponization.[4] China experts argue that
the interceptors of the system based in Alaska and California could be used to attack satellites.[5] After all, such systems could be easily adapted to target satellites, which are more fragile
and more predictable than ballistic missile warheads. If the United States is determined to ensure space dominance, it would first want to use such weapons to negate an adversarys
satellites.
Beijing is even more concerned about U.S. plans for a robust, layered missile defense system.
Such a system would provide the capability to engage ballistic missiles in all phases of flight: soon after they are launched, at the height of their
China is
concerned about interceptors and other defenses that the United States would like to position in
space. The Pentagon announced in December 2002 that the United States would continue the
development and testing of space-based defenses, specifically space-based kinetic energy [hit-to-kill]
interceptors and advanced target tracking satellites. The Pentagon has indicated that a Space-Based Interceptor Test Bed, intended to
trajectory, and as they descend. These are known as the boost, midcourse, and terminal phases, respectively. In particular,
develop and test plans for a lightweight space-based kinetic kill interceptor, is expected to conduct its first experiment in 2012. Within the
next year, the Pentagon expects to launch into low-Earth orbit (LEO) its first Near Field Infrared Experiment (NFIRE) satellite, designed to gather
information on ballistic missiles during the first few minutes of their flight. Although the NFIRE at this point is only charged with gathering
information, the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) had originally planned to include a kill vehicle in the NFIREs payload and could presumably
Moreover, research on a Space-Based Laser (SBL) had been conducted for some time
for boost-phase missile defense.
change its mind again.
West Coast
2011
107
Neg Handbook
Space is not a
junkyard or bombing range or playground for the high-tech boys with their new expensive toys. It is a
place of wonder and life. It is the place where our spirit soars and our dreams live and grow. The United Nations recognized this
when they created the 1967 Outer Space Treaty that says no weapons of "mass destruction" can be
put into the heavens. The treaty says that the heavenly bodies are the province of all human kind. We must call for the strengthening of this treaty, not its nullification! The
stop the aerospace industry which views space as a new market for war and enormous profit. The time has come for a new consciousness about space.
Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space has been working since 1992 to create a new consciousness about space. When we look up at that beautiful moon on a clear
night, we must remember that everyone on the entire planet has the same experience - it is a unifying symbol for all the people. We cannot allow the Pentagon to think that they can put
military bases on the moon or weapons into orbit around the Earth. I believe that space must be protected just like any other wilderness. We must create a global movement that says we shall
not move the bad seed of war into the heavens. We must not pollute space any longer with nuclear reactors and nuclear generators, and we must stop all planning for U.S. space weapons and
For once, we have a chance to stop something truly horrific before it actually happens.
We can prevent an arms race before it begins if we act now. If we pause long enough to give the
Pentagon and the aerospace industries the opportunity, they surely will move the arms race into the
heavens and rob our children and their children of the resources that they need to create a sustainable life on our earth. We must call out to the public to help us keep space for peace.
We must demand that the politicians rescind plans for "missile defense" and the space-based laser. We
military bases on the moon.
must say that space will be protected as a wilderness.Our relations who sat around their council fires for centuries before us marveled at the wonders of the night sky. We must honor them by
preventing the arms race from moving into the heavens. We must keep space for peace
West Coast
2011
108
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
109
Neg Handbook
Spacebased missiles will generate huge amounts of small debris particles, said Primack. Some will arise from
weapon explosions, but even more will come from the resulting small projectiles hitting larger objects
already in orbit and fragmenting them. According to Primack, so many bits of junk could eventually be
orbiting the Earth that no satellite or space station could be operated in Low Earth Orbit, 200 to 1,250
miles above the planet. Space shuttles and other space vehicles would need heavy armor to pass
through the debris.
more damage. Satellites are armored, but they can only withstand BB-sized particles. Even the International Space Station is vulnerable to any debris much larger than a BB.
Increased space debris will destroy all satellites, making space unusable every new
satellite and launch makes the situation worse
Brian Adeba Embassy 04-04-2007, US Scientist Says Weapon Ban could Curb Space Junk,, Canadas
Foreign Policy Newsweekly Issue 148, http://www.embassymag.ca/pdf/2007/040407_em.pdf
A scientist with the U.S- based Union of Concerned Scientists has called on Canada to use its position in multilateral fora to push for a ban on
the use of weapons in space. David Wright, co-director of the Union of Concerned Scientists global security program, fears that if countries
start putting weap- ons in space, the arms could be used to destroy satellites, which are vital to humans communica- tion needs. Though
there are cur- rently no weapons in space, Mr. Wright believes the destruction of an aging weather satellite by the Chinese early this year
sets a dan- gerous precedent for other coun- tries because the incident has the potential of sparking an arms race in space. In addition, he
fears that if nations start to destroy old
satel-lites or those belonging to enemy states, this could lead to an increase in the
amount of debris floating in space. He said spy satellites are 10-times larger than the weather satellite destroyed by the Chinese and could add more debris in
space if they are destroyed. Mr. Wright visited Ottawa last week as part of a campaign by the Rideau Institute for International Affairs and the U.S.-based Secure World Foundation to
educate the public and politicians about the dangers of space weapons. Since the first satellite was launched 50 years ago, many more have been placed in space to monitor weather
conditions, as well as for spying and for com- munication purposes. Now outer space is littered with broken piec- es from some of these satellites that are no longer use an esti- mated
500,000 pieces of debris. Mr. Wright said the destruction of the Chinese satellite added 40,000 more pieces, contributing to a 20 per cent increase in space garbage created by humans.
Eventually, when that amount gets larger, you have a situation where you cant use certain areas of
space, he said in an interview with Embassy. An increase in space junk created by the military destruc- tion of satellites could
eventu-ally lead to a situation where humans would no longer be able to launch satellites, thereby
dis-rupting vital communication links such as weather monitoring, sci-entific observation, navigation,
commercial ties and military operations. Mr. Wright said even though satellites have shields to protect them from debris,
pieces which can travel at a speed of 30,000 km per hour or 30 times faster than a jet aircraft, could endanger
satellites if there are so many of them out there. No Way To Remove Space Junk Michael Krepon, an expert on arms
control and disarmament issues at the Henry L. Stimson Center in Washington, D.C., said the world is now increasingly dependent on space.
There is no way of
removing debris from space and Mr. Wright said the best solution is not to put them out there. Its like
global warming, once you put carbon dioxide in the air, theres no way of getting it out. For that
The more dependent people become, the more fearful they become if satellites are placed at risk, he said.
reason, banning the testing and use of destructive anti-satellite weapons should be an urgent priority for the inter- national community, said
Mr. Wright at a media conference on Parliament Hill.
West Coast
2011
110
Neg Handbook
The risk is linear: collisions become more likely as more debris is added.
Michael W Taylor, J.D. University of Georgia; LL.M. (Air and Space Law), McGill, Fall 2007 , Trashing
the Solar System One Planet at a Time: Earths Orbital Debris Problem, Georgetown International
Environmental Law Review
Satellites operate within an enormous volume of space. For example, the volume of the most congested areas of LEO is more than 177 times
larger than the volume of airspace typically used by commercial airliners.69 It seems
West Coast
2011
111
Neg Handbook
both sides retain thousands of nuclear forces on alert and congured to ght a nuclear war.
When briefed about the size and status of U.S. nuclear forces, President George W. Bush reportedly asked What do we need all these weapons for?43
The answer, as it was during the Cold War, is that the forces remain on alert to conduct a number of possible contingencies, including a nuclear strike against Russia. This fact, of course, is
not lost on the Rus- sian leadership, which has been increasing its reliance on nuclear weapons to compensate for the countrys declining military might. In the mid-1990s, Russia dropped its
pledge to refrain from the rst use of nuclear weapons and conducted a series of exercises in which Russian nuclear forces prepared to use nuclear weapons to repel a NATO invasion. In
October 2003, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov reiter-ated that Moscow might use nuclear weapons preemptively in any number of contingencies, including a NATO attack.44
So, it remains business as usual with U.S. and Russian nuclear forces. And business as usual includes
the occasional false alarm of a nuclear attack. There have been several of these incidents over the years. In September 1983, as a relatively new
Soviet early-warning satellite moved into position to monitor U.S. missile elds in North Dakota, the sun lined up in just such a way as to fool the Russian satellite into reporting that half a
dozen U.S. missiles had been launched at the Soviet Union. Perhaps mindful that a brand new satel- lite might malfunction, the ofcer in charge of the command center that monitored data
from the early-warning satellites refused to pass the alert to his superiors. He reportedly explained his caution by saying: When people start a war, they dont start it with only ve missiles.
Russian president to communicate with his military advisors and review his options for launching his arsenal. In this case, the Russian earlywarning satellites could clearly see that no attack was under way and the crisis passed without incident.46 In both cases, Russian observers
were con-dent that what appeared to be a small attack was not a fragmentary picture of a much larger one. In the case of the Norwegian
space-based sensors played a crucial role in assuring the Russian leadership that it was
not under attack. The Russian command sys-tem, however, is no longer able to provide such reliable, early warning. The dissolution of
sounding rocket,
the Soviet Union cost Moscow several radar stations in newly independent states, creating attack cor-ridors through which Moscow could
not see an attack launched by U.S. nuclear submarines.47
would
have to make a judgment call. No state has the ability to denitively deter-mine the cause of the satellites failure. Even the
United States does not maintain (nor is it likely to have in place by 2010) a sophisticated space surveillance
system that would allow it to distinguish between a satellite malfunction, a debris strike or a
deliberate attack and Russian space surveillance capabilities are much more limited by comparison.
Even the risk assessments for col-lision with debris are speculative, particularly for the unique orbits in which Russian early-warning satellites
operate.
West Coast
2011
112
Neg Handbook
Launches Disadvantage
West Coast
2011
113
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
114
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
115
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
116
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
117
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
118
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
119
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
120
Neg Handbook
Ozone depletion effects all areas of the food chain drastically changes biodiversity
Chandramita Bora, MA in Economics, 2010, Ozone Layer Depletion: Effects and Causes of Ozone
Depletion, Buzzle, http://www.buzzle.com/articles/ozone-layer-depletion-effects-and-causes-of-ozonedepletion.html
The effects of ozone depletion are not limited to humans only, as it can affect animals and plants as
well. It can affect important food crops like rice by adversely affecting cyanobacteria, which helps
them absorb and utilize nitrogen properly. Phytoplankton, an important component of the marine
food chain, can also be affected by ozone depletion. Studies in this regard have shown that ultraviolet
rays can influence the survival rates of these microscopic organisms by affecting their orientation and
mobility.
West Coast
2011
121
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
122
Neg Handbook
Independent climate models confirm the impact of the ozone on climate change
Agence France Presse, 4-21-2011, Ozone hole linked to southern rain increases, AFP,
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iOaD5cbu9B7kBnzdXUiXmi9I00ug?docId=CNG.
9057d69a3ac96dafe3eb30ac1711a0b9.41
"While the ozone hole has been considered as a solved problem, we're now finding it has caused a
great deal of the climate change that's been observed," said co-author Lorenzo Polvani, senior
research scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. The study used two independently drawn
climate models -- the Canadian Middle Atmosphere Model and the United States' National Center for
Atmospheric Research (NCAR) Community Atmosphere Model.
West Coast
2011
123
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
124
Neg Handbook
B. We are at critical mass new launches create a pollution cloud that limits any
economic benefit from space
Thierry Snchal, PhD from Columbia University, 2007, Space Debris Pollution: A Convention
Proposal, Protocol for a Space Debris Risk and Liability Convention,
http://www.pon.org/downloads/ien16.2.Senechal.pdf
The time is right for addressing the problem posed by orbital debris and realizing that, if we fail to do
so, there will be an increasing risk to continued reliable use of space-based services and operations as
well as to the safety of persons and property in space. We have reached a critical threshold at which
the density of debris at certain altitudes is high enough to guarantee collisions, thus resulting in
increased fragments. In a scenario in which space launches are more frequent, it is likely that we will
create a self-sustaining, semi-permanent cloud of orbital pollution that threatens all future
commercial and exploration activities within certain altitude ranges. The debris and the liability it may
cause may also poison relations between major powers.
West Coast
2011
125
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
126
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
127
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
128
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
129
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
130
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
131
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
132
Neg Handbook
Space debris will coincide with a false alarm which triggers nuclear war
Jeffrey Lewis, Postdoctoral Fellow in the Advanced Methods of Cooperative Study Program, Worked In
the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, Center for Defense Information, 6-2004, What
if Space Were Weaponized?, Center for Defense Information, http://www.cdi.org/PDFs/scenarios.pdf
Even the United States does not maintain (nor is it likely to have in place by 2010) a sophisticated space
surveillance system that would allow it to distinguish between a satellite malfunction, a debris strike or
a deliberate attack and Russian space surveillance capabilities are much more limited by comparison.
Even the risk assessments for collision with debris are speculative, particularly for the unique orbits in
which Russian early-warning satellites operate. During peacetime, it is easy to imagine that the Russians
would conclude that the loss of a satellite was either a malfunction or a debris strike. But how confident
could U.S. planners be that the Russians would be so calm if the accident in space occurred in tandem
with a second false alarm, or occurred during the middle of a crisis? What might happen if the debris
strike occurred shortly after a false alarm showing a missile launch? False alarms are appallingly
common according to information obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, the U.S.-Canadian
North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) experienced 1,172 moderately serious false
alarms between 1977 and 1983 an average of almost three false alarms per week. Comparable
information is not available about the Russian system, but there is no reason to believe that it is any
more reliable.
West Coast
2011
133
Neg Handbook
Politics Disadvantage
West Coast
2011
134
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
135
Neg Handbook
United States would seek to retain global leadership and to preclude the rise of a
global rival or a return to multipolarity for the indefinite future. On balance, this is the best long-term guiding
principle and vision. Such a vision is desirable not as an end in itself, but because a world in which the United States
exercises leadership would have tremendous advantages. First, the global environment would be more
open and more receptive to American values - democracy, free markets, and the rule of law. Second, such a
world would have a better chance of dealing cooperatively with the world's major problems, such as
nuclear proliferation, threats of regional hegemony by renegade states, and low-level conflicts. Finally, U.S.
leadership would help preclude the rise of another hostile global rival, enabling the United States and
the world to avoid another global cold or hot war and all the attendant dangers, including a global
nuclear exchange. U.S. leadership would therefore be more conducive to global stability than a bipolar or a
multipolar balance of power system.
variety of reasons. Meanwhile, the companies and banks based in these societies are often less established and more vulnerable to the consequences of a financial crisis than more established
firms in wealthier societies. As a result, developing countries and countries where capitalism has relatively recent and shallow roots tend to suffer greater economic and political damage when
crisis strikes--as, inevitably, it does. And, consequently, financial crises often reinforce rather than challenge the global distribution of power and wealth. This may be happening yet again.
None of which means that we can just sit back and enjoy the recession. History may suggest that financial crises actually help capitalist great powers maintain their leads--but it has other, less
. If financial crises have been a normal part of life during the 300-year rise of the liberal capitalist system under the
so has war. The wars of the League of Augsburg and the Spanish Succession; the Seven Years War; the American Revolution; the Napoleonic Wars; the
two World Wars; the cold war: The list of wars is almost as long as the list of financial crises. Bad
economic times can breed wars. Europe was a pretty peaceful place in 1928, but the Depression poisoned German
public opinion and helped bring Adolf Hitler to power. If the current crisis turns into a depression,
what rough beasts might start slouching toward Moscow, Karachi, Beijing, or New Delhi to be born?
The United States may not, yet, decline, but, if we can't get the world economy back on track, we may still have to fight.
reassuring messages as well
Anglophone powers,
West Coast
2011
136
Neg Handbook
9/11, Republican communications strategist Frank Luntz wrote a memo saying that the
words illegal immigrant would conjure up a link to terrorism and negate support for legalization,
and he turned out to be correct. Before 9/11 we had the Immigration and Naturalization Service, and now we have Immigration
and Customs Enforcement within the Department of Homeland Security. In these ten years, conservatives and liberals alike have
alienated and squandered one of the countrys greatest assets because they cant figure out how to
keep terrorists out of the country without ending the great tradition of immigration. Last week, DHS
ended, finally, the ineffective and highly charged special registration program for Muslim immigrants.
It had been just one example of the official policy of racial profiling that fuels Islamaphobia in our country.
Since he took office, Obama has stalled on immigration, insisting that reform cannot move without Republican support.
Now he needs to acknowledge out loud that immigration and terrorism are not the same thing, and
use his capital to lean on Republicans and Democrats alike to finally bring our immigration policy into
the 21st century.
West Coast
2011
137
Neg Handbook
The optimists,
including the Presidents Latin American team, believe the trip will serve as a preamble of greater
substantive accomplishments to come in Washingtons relations with the region, and not mark a high point
based merely on public relations successes. If true, they have their work cut out for them, and only 18 months to get it done.
On the other hand, if they dont rise to the challenge and invest the necessary political capital, Obamas will
go down in the history books as just the latest in a long string of administrations that peddled hope
and new beginnings with our Latin neighbors in the course of a visit or two only to disappoint in the
end.
chapter in Washingtons engagement with the region based on mutual respect, common interests, and shared values will keep expectations high.
strategic
partnerships between the US and our Latin American neighbors. These sorts of strategic
collaborations could enable the Western Hemisphere to become the global behemoth in renewable
energy and biofuels, an area in which we are quickly losing ground to China. America stands at a crossroads. On the one hand, we can
technological expertisewielded by our private sector companies, research institutions and unique configuration of national laboratoriescould assist and support
continue our muddled, reactive engagement with Latin America. Or, we can forge a bold new vision of collaborative engagement to strengthen our energy security and manage the regions
Our global counterparts recognize that the countries south of the border are critical to their
energy security interests. Will America?
energy problems.
West Coast
2011
138
Neg Handbook
defeats
have led to a conventional wisdom in Washington that bipartisan immigration reform is impossible.
But a new consensus on immigration reform has emerged in the business community that could break
the logjam and provide a much-needed jolt to our economy. The idea is simple: Reform the way we attract and keep
talented and hard-working people from abroad to better promote economic growth.
West Coast
2011
139
Neg Handbook
that our president is fully capable of masterful political strategy. The president now has
the opportunity to redirect the last decades trajectory by resetting national priorities. This moment will not come again, and
struggling Americans are still waiting for Obama to make good on his promise of change. One enormous obstacle that stood in his way no
longer does: an unwinnable war on terror that created a budget sinkhole with more than $1 trillion spent in 10 years. Now
is the time
to end these wars and refocus our energy and resources on the domestic issues that are causing so much misery in the
lives of U.S. residents. With his detractors grasping at chewed up straws, here are the three things that Obama
should ram through Congress over the coming year.
West Coast
2011
140
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
141
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
142
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
143
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
144
Neg Handbook
with an immediate post-Apollo national decision (and a reasonable budget) to send astronauts to
Mars, it would not have proven possible by 1982, or 1989, or even perhaps anytime in the century if the task
proved too politically damaging in the face of setbacks. Heres the way Ive come to see it. It should have been
no surprise that On-To-Mars never happened. The reasons directly affect todays chances of tackling
the task in the near future. First, since Apollo had gloriously succeeded in its major purposerestoring
American status as the leading high-tech nation in the worldthe political support for further spending evaporated in
the face of new, more urgent challenges. Apollo had worked. Making the point again on a different
stage would have added little if any value.
attitude toward the VSE was to support ISS completion, robotic missions and the
return to the Moon. Citizens were, however, opposed to human missions to Mars and in particular the
associated risks. Similar to Europe, US citizens are totally unaware about the costs of NASA in US budgetary perspectives. The public also
perceived that public outreach is poorly executed. In 20052006, 450 US citizens aged 1824 participated in another
study and were contacted via internet tools [3]. Only 50% were aware about the VSE, 27% expressed doubts that NASA went to the Moon,
39% said that NASA does not do anything useful and 72% thought NASA money should be better spent elsewhere.
West Coast
2011
145
Neg Handbook
political incentive that the Cold War produced to advance space flight support
started to wane. The other major factor was the economy. The United State went through a period of
economic stagnation and recession that crippled its economy. With a bad economy the United States
government had fewer resources to devote to its space program. This lead to congress cutting funding
for the Apollo program and forcing NASA to go with cheaper alternatives.
West Coast
2011
146
Neg Handbook
such a mission would require NASA to develop a heavy-lift launch system to spring a crew of
astronauts out of Earth orbit, and the specs, timeline and cost of such rockets have caused friction
between the space agency and Congressional funders.
a speech at
Cape Canaveral, Obama announced that the astronauts' next stop is an asteroid. So far, the Obama
administration has been quiet on the need for a major sum of money to accomplish his goal. And unlike Kennedy, who used
Sputnik to promote the moon mission, Obama doesn't have a geopolitical imperative to justify the
goal. Congress is resisting Obama's change of direction, which could delay investment in the program.
West Coast
2011
147
Neg Handbook
The
President's ability to focus media attention on an issue, his power to bestow benefits on the
constituents of members of Congress who support his agenda, and his potential to deliver votes in
congressional elections increase the likelihood of legislative success for particular programs. Repeated
use of such tactics, however, will impose economic costs on society and concomitantly consume the President's
political capital. At some point the price to the President for pushing legislation through Congress exceeds the benefit he derives from
modify and kill legislation is well-documented. This is not meant to deny that the President has significant power that he can use to bring aspects of his legislative agenda to fruition.
doing so. Thus, a President would be unwise to rely too heavily on legislative changes to implement his policy vision.
In a Hollywood movie,
anything is possible. But in Congress, with limited money, limited time and limited patience, the
president can't get everything he wants. And after watching his cap and trade proposal fall flat in the Senate, his health care
cracking the congressional code. In the movie "The Matrix," Keanu Reeves, playing Neo, ends the film with the line, "Anything is possible."
bill lose support in both chambers, his tax proposals meet stiff resistance from the business community and key centrist Democrats, and his
financial service reform proposals go nowhere, he risks getting nothing that he wants.
West Coast
2011
148
Neg Handbook
Obama not
to squander precious political capital on hot-button issues that would alienate the business community, such as a
proposal to make it easier for workers to form unions.
Winners win only applies to pet issues like health care not the plan.
Chris Matthews and Chuck Todd, Host of Hardball and Correspondent for NBC, 6/22/2009, Hardball
with Chris Matthews, MSNBC, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31506736
MATTHEWS: Gentlemen, lets start and I want to start with Chuck, our guy on the beat. One thing weve learned, it seems, from presidents is
CHUCK TODD, NBC CORRESPONDENT/POLITICAL DIRECTOR: Well, no, youreA, youre absolutely right. And B, its, like, people that are
familiar with the way Rahm Emanuel thinks on trying to strategize when it comes to a legislative agenda and getting these big things done, you
know, this
is the lessons he feels like he learned the hard way in that first two years of the Clinton
administration, 93, 94, when a lot of their big things went down. Sure, they got their big stimulus
package, but they never did get health care. And that is what defines those first two years when you
look back on it. Fair or unfair, thats what its seen as.
West Coast
2011
149
Neg Handbook
Obamas popularity doesnt translate into his agenda public doesnt support specific
policies.
Rick Klein, ABC News' Senior Political Reporter, 6/23/2009, The Note: Drag & Pull -- Agenda Lags
Behind Obamas Popularity, ABC News, http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/06/the-note-agendalags-behind-obamas-popularity.html
With a news conference Tuesday at 12:30 pm ET (out of primetime), and a health care forum Wednesday evening on ABC (back in primetime),
the president gets to make his case with what remains the most solid brand in American politics
today: himself. That brand retains impressive approval ratings -- 65 percent in the new ABC News/Washington Post poll. But it
remains what he wants to do with those numbers that promises difficulties. From the start, the public
hasnt been behind his policies so much as its been behind him. And the president gets further out in front with
every new detail that emerges in a health care plan that isnt really a fully formed plan. (And look what was back Monday: Yes, we can, the
president said Monday morning, per ABCs Jake Tapper.) (The slogan really didnt have the same oomph this week, in the stodgy old
Diplomatic Reception Room, Tapper reported on Good Morning America Tuesday.) The underpinnings of Obamas presidency -- and his
argument for getting Congress to move his way -- has been found in the numbers all along: Since Obamas election, a key piece of his political
currency has been that confidence has been on an upward swing; right track finally beat wrong track in April. Now, wrong track is back on top - and with a slow erosion of support on key issues, the climb in optimism about the nations course is no longer.
interpretation, Edwards reports some very strong relationships between partisan public approval and partisan support in Congress which seem
West Coast
2011
150
Neg Handbook
space exploration vision is neither sustainable nor affordable unless NASAs leadership of the
exploration vision is deemed credible by the public and Congress. NASA will continue to operate
under a bright light of scrutiny. They must embrace best practices of program management, certainly from the public sector, but
also from the private sector. At all levels, NASA must be relentlessly innovative and institutionally nimble enough to embrace good ideas
arriving from any direction, especially from outside the proverbial box.
West Coast
2011
151
Neg Handbook
reform brings substantial economic gains even in the short runduring the first three years following legalization.
The real wages of newly legalized workers increase by roughly $4,405 per year among those in lessskilled jobs during the first three years of implementation, and $6,185 per year for those in higher-skilled jobs. The
higher earning power of newly legalized workers translates into an increase in net personal income of
$30 to $36 billion, which would generate $4.5 to $5.4 billion in additional net tax revenue. Moreover, an increase
in personal income of this scale would generate consumer spending sufficient to support 750,000 to
900,000 jobs.
West Coast
2011
152
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
153
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
154
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
155
Neg Handbook
Exploration causes space weaponization military will use NASA missions to expand
military programs.
Bruce K. Gagnon, coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space and a
contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus, 3/21/2009, The Space Arms Race and the NASA Scam , Foreign
Policy in Focus, http://www.antiwar.com/orig/bgagnon.php?articleid=14436
NASA was created as a civilian agency with a mission to do peaceful space exploration. But the
growing influence of the military industrial complex has rubbed out the line between civilian and
military programs. When George W. Bush appointed former Secretary of the Navy Sean O'Keefe to head NASA in late 2001, the
new space agency director announced that all NASA missions in the future would be "dual use." This
meant that every NASA space launch would be both military and civilian at the same time. The
military would ride the NASA Trojan horse and accelerate space weapons development without the
public's knowledge. NASA would expand space nuclear power systems to help create new designs for
weapons propulsion. Permanent, nuclear-powered bases on the moon and Mars would give the United
States a leg up in the race for control of those planetary bodies. The international competition for resource extraction
in space (helium-3 on the moon) is now full on.
West Coast
2011
156
Neg Handbook
Advances that entrepreneurs are making in suborbital space flight could eventually evolve
to a point where the Air Force would find it far easier, politically as well as financially, to acquire
platforms capable of delivering munitions from space.
miles above Earth.
The fog of war would reach an entirely new density, with our situational awareness of the
. Events would occur so quickly that we could
not even be sure which nation had initiated a strike. We would be repeating history, but this time with far graver consequences.
treat this as an act of war and respond accordingly.
course of battle in space limited and our decision cycles too slow to properly command engagements
Space war causes WMD conflict outweighs any of their war scenarios.
Gordon R. Mitchell et al, Associate Professor of Communication at the University of Pittsburgh, July
2001, Missile Defence: Trans-Atlantic Diplomacy at a Crossroads, ISIS Briefing Series on Ballistic
Missile Defence, No 6, http://www.pitt.edu/~gordonm/JPubs/Mitchelletal2001b.pdf
It is chilling to contemplate the possible effects of a space war. According to retired Lt. Col. Robert M.
Bowman, 'even a tiny projectile reentering from space strikes the earth with such high velocity that it
can do enormous damage - even more than would be done by a nuclear weapon of the same size!,. In the same
Star Wars technology touted as a quintessential tool of peace, defence analyst David Langford sees one of the most
destabilizing offensive weapons ever conceived: 'One imagines dead cities of microwave-grilled
people. Given this unique potential for destruction, it is not hard to imagine that any nation
subjected to space weapon attack would retaliate with maximum force, including use of nuclear,
biological, and/or chemical weapons. An accidental war sparked by a computer glitch in space could
plunge the world into the most destructive military conflict ever seen.
West Coast
2011
157
Neg Handbook
new space policy explicitly says that Washington will consider proposals and concepts for arms
control measures if they are equitable, effectively verifiable and enhance the national security of the United States and its allies.
West Coast
2011
158
Neg Handbook
attempt to
enjoy supremacy on earth through threatening space warfare tactics will remain the essential doctrine
of the U.S. for years to come. Perhaps this is why most of the complex space exploration
projects of NASA remain classified. Keith Glennon, the first director of NASA, said the major
implications of the U.S. Space Act was to pursue the development of activities in space for the benefit
of all humankind. Just like any other American policies, Glennons description of NASAs prerogatives
sounds dangerously suspicious.
West Coast
2011
159
Neg Handbook
Link Perception
Even if the plan doesnt cause actual weaponization, other nations will perceive it that
way.
Jeremy Hsu, contributor to Space.com, 5/5/2010, Is a New Space Weapon Race Heating Up?
http://www.space.com/8342-space-weapon-race-heating.html
Many existing space technologies play dual roles in both military and civilian life. The Global Positioning
Satellite (GPS) system which started out as military-only has since become common in consumer smartphones and car navigation systems.
Modern rocketry grew in part from the technology and scientific minds behind Nazi Germany's V-2 rockets of World War II, and continued to
evolve alongside ballistic missile technology. Even
relationship is so bad that he was convinced that NASA did that on purpose to mess them up, he
said. Theres a lot of mistrust and bad feelings.
West Coast
2011
160
Neg Handbook
Link Tech
Exploration program will be used to militarize space
Richard C. Cook, former NASA analyst and frequent contributor to Global Research, 1/22/2007,
Militarization and The Moon-Mars Program: Another Wrong Turn in Space? Global Research,
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=4554
The way NASA has started its new moon-to-Mars exploration program, the October 2006 White House announcement of a new
national space policy, and subsequent statements by the State Department raise grave concerns about whether a new push to militarize
space has begun. Events are pointing to an aggressive extension of U.S. supremacy beyond the
stratosphere reminiscent of Reagan administration actions in the 1980s. Then it was the militarization of the
space shuttle and the start-up of the Strategic Defense Initiative"Star Wars"which were gaining momentum until space
weapons technology testing halted with the space shuttle Challenger disaster. To date, the principal beneficiary of
the moon-Mars program is Lockheed Martin, to which NASA awarded a prime contract with a potential value stated at $8.15 billion. Already
the worlds largest defense contractor, Lockheed Martins stock yielded an instant bonanza, rising more than
seven percent in the five weeks following NASAs August 2006 announcement. NASA is not paying the giant of the military-industrial
complex $8.15 billion to have people hop around and hit golf balls on the moon. The aim of the moonMars program is U.S. dominance, as suggested by NASA Administrator Michael Griffins statements that "my language"i.e.,
Englishand not those of "another, bolder or more persistent culture" will be "passed down over the generations to future lunar colonies."
U.S. military destroyed the defunct and out-of-control USA 193 spy satellite with a specially designed SM-3 ballistic missile.53
West Coast
2011
161
Neg Handbook
Pentagon announced that data acquired by the spacecraft indicated that there is
ice in the bottom of a crater on the Moon, located on the Moons south pole the same venue NASA now
envisions as the site for the 2024 permanent base. According to a Pentagon website, The principal
objective of the lunar observatory mission though was to space qualify lightweight sensors and
component technologies for the next generation of Department of Defense spacecraft [Star Wars]. The
mission used the Moon, a near-Earth asteroid, and the spacecrafts Interstage Adapter (ISA) as targets to demonstrate sensor performance. As
a secondary mission, Clementine returns valuable data of interest to the international civilian scientific sector.
There are no administrative barriers Obama has already made this official policy.
Demian McLean, writer for Bloomberg, 1/2/2009, Obama Moves to Counter China With PentagonNASA Link, Bloomberg,
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aOvrNO0OJ41g&refer=home
President-elect Barack Obama will probably tear down long-standing barriers between the U.S.s civilian and
military space programs to speed up a mission to the moon amid the prospect of a new space race
with China. Obamas transition team is considering a collaboration between the Defense Department
and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration because military rockets may be cheaper and
ready sooner than the space agencys planned launch vehicle, which isnt slated to fly until 2015, according to people whove
discussed the idea with the Obama team. The potential change comes as Pentagon concerns are rising
over Chinas space ambitions because of what is perceived as an eventual threat to U.S. defense satellites, the lofty battlefield eyes
of the military.
West Coast
2011
162
Neg Handbook
successful space
warfare mandates pre-emptive strikes and a preventive war in space as well as on the ground. War
plans and execution often go awry here on Earth. It takes enormous hubris to believe that space warfare would be any different.
If ASAT and space-based, ground-attack weapons are flight-tested and deployed, space warriors will have succeeded in the
dubious achievement of replicating the hair-trigger nuclear postures that plagued humankind during
the Cold War. Armageddon nuclear postures continue to this day, with thousands of U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons ready to be
launched in minutes to incinerate opposing forces, command and control nodes, and other targets, some of which happen to be located within large metropolitan areas. If the
heavens were weaponized, these nuclear postures would be reinforced and elevated into space. U.S.
space warriors now have a doctrine and plans for counterspace operations, but they do not have a
credible plan to stop inadvertent or uncontrolled escalation once the shooting starts. Like U.S. war-fighting scenarios,
there is a huge chasm between plans and consequences, in which requirements for escalation dominance make uncontrolled
escalation far more likely. A pre-emptive strike in space on a nation that possesses nuclear weapons
would invite the gravest possible consequences. Attacks on satellites that provide early warning and other critical
military support functions would most likely be viewed either as a surrogate or as a prelude to attacks on nuclear forces.
can damage U.S. or allied space objects, and to target and defeat all ground-based military activities that could join the fight in space. In other words,
West Coast
2011
163
Neg Handbook
has a
much smaller industrial base, but has long attempted to match Indian deployments particularly in
military matters. Pakistan is likely to emulate Indian ASAT efforts, given the enmity between the two
countries and the relative advantage that India derives from the use of space for military operations .
West Coast
2011
164
Neg Handbook
experts
also argue there would be costs, both economic and strategic, stemming from the need to counter other
asymmetric challenges from those who could not afford to be participants in the race itself.
Threatened nations or non-state actors might well look to terrorism using chemical or biological
agents as one alternative.
No offense space weapons cant help fight terrorism and it risks funding trade-off
with key technology.
Donald P. Christy, Lieutenant in the US Air Force, 3/15/2006, United States Policy on Weapons in
Space, USAWC Strategy Research Project,
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/ksil307.pdf
The last category to examine is the impact space weapons could have in the Global War on Terrorism.
The most likely use for space weapons to contribute to the war on terror is by expanding and improving global strike
and global reach capabilities. As previously discussed, however, there is minimal, if any, benefit in this area. There are
numerous cases (one previously cited) where we have missed high value targets despite having quick strike
capabilities readily available. The United States has proved quite adept at gaining the necessary
access around the globe to combat terrorism. The funding necessary to develop and deploy space to ground
weapons would be better-used improving effectiveness in other areas of the fight and reducing the
vulnerability of existing space based enablers.
West Coast
2011
165
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
166
Neg Handbook
kinds of accidents are more likely to happen when forces are kept on
West Coast
2011
167
Neg Handbook
Weaponization decreases heg trades off with soft power and geopolitical support.
Trevor Brown, MSc, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University,
Spring 2009, Soft Power and Space Weaponization, Air and Space Power Journal,
http://www.airpower.au.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj09/spr09/brown.html
The problem for the United States is that other nations believe it seeks to monopolize space in order
to further its hegemonic dominance.7 In recent years, a growing number of nations have vocally objected to this perceived
agenda. Poor US diplomacy on the issue of space weaponization contributes to increased geopolitical
backlashes of the sort leading to the recent decline in US soft powerthe ability to attract others by the legitimacy
of policies and the values that underlie themwhich, in turn, has restrained overall US national power despite any
gains in hard power (i.e., the ability to coerce).
the
most from a space-based arms race. The United States is currently the preeminent world military
power, and much of that power resides in our ability to use space for military applications. A large
percentage of our military communications now passes through space. Our troops rely on weather satellites, our
targeteers on satellite photos, and virtually all of our new generations of weapons on the Global Positioning System satellites for pin-point
accuracy. By
encouraging potential adversaries to deploy weapons into space that could quickly destroy
many of these systems, a space-based arms race would render many of these more vulnerable to
attack than they are today. Even if our potential adversaries were unable to build a competing force, they
could still position deadly satellites disguised as commercial assets near or in the path of our most
vital military satellites. And even if we could sustain our space advantage, the costs would be
extraordinary. Why pursue this option when there is no compelling reason to do so at this time? Why make a battlefield out of an arena
upon which we depend so heavily?
West Coast
2011
168
Neg Handbook
is a major worldwide market accounting for many billions in revenue, and U.S.
firms are dominant in the sector.
West Coast
2011
169
Neg Handbook
Space weapons destroy all other purposes for space turns the case.
Bruce M. DeBlois, Adjunct Senior Fellow for Science and Technology at the Council on Foreign
Relations, 2003, The Advent of Space Weapons, Astropolitics,
www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/Bergman_11ast03.pdf
In addition to posing insurmountable military opportunity costs and the potential of another costly
arms race, space weapons directly threaten the fiscal health of the space sector itself. Use of
destructive weapons in space would obviously promote an orbital debris problem that is on the
threshold of becoming a major inhibitor to space commerce. Currently, the US Space Surveillance Network uses
ground-based radar and optical/infrared sensors to track roughly 7,500 objects across orbital space. That constitutes objects greater than 10
cm in diameter in low Earth orbit to objects greater than 1m diameter in geostationary orbit. Only approximately five per cent of those objects
are operating satellites; the rest are effectively debris, 40 per cent of which are fragments of disintegrated satellites and upper stages of
rockets. Unfortunately, there are between 30,000 and 100,000 untracked objects between 1 cm and 10 cm diameter (large enough to cause
serious damage to spacefaring vehicles), and an unknown but enormous number of particles smaller than 1 cm (many of which could damage
sensitive systems on impact). While the space environment is extremely large and the probability of an impact is still small, that probability is
growing. For some space missions active protection through shielding is already a requirement (e.g. the International Space Station).
Getting this shielding to orbit is an added expense to an already low-profit-margin industry. Any
weapon use in space, but particularly proliferating weapon use in space, could readily make space a no-go
area of dangerous debris, in the process pre-empting commercial and civil development.
West Coast
2011
170
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
171
Neg Handbook
Space arms control can be effective maintains US leadership even the military
agrees.
Theresa Hitchens, vice president of the Center for Defense Information, October 2003, Space
Weapons: Are They Needed? http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/assets/docs/Security_Space_Volume.Final.pdf
The potential for strategic consequences of a space race has led many experts, including within the
military, to tout a space arms control regime as an alternative. A ban on space weapons and ASATs could
help preserve at least for some time the status quo of U.S. advantage (especially if coupled with U.S. moves to shore up
passive satellite defenses). In a recent article in Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, Jeffrey Lewis, a graduate research fellow at the
Center for International Security Studies at the University of Maryland, makes a good case for an arms control approach,
arguing: If defensive deployments in space cannot keep pace with offensive developments on the
ground, then some measure of restraining offensive capabilities needs to be found to even the playing
field.
West Coast
2011
172
Neg Handbook
Risks of space attack are overstated in the status quo weaponization risks
retaliation.
Michael Krepon, president emeritus of the Henry L. Stimson Center, November 2004, Weapons in
the Heavens: A Radical and Reckless Option, Arms Control Today,
http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2004_11/Krepon
Worries about a surprise attack in space cannot be written off, but there are far easier, less traceable, and more painful
ways for Americas enemies to engage in asymmetric warfare than by attacking U.S. satellites. Weapons in
space and weapons on Earth specifically designed to neutralize or destroy objects in space are being pursued for another reason as well: to help U.S. armed forces win quickly and with a
This rationale only makes sense if Americas adversaries will refrain from fighting back in
space. If they return fire, however, U.S. troops are likely to be punished rather than helped because of their greater reliance on satellites. Similarly, the clear preference
of U.S. space warriors is to use nondestructive techniques that disorient, dazzle, or disable an
adversarys satellites without producing debris that could destroy the space shuttle, the international
space station, and satellites. Americas weaker foes, however, have far less incentive to be so
fastidious about debris in their approach to space warfare.[8] States possessing nuclear weapons and
ballistic missiles could explode a nuclear weapon in space to wreak havoc on satellites.
minimum of casualties.
West Coast
2011
173
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
174
Neg Handbook
Even if we can strike from space, we lack satellite data to make strikes effective.
Bruce DeBlois et al, Director of Systems Integration at BAE Systems and formerly Adjunct Senior
Fellow for Science and Technology at the Council on Foreign Relations, Fall 2004 Space Weapons,
International Security, p.69
Some defense strategists argue that the United States should pursue new strike capabilities that could
reach anywhere in the world from U.S. territory in less than ninety minutes. With the exception of ballistic missiles and
forward deployed forces (which face significant practical, economic, and political barriers), space systems alone possess the
vantage point and positioning necessary for rapid global response. But U.S. satellites do not currently have any
ability to employ or project direct force from orbit.
West Coast
2011
175
Neg Handbook
Spending Disadvantage
West Coast
2011
176
Neg Handbook
c) Internal Link Rejection of the plan sends a signal against wasteful government
spending
Alexander Villacampa, summer fellow at the Mises Institute, 2006, NASA: Exemplary of Government
Waste, Rockwell Institute, http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/villacampa2.html
In summation, in order to roll back the growing tide of government spending, the most wasteful
programs must be cut first. What is needed from such public sector failures as NASA is not increased
funding and wasteful behavior but full privatization. Only when this occurs will resources be used
efficiently, will there be increased emphasis on consumer safety on extraterrestrial flights, and an end
to the coercive sequestering of funds from taxpayers to prop up a failed program.
West Coast
2011
177
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
178
Neg Handbook
US recovery is increasing
Sonai Nikai , Economics and investment staff, 3-23-2011, U.S. Recovery is Slowly Happening Said Fed
Officials, Financial Feed, http://www.financialfeed.net/u-s-recovery-is-slowly-happening-said-fedofficials/852556/
Two Federal Reserve officials agreed that U.S. recovery has improved but their views on the economys
inflation risks opposed. Cleveland Fed President Sandra Pianalto, expecting a fair but continued pace
U.S. recovery and temporary pressure on consumer prices because of commodity and energy prices
rise said there seems an established firmer footing for recovery. Its a clear sign of a virtuous growth
cycle, she added.
West Coast
2011
179
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
180
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
181
Neg Handbook
Holding the line on new sacred-cow spending legislation is key to restoring US fiscal
discipline
Ron Smith, Editorial Staff at Southwest Farm Press, 2004, Southwest Farm Press, pg. 3
Stenholm agrees that Congress must clamp down on a deficit that is rapidly spiraling out of control.
"Our nation is being threatened with an economic perfect storm consisting of record deficits largely
financed by foreign investors, large and growing trade deficits, and the approaching retirement of the
baby boom generation," Stenholm said. "Unfortunately, the President's budget fails to prepare our
nation to deal with these economic dangers. His budget leaves our nation with large structural deficits
that will be on the rise after the five-year budget window used by OMB." Neugebauer quipped that the
budget problem "is not mad cow, but too many congressional sacred cows. As a father and small
business owner, I had to make tough economic decisions for my family just like most every American
family does. Congress should have that same fiscal discipline." Stenholm supports increased fiscal
discipline from Congress. He said he was pleased with the proposed reinstatement of discretionary
spending limits and PAYGO rules but said the proposal did not go far enough. "I have been a long-time
proponent of budget enforcement legislation - the idea that Congress and the President should not
make the deficit worse," he said. "If we are going to restore much needed fiscal discipline to
Washington, we must apply budget rules to all legislation that would increase the deficit."
West Coast
2011
182
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
183
Neg Handbook
NASA projects are purely political they provide no economic benefit and ensure
government coercion
Andrew Dart, broadcast engineer in Dallas, Texas, 2006, It's Time to Scrap NASA, Personal Collection
of Essays, http://www.akdart.com/nasa.html
While the space program yielded many successes in years past, taxpayers are no longer getting their
money's worth from a space program that focuses on repeating the deeds of yesterday. But NASA's
current priorities allow the scientifically and financially bankrupt $100 billion Space Station to absorb a
larger and larger share of the NASA budget. [24] Americans must come to the realization that the
federal government does not have infinite amounts of money to spend. In fact it has no money, other
than the money it has taken out of your paycheck and mine! The manned space program is an indirect
way to buy votes, by associating the Space Shuttle with patriotic pride. NASA's apparent goal is to make
space flight look like a worthwhile endeavor, at least to the masses who don't give it much thought. But
it is not the proper role of government to take money from its citizens (through taxes, which are paid
under the threat of imprisonment) and spend it on the pet projects of the politically powerful.
West Coast
2011
184
Neg Handbook
that take on the task of space exploration will be doing so at a profit and trying to minimize cost. This
is significantly different from the wasteful practices of government and public sector programs.
Whenever costs outweigh profits, precious resources have been wasted in the production of that
good or service. In the private sector, entrepreneurs quite literally pay the price for having misused
resources and the costs will cut into the entrepreneurs income. If this occurs, either changes are to be
made in order to cut costs or the entrepreneur will need to shut down the business. When public
sector industries waste resources, often times no direct harm is done to their ability to continue the misuse of
funding.
Government intervention leads to failed policy private sector innovation will solve
best
Alexander Villacampa, summer fellow at the Mises Institute, 2006, NASA: Exemplary of Government
Waste, Rockwell Institute, http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/villacampa2.html
In summation, in order to roll back the growing tide of government spending, the most wasteful
programs must be cut first. What is needed from such public sector failures as NASA is not increased
funding and wasteful behavior but full privatization. Only when this occurs will resources be used efficiently,
will there be increased emphasis on consumer safety on extraterrestrial flights, and an end to the coercive sequestering of funds from
taxpayers to prop up a failed program. It
is time to put the industry of space exploration to the ultimate test: that
of the market economy. The market, not the government, will be the true decider as to the existence
of such an industry. It seems that the market is declaring that space exploration can be not only
profitable but safe. If this is so, then so be it; it might be possible one day for all citizens to afford flights
into the far reaches of space. What is important is to allow consumers, not bureaucrats, to decide where precious resources should
go. It is time to end the government finance of wasteful public space exploration and to forevermore
dismantle NASA.
West Coast
2011
185
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
186
Neg Handbook
Launch costs are too expensive ensure a huge investment from the plan
Tom James, Futurismic analyst and space writer, 3-9-2009, Japanese plan space-based solar power,
Futuristic, http://futurismic.com/2009/09/03/japanese-plan-space-based-solar-power/
There are still a number of hurdles to work through before space-based solar power becomes a reality
though. Transportation of the solar panels into space is too expensive at the moment to be
commercially viable, so Japan has to figure out a way to lower costs. Even if costs are lowered, solar
stations will have to worry about damage from micrometeoroids and other flying objects. Still, spacebased solar operates perfectly under all weather conditions, unlike Earth-based panels that are at the
mercy of the clouds.
West Coast
2011
187
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
188
Neg Handbook
Our link is lineareach sacred cow weakens efforts to balance the budget
Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Baby steps Toddling towards a balanced budget, 5-14-1997,
Editorial Project at the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, pg. 10B
The agreement also achieves some savings in Medicaid. Just a few years ago, the so-called entitlements
-- Medicare, Medicaid, and especially Social Security -- were considered politically untouchable, even if
the programs themselves were in financial straits. Each time Congress finds the courage to rein in
entitlements even a little -- and so chip away at their sacred-cow status -- the likelihood grows that
Congress will eventually find the courage to really reform these programs. And reform is needed, not
just to balance the federal budget but so the programs themselves can remain healthy for the long haul.
West Coast
2011
189
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
190
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
191
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
192
Neg Handbook
The logic of the inevitability of government intervention is exactly what justifies mass
coercion
John Hospers, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at USC, 2007, Libertarianism: A Political Philosophy
for Tomorrow, pg. 210
But it is so easy, so fatally easy, every time a senator has an idea for "just one more" government
project that will redound to his honor, for the tax on everyone to be raised once again, just a little.
(And once raised, how often does it come down again?) But the result is cumulative and devastating:
every shopkeeper in the nation has to pay just that bit more in taxes to break even, has to work just
that bit harder and longer every day, before he can afford an evening out. He has to work that much
more just to stay where he was before. And the customers, for their part, will not be likely to increase:
on the contrary, their taxes are higher too, and the things that they can't buy now (because the money
has to go to pay their taxes) may just include the things they would have bought at his/[her] shop. He is
the unsung victim of government's interference in a once free economy.
West Coast
2011
193
Neg Handbook
use of
violence is the central issue, not what might potentially happen in the absence of violence.
West Coast
2011
194
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
195
Neg Handbook
If NASA doesnt do it, the private sector will fill in which is better for the economy
David Boaz, executive vice president of the Cato Institute, 9-15-2008, Space Privatizationfrom Cato
to the BBC, CATO at Liberty, http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/space-privatization-from-cato-to-the-bbc/
He concludes that fostering good relations with other countries is insufficient justification for the
expenditures, and that NASA should move aside and allow the private sector to play a role in manned
space flight. The cost of these activities must lessen if they are to continue, and that will only happen
with a decrease or removal of government involvement. Rees observes that only NASA deals with
science, planetary exploration, and astronauts, while the private sector is allowed to exploit space
commercially for things such as telecommunications. However, there is no shortage of interest in space
entrepreneurship: wealthy people with a track record of commercial achievement are yearning to get
involved. Rees sees space probes plastered with commercial logos in the future, just as Formula One
racers are now.
West Coast
2011
196
Neg Handbook
China Counterplan
West Coast
2011
197
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
198
Neg Handbook
China is the only country that can limit North Korean aggression
Walter Russell Mead, Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, 6-23-2005, Should Nukes
Bloom in Asia?, Council on Foreign Relations, http://www.cfr.org/china/should-nukes-bloomasia/p8192
China is the only country that can pressure North Korea to give up its nukes. Only China has the
carrots and sticks that the North Koreans respect. Without China, no progress is possible. If North
Korea stays nuclear, the region will respond in ways that China will hate. With China's and India's
power growing, North Korea rattling its nukes, Japan becoming more nationalistic and South Korea
reconsidering its relations with the U.S., this once-stable part of the world is in flux. A nuclear arms
race across East Asia would be hugely dangerous and destabilizing. Far better that the Bush
administration convince China that the wiser course is to prevent a nuke race by telling Pyongyang the
time has come for a deal.
The permutation doesnt solve only countering the US led system boosts Chinese
leadership
Rob Chambers, M.S., Strategic Intelligence, Joint Military Intelligence College, Major in the USAF,
2009, Chinas Space Program: A New Tool for PRC soft power in International Relations, Naval
Postgraduate School, http://edocs.nps.edu/npspubs/scholarly/theses/2009/Mar/09Mar_Chambers.pdf
Kevin Pollpeter echoes this idea behind the 2006 White Paper as he notes that, the document serves
as a venue to tout Chinas accomplishments in space not only for domestic political and bureaucratic
reasons, but also to advertise Chinas viability as an international partner in space. He also noted
Chinas space program will help it achieve great power status within a system dominated by the
United States and to increase its international influence without triggering a counterbalancing
reaction. Clearly, for a nation to successfully achieve manned spaceflight is a tremendous
accomplishment with significant second-order impacts. Dean Cheng, CNA China space expert, notes, At
the very least it seems the manned programme is about international prestige. Chinas space
capability says to the world, We are an advanced nation. Cheng also asserts that Another driver is
diplomacy.
West Coast
2011
199
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
200
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
201
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
202
Neg Handbook
Chinese space leadership is key to China-African joint ventures that solves Chinese
energy security
National Institute for Defense Studies, 2008, Chinas Space DevelopmentA Tool for
Enhancing National Strength and Prestige, East Asian Strategic Review,
http://www.nids.go.jp/english/publication/east-asian/pdf/2008/east-asian_e2008_01.pdf
In addition to serving national security and domestic civilian use of space, Chinas space activities are
also being used as a tool for diplomacy. The nations spacerelated international cooperation efforts,
which began with a bilateral arrangement for satellite development, have blossomed to include the
establishment of satellite tracking stations and a leading role in multilateral frameworks. Chinas
pursuit of such international cooperation is expected to expand in the future, and will likely help the
nation to secure its necessary supply of resources and energy. In light of this posture and Chinas
growing efforts to provide African nations with official development assistance and debt relief,
projects like the China-Nigeria partnership in communication satellite development and launches can
be seen as examples of Chinas exploitation of space activities as a diplomatic tool.
West Coast
2011
203
Neg Handbook
Chinese soft power leads to US-China cooperation and solves war in global hotspots
Carola McGiffert, Editor, Senior Fellow and director of Smart Power Initiatives at CSIS, 3-2009,
Chinese Soft Power and its Implications for the United States, CSIS
http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/090305_mcgiffert_chinesesoftpower_web.pdf
China has not sought to replace or supplant the United States in its role of security provider in the
Middle East, Southeast Asia, or Latin America. Thus, U.S. policymakers must recognize China's
objectives of maintaining its own internal stability and economic growth as they craft policies to
ensure that the United States promotes its own policies effectively. The United States can do more to
collaborate with China in the developing world, particularly in the areas of energy, health, agriculture,
and peacekeeping. If such collaboration were to take place, the United States and China would find
themselves working toward a greater global public good.
West Coast
2011
204
Neg Handbook
Chinese space leadership limits dissent by boosting national image and prestige
Rob Chambers, M.S., Strategic Intelligence, Joint Military Intelligence College, Major in the USAF,
2009, Chinas Space Program: A New Tool for PRC soft power in International Relations, Naval
Postgraduate School, http://edocs.nps.edu/npspubs/scholarly/theses/2009/Mar/09Mar_Chambers.pdf
Noting Chinas semi-obsessive behavior with its national image and prestige, as well as the CCPs
determination to retain absolute control of the country, William Martel and Toshi Yoshihara echo the
conventional wisdom: Success in Chinas manned space program will confer a strong sense of national
dignity and international status on the country, which are viewed as crucial elements to sustain the
legitimacy of the Communist Party and replace its declining ideological appeal. This intangible yet
powerful expression of Chinese nationalism partially explains why Beijing invests substantial
resources into its space program.
West Coast
2011
205
Neg Handbook
Chinese neo-nationalist agenda might include attacks on Taiwan and Vietnam, hardline
repression in Hong Kong, and border disputes with Kazakhstan and Russia. Were Russia to be pursuing
an extreme nationalist agenda at the same time, the result would be an Asian nightmare
West Coast
2011
206
Neg Handbook
The counterplan spills over to improve all sectors of the Chinese economy
Rob Chambers, M.S., Strategic Intelligence, Joint Military Intelligence College, Major in the USAF,
2009, Chinas Space Program: A New Tool for PRC soft power in International Relations, Naval
Postgraduate School, http://edocs.nps.edu/npspubs/scholarly/theses/2009/Mar/09Mar_Chambers.pdf
Chinas space program has brought immense benefits to its industrial, commercial, and agricultural
programs. Johnson-Freese notes, Having studied the Apollo playbook, China understands there are
multiple rewards to be reaped from a successful manned space program. China sees a space program
as generating technology, and technology as spurring economic development. As the demand on
telecommunications industry and demand for remote sensing services continue to grow, China will
see an increase *in+ future financial revenues, as well as the quality and number of available jobs
produced in China
West Coast
2011
207
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
208
Neg Handbook
that seem to guide both Chinas civil and military space efforts fall into three categories that
I call catch-up, leap-frog, and conspicuous consumption. Catch-up involves China bringing its space
capabilities up to par with other developed nations. "Leap-frog' has China taking advantage of new
technologies, like microsatellites, to surpass developed nations. Conspicuous consumption involves those eyecatching activities that will enhance Chinas prestige and influence. While there are elements of all three in Chinas space efforts, judging from
expenditures and payloads, the most important of the three motives is now conspicuous consumption.
West Coast
2011
209
Neg Handbook
China will only work on cooperation with Europe they oppose US joint ventures
National Institute for Defense Studies, 2008, Chinas Space DevelopmentA Tool for
Enhancing National Strength and Prestige, East Asian Strategic Review,
http://www.nids.go.jp/english/publication/east-asian/pdf/2008/east-asian_e2008_01.pdf
Chinas resistance is further manifested in its proactive involvement in the Galileo Project, the
European program aimed at developing a navigation satellite system that will not rely on the United
States GPS. As such, the project serves as an opportunity for China to deepen its ties with Europe
while challenging US supremacy. Moreover, China is carrying out its own initiatives, such as the Beidou
system mentioned earlier. It also appears to be enhancing its optical reconnaissance satellites and
developing SAR reconnaissance satellites; these projects, if successfully realized, will allow China to
dramatically improve its capabilities in space asset use and space-based information gathering.
West Coast
2011
210
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
211
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
212
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
213
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
214
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
215
Neg Handbook
Tax incentives solve boost private investment and doesnt link to our budget DA.
Edward Aldridge Jr. et al, Under Secretary for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, at the
Department of Defense, June 2004, A Journey to Inspire, Innovate, and Discover, Report of the
Presidents Commission on Implementation of United States Space Exploration Policy,
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/60736main_M2M_report_small.pdf
Tax Incentives. A time-honored way for government to encourage desired behavior is through the creation
of incentives in the tax laws. In this case, an increase in private sector involvement in space can be
stimulated through the provision of tax incentives to companies that desire to invest in space or space
technology. As an example, the tax law could be changed to make profits from space investment tax free until they reach some predetermined multiple (e.g., five times) of the original amount of the investment. A historical precedent to such an effort was
the use of federal airmail subsidies to help create a private airline industry before World War II. In a like manner,
corporate taxes could be credited or expenses deducted for the creation of a private space transportation system, each tax incentive keyed to a
specific technical milestone. Creation
West Coast
2011
216
Neg Handbook
Americas direct financial investment should be designed to leverage all such private and public
investments. These monies, when added to what the federal government can afford, will indeed get us to the Moon,
Mars, and beyond.
The focus of cash prizes should be on maturing the enabling technologies associated with the vision.
NASA should expand its Centennial prize program to encourage entrepreneurs and risktakers to undertake major space missions. Given the complexity and challenges of the new vision, the
Commission suggests that a more substantial prize might be appropriate to accelerate the development of
enabling technologies. As an example of a particularly challenging prize concept, $100 million to $1 billion
could be offered to the first organization to place humans on the Moon and sustain them for a fixed period before they return to
Earth. The Commission suggests that more substantial prize programs be considered and, if found appropriate, NASA should work with the Congress to develop how the funding for such a
prize would be provided.
West Coast
2011
217
Neg Handbook
Whenever the government creates some public work, everyone can see the obvious benefits. For example,
everyone can appreciate the fact that we put a US flag on the moon, and listened as Neil Armstrong apparently flubbed his memorized line. Or to use a more mundane example, everyone can
What people cant see are the thousands of other goods and
services that now wont be enjoyed, because the scarce resources necessary for their production were devoted
to the government project. Politicians may break moral laws, but they cant evade economic ones: If they send a man to
the moon (or build a new stadium), consumers necessarily must curtail their enjoyments of other goods.
see a beautiful new sports stadium financed (in part) by tax dollars .
variety of reasons. Meanwhile, the companies and banks based in these societies are often less established and more vulnerable to the consequences of a financial crisis than more established
firms in wealthier societies. As a result, developing countries and countries where capitalism has relatively recent and shallow roots tend to suffer greater economic and political damage when
crisis strikes--as, inevitably, it does. And, consequently, financial crises often reinforce rather than challenge the global distribution of power and wealth. This may be happening yet again.
None of which means that we can just sit back and enjoy the recession. History may suggest that financial crises actually help capitalist great powers maintain their leads--but it has other, less
If financial crises have been a normal part of life during the 300-year rise of the liberal capitalist system under the
Anglophone powers, so has war. The wars of the League of Augsburg and the Spanish Succession; the Seven Years War; the American Revolution; the Napoleonic Wars; the
two World Wars; the cold war: The list of wars is almost as long as the list of financial crises. Bad
economic times can breed wars. Europe was a pretty peaceful place in 1928, but the Depression poisoned German
public opinion and helped bring Adolf Hitler to power. If the current crisis turns into a depression,
what rough beasts might start slouching toward Moscow, Karachi, Beijing, or New Delhi to be born? The
United States may not, yet, decline, but, if we can't get the world economy back on track, we may still have to fight.
reassuring messages as well.
West Coast
2011
218
Neg Handbook
United States would seek to retain global leadership and to preclude the rise of a
global rival or a return to multipolarity for the indefinite future. On balance, this is the best long-term guiding
principle and vision. Such a vision is desirable not as an end in itself, but because a world in which the United States
exercises leadership would have tremendous advantages. First, the global environment would be more
open and more receptive to American values - democracy, free markets, and the rule of law. Second, such a
world would have a better chance of dealing cooperatively with the world's major problems, such as
nuclear proliferation, threats of regional hegemony by renegade states, and low-level conflicts. Finally, U.S.
leadership would help preclude the rise of another hostile global rival, enabling the United States and
the world to avoid another global cold or hot war and all the attendant dangers, including a global
nuclear exchange. U.S. leadership would therefore be more conducive to global stability than a bipolar or a
multipolar balance of power system.
West Coast
2011
219
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
220
Neg Handbook
Tax incentives are the most effective government tool for spurring innovation.
R.D. Atkinson, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, July 2007, Expanding the R&E tax
credit to drive innovation, competitiveness and prosperity, Journal of Technology Transfer,
http://www.itif.org/files/AtkinsonRETaxCreditJTT.pdf
In an environment where R&D investments are increasingly mobile, R&D tax incentives have become
a more important policy tool. Of 27 OECD nations examined, 70% had R&D tax incentives in place in
2005, up from 50% in 1996 (Warda 2006). Moreover, other nations have boosted their R&D tax credits. In the late
1980s the United States provided the most generous tax treatment of R&D in the world (Hall 2000). By
1996, we had fallen to seventh most generous among OECD nations, behind Spain, Australia, Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands, and France
(Guellec et al. 1997). By 2004, we had fallen to 17th in generosity for general R&D; 16th for machinery and equipment used for
research; and 22nd for buildings used for research (see Fig. 1).7 In 2006 Congress added a new Alternative Simplified Credit (ASC). While clearly
a step in the right direction, it is important to note that the addition of the ASC increased our rank only to 15th in tax generosity for R&D
(assuming that other nations did not increase their R&D incentives last year).
West Coast
2011
221
Neg Handbook
prize
of one hundred million dollars remains well-worth winning whether it is unique or whether 10 or 100
other people also get a 100 million dollar prize. This is important because there need to be enough prizes for revolutionary science that competitors should feel
they have a realistic chance of winning one of these prizes so long as their research succeeds in its aims. This would enable there to be a significant
incentive to do revolutionary science across as many scientific disciplines as there are mega-cash
prizes. Our feeling is that mega-prizes to stimulate revolutionary science would need to be of the order of
magnitude of tens of millions of US dollars in order to replicate the kind of incentives seen in popular
creative activities such as music and sports.
West Coast
2011
222
Neg Handbook
Prizes attract larger body of researchers government regulations deter the best and
brightest.
Thomas Kalil, Special Assistant to the Chancellor for Science and Technology at UC Berkeley, December
2006, Prizes for Technological Innovation, http://www.brookings.edu/views/papers/200612kalil.pdf
Prizes can attract teams with fresh ideas who would never do business with the federal government
because of procurement regulations (e.g., accounting and reporting requirements) that they may find burdensome.
This effect is important because, as Baumol (2004, p. 5) notes, the independent innovator and the
independent entrepreneur have tended to account for most of the true, fundamentally novel
innovations. In the list of the important innovative breakthroughs of the twentieth century, a substantial number, if not the majority, turn
out to be derived from these sources rather than from the laboratories of giant business enterprises. As examples of small-firm
innovations, Baumol cites the airplane, air conditioning, the electronic spreadsheet, FM radio, the
high-resolution CAT scanner, and the microprocessor.
West Coast
2011
223
Neg Handbook
Solvency Technology/Innovation
Private development key to innovation and technology development solves your
inspiration arguments.
Joseph N. Pelton, Space & Advanced Communications Research Institute, George Washington
University, May 2010, A new space vision for NASAAnd for space entrepreneurs too? Space Policy,
p.78
XPrize Founder Peter Diamandis
has noted that we don't have governments operating taxi companies, building
computers, or running airlines-and this is for a very good reason. Commercial organizations are, on
balance, better managed, more agile, more innovative, and more market responsive than government
agencies. People as diverse as movie maker James Cameron and Peter Diamandis feel that the best way forward is to let
space entrepreneurs play a greater role in space development and innovation. Cameron strongly endorsed a
greater role for commercial creativity in U.S. space programs in a February 2010 Washington Post article and explained why he felt this was
the best way forward in humanity's greatest adventure: I applaud President Obama's bold decision
for NASA to focus on building a space exploration program that can drive innovation and provide
inspiration to the world. This is the path that can make our dreams in space a reality
West Coast
2011
224
Neg Handbook
25 years after the Rogers and Paine Commission reports that followed the Challenger disaster, we
find that the recommendations for NASA to develop a reliable and costeffective vehicle to replace the
Shuttle is somewhere between being a disappointment and a fiasco. Billions of dollars have gone into
various spaceplane and reusable launch vehicle developments by NASA over the past 20 years. Spaceplane
projects have been started by NASA time and again amid great fanfare and major expectations and
then a few years later either cancelled in failure or closed out with a whimper. The programs that NASA has
given up on now include the Delta Clipper, the HL-20, X-33, the X-34, X-37, X-38, and X-43 after billions of US funds and billions more of private
money have been sacrificed to the cause.
Did
we win the space race or did we uselessly spend billions of dollars? It is doubtful if anyone will ever have a clear answer to this question.
NASA's ambitious lunar plans became bogged down in the incoherence of the annual funding battles
in Congress. A few more Apollos were indeed completed but the ideas to pursue numerous scientific experiments
on the moon got "lost in space." The moon base and space station projects were completely
abandoned to the next generation of space explorers. Not until the Bush administration were they touched upon once again. President
Bush proposed to undertake a large project that would involve the construction of both a moon base
and a space station that would mainly serve as assembly, test, and departure points for piloted missions to Mars and beyond.
However, estimates nearing $300 billion made it obvious why this ambitious idea was never
mentioned in Congress. History clearly shows, tells us Robert A. Frosch, former NASA Administrator, that "society gets its money back
from science programs, but not immediately. That's why science programs can be tough to sell to political people,
who aren't terribly interested in what's going to happen 10 or 15 years from now. "
West Coast
2011
225
Neg Handbook
NASA led exploration risks disasters tanking the whole program privatization solves.
Martin Rees, Britain's astronomer royal and a Royal Society research professor at Cambridge
University's King's College, 7/1/2003, Mars Needs Millionaires, Foreign Policy,
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2003/07/01/mars_needs_millionaires
But the speed of communication will not make probing the universe any less dangerous. Machines fail. Visitors to Mars, or the
long-term denizens of a lunar base, will confront an environment far more inhospitable than anything they
knew before. When nations send people to space, space disasters become national traumas -- and
nations lose some of their will to explore. By contrast, were a private adventurer like Fossett to come to a sad
end in space, we would mourn a brave and resourceful man, but his death would not be considered a
catastrophe on the scale of the Columbia or Challenger accidents. Nor would it provoke nearly as
much hand-wringing. It would be seen for what it was: a personal tragedy. To reach Mars and points beyond will
require a certain ruthlessness of spirit, and swashbuckling individuals possess this quality much more
than civilized nations do.
Private leadership key to large-scale space exploration NASA cant keep up.
Zach Meyer, J.D. Candidate, 2010, Northwestern University School of Law, Winter 2010, Private
Commercialization of Space in an International Regime: A Proposal for a Space District, Northwestern
Journal of International Law & Business, pp.242-3
NASA has sent limited numbers of astronauts into space over the last five decades, including landing a dozen
astronauts on the Moon. Other national space agencies have or are poised to develop the ability to send astronauts into space. However,
private commercial space enterprise promises to be a more powerful catalyst to the full development
of the Space Age. Consider that NASA is due to retire its space shuttle fleet in 2010, leaving the national
space agency without the ability to transport supplies or a crew to the International Space Station ("ISS"). To cover
this gap, NASA will temporarily rely on the Russian Space Agency's Soyuz rockets to fulfill its ISS commitments. In addition, NASA has
awarded commercial contracts to Space Exploration Technologies Corporation and Orbital Sciences Corporation ("SpaceX")
for the development of a domestic, commercial alternative to reliance on the Russians. SpaceX has been
rapidly developing a new space vehicle capable of reaching high orbit, docking with the ISS, and transporting supplies and crew
at a more reasonable cost and within a more concrete schedule than NASA's own proposed new space transportation architecture. Through
the accomplishments of SpaceShipOne and SpaceX, private commercial space enterprise has made a
case for itself as the best-suited candidate for pioneering the space frontier.
West Coast
2011
226
Neg Handbook
by contrast, until recently has remained the domain of NASA. Burt Rutan,
the aerospace engineer famous for building a suborbital rocket plane that won the Ansari X Prize, believes NASA is crowding out
private efforts. "Taxpayer-funded NASA should only fund research and not development," Rutan said
during a recent panel discussion at the California Institute of Technology. "When you spend hundreds of billions of dollars
to build a manned spacecraft, you're...dumbing down a generation of new, young engineers (by saying),
'No, you can't take new approaches, you have to use this old technology.'"
Perm forces NASA resource trade-off prevents solutions to warming and asteroids.
Joseph N. Pelton, Space & Advanced Communications Research Institute, George Washington
University, May 2010, A new space vision for NASAAnd for space entrepreneurs too? Space Policy,
p.79
With much less invested in a questionable Project Constellation enterprise we can do much more in space
astronomy. We can invest more wisely in space science to learn more about the Sun, the Earth and threats from Near
Earth Objects. David Thompson, Chairman and CEO of Orbital Sciences said the following in a speech that endorsed the new commercial
thrust of the NASA space policies on Nine February 2010: Let us, the commercial space industry, develop the space
taxis we need to get our Astronauts into orbit and to ferry those wanting to go into space to get to where they want to go.
We are in danger of falling behind in many critical areas of space unless we shift our priorities. With a
change in priorities we can deploy far more spacecraft needed to address the problems of climate
change via better Earth observation systems. We can fund competitions and challenges to spur space
entrepreneurs to find cheaper and better ways to send people into space. We can also spur the
development of solar power satellites to get clean energy from the sun with greater efficiency. We can
deal more effectively with finding and coping with killer asteroids and near earth objects. We may
even find truly new and visionary ways to get people into space with a minimum of pollution and promote the
development of cleaner and faster hypersonic transport to cope with future transportation needs.
West Coast
2011
227
Neg Handbook
Establishing one government prize spurs private sector investment and prizes
counterplan will get modeled.
Thomas Kalil, Special Assistant to the Chancellor for Science and Technology at UC Berkeley, December
2006, Prizes for Technological Innovation, http://www.brookings.edu/views/papers/200612kalil.pdf
Under some circumstances, prizes can stimulate philanthropic and private sector investment that is
greater than the cash value of the prize. For example, the ten million dollar Ansari X PRIZE was financed by a one
million dollar insurance policy, and the X PRIZE Foundation reports that the prize stimulated at least one hundred million
dollars in private sector investment (Diamandis 2006). This leverage can come from a number of different
sources. Companies may be willing to cosponsor a competition or invest heavily to win it because of
the publicity and the potential enhancement of their brand or reputation. Private, corporate dollars
that are currently being devoted to sponsorship of Americas Cup or other sports events might shift to support prizes or teams .
Wealthy individuals are willing to spend tens of millions of dollars to sponsor competitions or bankroll
individual teams simply because they wish to be associated with the potentially historical nature of
the prize. Most areas of science and technology are unlikely to attract media, corporate, or philanthropic interest, however.
West Coast
2011
228
Neg Handbook
commercial space market will need at least some of them. President Obama and all of us
who want to focus on the future should not forget how good the private sector can be at creating
both jobs and opportunities.
New budget proves theres bipartisan support for financing private space travel.
Frank Morring Jr, Writer for Aviation Week, 2/15/2011, NASA Wants Commercial Crew, Technology,
Aviation Week,
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/awx/2011/02/1
4/awx_02_14_2011_p0-289550.xml
In a bid to follow President Barack Obamas overall science and technology policy, the new budget aims to create a
sustainable program of exploration and innovation, according to Administrator Charles Boldens introduction to the
strategic plan that accompanies the budget request. This new direction extends the life of the International Space Station, supports
the growing commercial space industry, and addresses important scientific challenges while continuing our commitment to
robust human space exploration, science and aeronautics programs, Bolden states. The strong bipartisan support for the
NASA Authorization Act of 2010 confirms our essential role in addressing the nations priorities. The
governments effort to seed private development of commercial crew and cargo transportation to the ISS and other LEO
destinations would be boosted to $850 million in the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1 up from the $612 million authorized but not
appropriated in the current fiscal year.
Support for NASA doesnt mean politicians will oppose the CP supporters will see
the CP as allowing NASA to preserve its resources.
Bart Leahy, technical writer and National Space Society member, 5/12/2006, Space Access: The
Private Investment vs. Public Funding Debate, http://www.space.com/2401-space-access-privateinvestment-public-funding-debate.html
Meanwhile, in another part of ISDC, space law lecturers were discussing the best way to secure private property rights on lunar resources when
a private landing happens. To settle that argument, lawyer Bill White suggested that someone should "just do it." And Peter Diamandis
suggested that Mars itself could and would be settled by private citizens before NASA. He believes space enthusiasts should "give up on
government." Virgin Galactic's Wil Whitehorn
West Coast
2011
229
Neg Handbook
in a global innovation environment it is no longer true that basic research performed in the United
States will necessarily benefit American firms or American workers. Rather, the economic benefits depend on the
degree to which universities (together with entrepreneurs, venture capitalists, and corporations) can translate the results of basic research into
marketable innovations. The
West Coast
2011
230
Neg Handbook
Space arms control can be effective maintains US leadership even the military
agrees.
Theresa Hitchens, vice president of the Center for Defense Information, October 2003, Space
Weapons: Are They Needed? http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/assets/docs/Security_Space_Volume.Final.pdf
The potential for strategic consequences of a space race has led many experts, including within the
military, to tout a space arms control regime as an alternative. A ban on space weapons and ASATs could
help preserve at least for some time the status quo of U.S. advantage (especially if coupled with U.S. moves to shore up
passive satellite defenses). In a recent article in Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, Jeffrey Lewis, a graduate research fellow at the
Center for International Security Studies at the University of Maryland, makes a good case for an arms control approach,
arguing: If defensive deployments in space cannot keep pace with offensive developments on the
ground, then some measure of restraining offensive capabilities needs to be found to even the playing
field.
West Coast
2011
231
Neg Handbook
today what we incentivize, we incentivize a Congressman being elected every two years, a President being
elected every four years, and a Senator every six years. So, its whats going to affect people right
now. What can I promise and delivery in two years. Space is not a two-year objective. It used to be, in the early 60s, we had
this eye candy of Mercury and Gemini and Apollo and every year we would do something more and more and it met those needs. But the
easy stuff has been done. And today, NASA calls stuff nominal instead of phenomenal, like it really is. So I have given up
that there is going to be a balance and NASA is going to do certain things and we are finally in a state
of existence where small groups of individuals can do extraordinary things, funded by single people.
Today, a group of 20 individuals empowered by the exponential growing technologies of AI and robotics and computers and networks and
eventually nanotechnology can do what only nation states could have done before.
West Coast
2011
232
Neg Handbook
Disposability Critique
West Coast
2011
233
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
234
Neg Handbook
depending on its altitude, remain inaccessible for millennia. Likewise, a planetary body such as the Earths Moon, which has no
appreciable atmosphere, no weather and negligible tectonic activity, has no facility for environmental renewal. Unless we actively disturb them,
the hardware left by the Apollo astronauts, and their footprints, will remain intact for millennia. However,
current attitudes could prejudice future activities. The potential of the debris-clogged orbit or the
contaminated canyon are simply different manifestations of the same lack of understanding and
appreciation; both eventualities call for protection of the respective resource.
West Coast
2011
235
Neg Handbook
result of arrogant cultures (based in arrogant philosophical views) that deny the fact
that humans are dependent on nature, men are dependent on women, and those with economic and decision-making power are
dependent on disempowerment of others. Cultures built on the legacies of Platonic dualism (which posits
reason as separate from and superior to nature, or matter) and empiricism (which admits that nature is relevant to knowledge, but
debases it nonetheless) fail to acknowledge the existence and importance of the Othernature, women,
indigenous people, and anyone identified with the less powerful side of the reason/matter dualism.
West Coast
2011
236
Neg Handbook
They therefore allow for and encourage mindsets and practices that harm those others on which
the privileged at the center of reality depend.
West Coast
2011
237
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
238
Neg Handbook
however, protection of the space environment is beginning to appear on the space communitys agenda, as increasing numbers of space professionals begin to consider mankinds collective
attitude towards the space environment.
anthropocentric thinkers willing to question space exploration but not the value of ecological methodology. As a result, ecological analysis has become synonymous with environmental
This ecological colonization of outer and earthly space empowered the managerial ecologist at
the expense of humanism. One can only hope that environmentally concerned humanists of today will
analysis.
West Coast
2011
239
Neg Handbook
abandon the intellectual space capsule ecologists have created for them. In the lyrics of David Bowies Space
Oddity, Now its time to leave the capsule if you dare.
West Coast
2011
240
Neg Handbook
exploration as part of a process which is forcing humanity to lose sight of its very
nature and values, pushing it toward a future in which technology replaces human values. If not
stopped in time, that route could lead to the destruction of the ecosystem on which human life itself
depends.
new legal structures will have to be created to guide industries in their use of
West Coast
2011
241
Neg Handbook
space, particularly across the pristine surfaces of planets like Mars. Ideas will be garnered from the
legal protection of rivers, forests and other wilderness areas on Earth.
West Coast
2011
242
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
243
Neg Handbook
unethical, yet nevertheless adopted terminology, technology, and methodology from space research
in their efforts to reshape the social and ecological matrix onboard Spaceship Earth.
West Coast
2011
244
Neg Handbook
Mining exploits the moon and countless workers. the world would be divided
between space have and have-nots
Angela Burr, Conference Speaker, April 29, 2001, Touching The Limits Of Knowledge, Cosmology and
Our View of the World, Space Exploration/Exploitation? Conference, http://wwwssg.sr.unh.edu/preceptorial/ Summaries_2001/summary9_2001.html
Lunar regolith is a valuable historic record of solar wind and cosmic rays, similar to the radiation and climate "recording" of the polar ice caps.
We can mine the Moon, release O2 in the process and have a record of solar energy. This could lead to
the process of strip-mining Helium 3 and other materials that could be brought back and used for energy.
Once private companies found a way to use the Moon for profit, exploitation begins. This could also
lead to the exploitation of certain groups within the human race as one student pointed out. Those
who find a way of using materials from space and those who have the money to buy it will be
exploiting the work of countless others who won't have access to these materials. The technology
would not be shared with the entire world and would therefore exploit humans as well as space.
Space wont free up population pressures. Abundant resources will fuel migration
Charles S. Cockell, Ph.D., Professor and Chair of Geomicrobiology, Open University, 2007, Space on
Earth: Saving Our World By Seeking Others, pp. 62-63
These problems become particularly serious when one considers that the Earth is almost certainly likely to always be a
very attractive place to live. It has forests, a breathable atmosphere, lakes, oceans and abundant life.
Compare this to the grey lethal wasteland of the Moon, the red desiccated deserts of Mars, or the
radiation-bombarded blackness of outer space. Given the choice between living in space or on the
Earth, most people would probably prefer the latter, where they can move and breathe freely and admire the natural
wonders around them. If the resources from space become widely available on Earth at a good price, this is
likely to be even more the case. Abundantly available space resources are likely to fuel migration back
to the Earth, further contributing to environmental difficulties and the population explosion. Regardless
of how rapidly space markets and communities do develop, the people of Earth will overwhelmingly, for a long time, remain the largest market
in the Solar System, even if it turns out that people are enthusiastic to leave Earth and live in space. There are six and a half billion of us here on
Earth. We cannot predict when there will be an equal number in space, making markets there equal in size to those on Earth, but we can be
fairly certain that the Earth will remain the largest market for resources for some time to come. So
West Coast
2011
245
Neg Handbook
for a considerable period space resources will be transported back to the surface of the Earth to feed
this large market with its ensuing impact on the environment.
West Coast
2011
246
Neg Handbook
Energy from solar power satellites would fuel global mass consumption and
environmental destruction
Charles S. Cockell, Ph.D., Professor and Chair of Geomicrobiology, Open University, 2007, Space on
Earth: Saving Our World By Seeking Others, p. 63
The same concerns apply to solar power satellites. Yes, solar power satellites could free us of energy
shortages, climate change and starvation on Earth, but what would society be like with access to huge
amounts of cheap energy? What would happen to consumption? The energy must go somewhere, and
it will feed new electrical appliances, more street lighting, more development and more waste.
Society's greed for energy tends to grow to match availability. Power and resources from space will
not necessarily create a new, clean environment. Indeed, it is more likely to be the fuel of mass global
consumption and environmental destruction on Earth.
West Coast
2011
247
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
248
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
249
Neg Handbook
A flawed ecological epistemology will destroy all life on the planet forever
Glen Barry, Ph.D. in "Land Resources" from the Univ.of Wisconsin-Madison, May 2007, Earth
Prophecy - And the way out, New Paradigm Journal, 2(1),
http://www.newparadigmjournal.com/May2007/earthprophecy.htm
Imagine the panic as Americans and others in the world that are ecologically ignorant and isolated
realize food does not come from grocery stores but from healthy agro-ecosystems with dependable
climatic patterns and rich soil. That water does not come from the tap, but from aquifers and rivers. That weather need not follow reliable cycles, that natural
resources are finite, and that social order depends upon all the above. I prophesize that within my lifetime environmental destruction and
unsustainable living will lead to widespread global ecological collapse and social disintegration;
leading eventually to extinction for most life forms including humans and Gaia - the Earth system
itself. This is the Earth Prophecy. None of what follows need happen, and I close this essay by repeating the policies that offer the way out. We have all the tools and knowledge on hand
to prevent global ecological and social collapse. Yet the hour is late, widespread political and personal will essentially absent, and the momentum behind Earth destroying trends so pernicious
and constant that barring major social change unprecedented in scale and ambition, the Earth and her inhabitants are going to die a hard and brutal death. Globally as the climate becomes
wildly unpredictable, droughts and floods prevalent, and the land and oceans lifeless; starvation and disease will become rampant, economies will fail, and social cohesion will break down
leading to unprecedented violence and death as the truth of existence is revealed to a formerly air-conditioned, consumer society fighting to survive. Firstly, what do I mean when I say the
Earth is dying? The prevailing sentiment is whatever the fate of humanity; the Earth's biota shall sufficiently persist to maintain other life forms. Evolution will be set back by a sixth major
West Coast
2011
250
Neg Handbook
be averted, or at least some semblance of humanity and ecosystems achieved post-collapse, given
people power and political will now.
West Coast
2011
251
Neg Handbook
Rocks have inherent value as facets of nature that can be experienced as beautiful and
sublime
Erin Moore Daly, graduate student in the School of Life Sciences and the Center for Science, Policy, and
Outcomes at Arizona State University, and Robert Frodeman, Chair of the Department of Philosophy
at the University of North Texas, 2008, Separated at Birth, Signs of Rapproachment: Environmental
Ethics and Space Exploration, Ethics & the Environment, 13(1), pp. 135-151
The question, however, of whether e.g., rocks have intrinsic value is different from whether they have
values of their own. Abiotic nature can also have value through the relatedness of nature and natural
objects to human beings. This value resides in the daily presence of humans in nature, humans as part
of naturesomething not (yet) true of the extraterrestrial world. We may be confident that rocks do
not think, or have values of their own. But humans can nonetheless value rocks for their own sake
West Coast
2011
252
Neg Handbook
they can be experienced as beautiful, sublime, or sacred. Metaphysical, aesthetic, and theological
questions such as these must be included as we address issues of terraforming.
West Coast
2011
253
Neg Handbook
the realm
of consequentialist ethics. This means that only the consequences of decisions are taken into
consideration. Questions of fundamental rights are ignored. Thus, where questions of rights come up
in space exploration, such as in questions of whether we have the right to perturb extraterrestrial
planets from their native condition, CBA may be of limited or negligible relevance.
West Coast
2011
254
Neg Handbook
an environment highlights the need to discern and evaluate our various interests, as well as the need
to ask, who we includes in a given situation.
West Coast
2011
255
Neg Handbook
In space we have interesting phenomena but it is lifeless, and in environmental ethics life is of special
importance; many central environmental ethical concepts and ideas make sense only when we are
talking about places where there is life. It is still under dispute how far we should go to protect and cherish life here on Earth. Another complication is that
the theory of environmental ethics is often quite different from the practices in place in various levels of society: even when we know that polluting our environment is harmful, we often
choose to do it anyway for one reason or another. Keeping this in mind, it may be difficult to argue that we should prohibit all exploitation of space on the grounds that pollution in the process
is inevitable.
We are all the accumulation of galactic particles and atoms. we are the stuff of rocks.
move beyond anthropocentric conceptions of value, life/nonlife
John Seed, founder and director of the Rainforest Information Centre, 1995, Beyond
Anthropocentrism, http://www.rainforestinfo.org.au/deep-eco/Anthropo.htm
When humans investigate and see through their layers of anthropocentric self-cherishing, a most
profound change in consciousness begins to take place. Alienation subsides. The human is no longer
an outsider, apart. Your humanness is then recognised as being merely the most recent stage of your
existence, and as you stop identifying exclusively with this chapter, you start to get in touch with yourself as mammal, as vertebrate, as a
species only recently emerged from the rainforest. As the fog of amnesia disperses, there is a transformation in your
relationship to other species, and in your commitment to them. What is described here should not be seen as merely intellectual. The
intellect is one entry point to the process outlined, and the easiest one to communicate. For some people however, this change of perspective follows from actions on behalf of Mother Earth.
"I am protecting the rainforest" develops to "I am part of the rainforest protecting myself. I am that part of the rainforest recently emerged into thinking." What a relief then! The thousands of
years of imagined separation are over and we begin to recall our true nature. That is, the change is a spiritual one, thinking like a mountain, sometimes referred to as "deep ecology". As your
as the implications of evolution and ecology are internalised and replace the outmoded
anthropocentric structures in your mind, there is an identification with all life, then follows the
realisation that the distinction between "life" and "lifeless" is a human construct. Every atom in this
body existed before organic life emerged 4000 million years ago. Remember our childhood as
minerals, as lava, as rocks? Rocks contain the potentiality to weave themselves into such stuff as this.
We are the rocks dancing. Why do we look down on them with such a condescending air. It is they
that are immortal part of us.
memory improves,
West Coast
2011
256
Neg Handbook
The overview effect is the language of ecocracy that seeks to erase all notions of
difference. it is the call of colonialism
Wolfgang Sachs, Fellow at the Institute for Cultural Studies, 1995, Deep Ecology for the 21st Century, p.
442
Satellite pictures scanning the globe's vegetative cover, computer graphs running interacting curves
through time, threshold levels held up as worldwide norms are the language of global ecology. It
constructs a reality that contains mountains of data, but no people. The data do not explain why Tuaregs are driven to exhaust their waterholes, or what makes Germans so obsessed with high speed on
freeways; they do not point out who owns the timber shipped from the Amazon or which industry
flourishes because of a polluted Mediterranean sea; and they are mute about the significance of forest
trees for Indian tribals or what water means in an Arab country. In short, they provide a knowledge
which is faceless and placeless; an abstraction that carries a considerable cost: it consigns the realities
of culture, power and virtue to oblivion. It offers data, but no context; it shows diagrams, but no
actors; it gives calculations, but no notions of morality; it seeks stability, but disregards beauty. Indeed, the global vantage point requires ironing out all the differences and disregarding all
circumstances; rarely has the gulf between observers and the observed been greater than between
satellite-based forestry and the seringueiro in the Brazilian jungle. It is inevitable that the claims of
global management are in conflict with the aspirations for cultural rights, democracy and selfdetermination. Indeed, it is easy for an ecocracy which acts in the name of "one earth" to become a
West Coast
2011
257
Neg Handbook
threat to local communities and their lifestyles. After all, has there ever, in the history of colonialism,
been a more powerful motive for streamlining the world than the call to save the planet.
West Coast
2011
258
Neg Handbook
Recontextualizing our ethical thinking within nature and the solar system transforms
anthropocentrism by decentering the human beyond dichotomous thinking
Michael A. Peters, Associate Professor in the Education Department at the University of Auckland, New
Zealand and Ruyu Hung, Professor at the National Chiayi Universit, Department of Education, 2008,
Solar Ethics: A New Paradigm for Environmental Ethics, Environmental Education, Volume 1 of
Contexts of Education, pp. 17-18
Solar ethics is an ethical frame of mind which may help to re-position human beings within nature. Don
Cupitt has published a small book entitled Solar Ethics in 1995. In this book, Don Cupitt (1995) points out that what drives him to think about
solar ethics is moral anxiety or even panic about contemporary moral problems. For him, the
makes explicit the failure of the traditional moral philosophy, whether be it emotivism or moral objectivism or realism.
It is the starting point to conceive of a new ethics. Thus he states, if you agree that tradition has failed, and that moral philosophy as we have
been doing it has been addressing itself to all the wrong questions; and you further agree that we need a moral philosophy better fitted to our cosmology and our culture then you may be
ready for solar ethics. The Sun sees no reason at all to apologize for making such an exhibition of itself all the time; it simply is its own outpouring self-expression... It has no inwardness; that
is, it is not inwardly subject to something unseen that is authoritative over it. It does not experience the moral orderit is purely and only affirmative.
It coincides
West Coast
2011
259
Neg Handbook
explore and protect rather than as a frontier to exploit could help to keep nuclear technology, debris
and other environmental hazards out of the heavens.
West Coast
2011
260
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
261
Neg Handbook
to be practically moot. Many of the people that pursue this line of logic sometimes forget that most of the six and a half billion of us (and rising) on Earth are not going
anywhere for a long time, and that we should indeed solve the environmental problems at home.
West Coast
2011
262
Neg Handbook
and space exploration are not only perfectly compatible, but positively beneficial to each other. We explore space
because it helps us care for the Earth and we explore the Earth's environments and try to protect
them because it helps us get into space. The links are so tight that one can argue that
environmentalism and space settlement have actually one and the same objective creating sustainable human communities in the cosmos whether they are on the Earth or on any other planet
or moon. Why should we care about these links and trying to strengthen them? To strengthen these connections will
vastly improve our ability to solve environmental problems, and it will increase our chances of
successfully settling space, with all the resources it has to offer. In continuing a philosophy of division
between home and away we miss an opportunity to improve the human condition.
Current environmental ethics are bound only to earth. we must strengthen the links
between the space and earth environments to create a broader ethic
Charles S. Cockell, Ph.D., Professor and Chair of Geomicrobiology, Open University, 2007, Space on
Earth: Saving Our World By Seeking Others, pp. 121-122
Today, environmental ethical discussions are focused on objects only on this planet. We consider
whether objects have instrumental worth and intrinsic worth. This is a view of environmental ethics that fits a
society bound only to Earth, and it considers only the component parts of this world. A space-faring civilization must
consider the instrumental and intrinsic worth of the Earth and its component parts to the space-faring
society; equally, it must consider the instrumental and intrinsic worth of objects in space to the Earth
and its inhabitants. We should first consider the value of the Earth to a civilization that plans to spread across the Solar System and eventually, perhaps, beyond. What value
does Earth have to the space branches of a space-faring civilization? As we've seen, the biosphere is a source of analogue environments that help us explore space. We protect ice-covered
lakes in Antarctica, volcanoes in Iceland and asteroid craters in America because they help us to understand and explore space. They might help us search for life or assist us in understanding
Within this ethos, environmentalism and space settlers find common ground. A spacefaring environmental ethic can create a strong and lasting connection between Earth and space that
can be of benefit to Earth and space dwellers many millennia into the future. Even if you don't use any
of Earth's resources, its analogue environments are useful to you. Perhaps, as you explore the volcanoes of some distant world, you can use
the geology of other planets.
the databases of Earth volcanoes to understand them better. As you examine what you think is life on another planet, the information about life in extreme environments on Earth can help
you out. The use of Earth's environments in this way gives the Earth an instrumental value to people who may not even live there.
These
perceived differences are superficial. Environmentalists and space explorers actually share the same
overarching goal the sustainable use of the environment around us; they just differ in the location
they focus on. If we look at each community through the eyes of the other, we can think of environmentalists as people
who believe in the successful colonization of planet Earth, a laudable and grandiose vision of space exploration.
Space explorers, on the other hand, are an ambitious set of environmentalists who would like to
environmentalists as Luddites, peering inwards to the wounds of Mother Earth and lacking the vision to look outwards to the endless resourCes and opportunities in space.
West Coast
2011
263
Neg Handbook
extend human living to the surface of other worlds. In the process of pursuing these common
ambitions, both groups of people reflect very practical and deep connections between them.
West Coast
2011
264
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
265
Neg Handbook
Imperialism Critique
West Coast
2011
266
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
267
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
268
Neg Handbook
guarantees citizen participation in formulating space policy but because it has the potential (conferred upon it by international law) to decide how the final frontier and its accompanying
material benefits may be shared. Though any one nation has myriads of barriers that stand in the way of citizen participation in the formulation of space policy, it could be argued that even if
these were resolved in your favour you would soon come up against barriers against participation at the international level. There is within the international realm a variety of conflicting views
Though
couched in terms of peace and inclusiveness the legal regimes emerging from the machinations of
international politics firmly veer the future of space in an imperialistic direction, where the commonly owned resources
with regards to space development scenarios. Watching these proposed scenarios clash exposes the significantly anti-participatory schemes at work in particular governments.
of the solar system become entrenched in the hands of a technological elite. At work to glorify such extraterrestrial technocracy is a continuing ideological attachment to frontierism.
Space frontierists speak of the rational and renaissance character of space development much as
those humanists of old heralded the worldwide expansion of Europeans as the civilised dispersal of an
enlightened culture and nothing but. In so doing they become not only the ideologues of a misjudged
past and the silencers of alternative histories, but also the progenitors of future imperialism.
West Coast
2011
269
Neg Handbook
entrenched ethnocentrism is
contained within the frontierist attitude to space expansion. There are two great modern stories of
westward expansion. One is of glorious and civilised Euro-American discovery and settlement and the
other is of imperialist victimisation of colonised peoples. It is questionable whether either of these two stories is
adequate when dealing with the many local and enormously heterogeneous histories of North American people, but the point is that space
frontierists only ever adopt one of these two great stories: that of grand and glorious European
expansion. In the many writings of space frontierists there is hardly a sentence acknowledging the
plight of colonised peoples in the face of such expansion, except when it comes to rebutting the
legitimacy of the alternative story. Space frontierists feel safe in reinvigorating the ideas of
frontierism because there are no indigenes on the other planets. Thus imperialism can forevermore be
excised from the final frontier because there will be no victims in its pursuit. In this last point,
however, they may be grossly mistaken.
I. Decentering space policy from nationalism opens up new avenues for space
Asif A. Siddiqi, Ph.D., assistant professor of history at Fordham University, April 2010, Competing
Technologies, National(ist) Narratives, and Universal Claims: Toward a Global History of Space
Exploration, Technology and Culture, v51, n2, pp. 425-443
Since a global history would theoretically be decentered and a nations space program rendered as a
more nebulous transnational process, one might expect a multitude of smaller, local, and ambiguous
processes and meanings to become visible. With a new approach grounded in a global history of
spaceflight, we might learn much more about how individuals, communities, and nations perceive
space travel, how they imbue space exploration with meaning, and especially how those meanings are
contested and repeatedly reinvented as more and more nations articulate the urge to explore space.
West Coast
2011
270
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
271
Neg Handbook
Astronomy Links
Astronomy research is viewed by practitioners as a benign, pure science, but
astronomy is divorced from the lived experience of everydayness and ethics.
advancing astronomy research advances military/industrial control of space
Mark A. Bullock, planetary scientist at the Southwest Research Institute in Boulder, March 15, 2005,
Cosmology and Ethics, in Encyclopedia of Science, Technology, and Ethics, Carl Mitcham, ed.,
Macmillan Reference, Detroit, www.boulder.swri.edu/~bullock/cosmo_ethics.pdf
Cosmology evokes a sense of the most benign, most pure of sciences. The fascination of
contemplating what's out there, combined with the fact that we can't do anything to it lends the
study of space its alluring innocence. That of course, is the old view - cosmology today is coming dangerously close to asking God
some rather direct questions. To some degree, scientific disciplines can be categorized by how influential ethics is
thought to be in the field. Indeed, the ethical weight of astronomy, compared with that of genetics,
lends it a kind of lightness and purity, which is perceived by the people who fund it. Virtually everyone on the
planet has at one time or another gazed up and rested briefly in that human space where we wonder what it all is and what it all means. The
pursuit of these wonders feels ennobling, partly perhaps because of the human space it comes from, and partly because it is
difficult to imagine how contemplation of the stars above us could remotely alter our own fate. The modern science of cosmology
is perhaps as far removed from the day to day concerns of humanity as any human endeavor could be.
Futurists may conjure colorful uses for the discoveries of scientific research on the nature and origin
of the Universe, but we are not dealing here with transistors or life-extending drugs. No one argues that cosmology is
studied because of its economic impact. Does this mean that the study of the Universe has no economic impact? Not at all. The
latest discoveries in astronomy have always depended upon progress in computer, space, and detector technology. Synergism between
the astronomical sciences and industrial and military concerns is strong and growing. Both enterprises
benefit.
amateur astronautics
groups are gradually building up to orbital rocket potential and are proposing solar system colonisation schemes already.
Of course, one may wonder if these plans will ever come about. Even with the help of a few eccentric
millionaires it seems unlikely that the resources will be near what a nation state can muster. Much of
the time, though, it seems as though capital accumulation is only a minor programme for space advocates and amateur rocketeers. What
they (as well as many professional space-workers) really like dealing in is ideology: the ideology of frontierism.
West Coast
2011
272
Neg Handbook
West Coast
2011
273
Neg Handbook
seemed
that we were discussing the Ameriforming of Mars. Hearing these words, my heart sank. Is this really the way we
want to frame our dreams of inhabiting Mars? Maybe these guys are simply not aware of the historical use of this phrase
and its negative connotations, I thought. This hope vanished when Zubrin leapt to the defence of Manifest
Destiny, shouting, "By developing the American West we have created a place that millions of
Mexicans are trying to get into!" to a smattering of applause (and some gasps of disbelief) from the crowd.
West Coast
2011
274
Neg Handbook
Resources Links
Resource extraction drives the frontier mentality
Alan Marshall, PhD in Science and Technology Studies at the University of Wollongong where his
interests revolve around the political sociology of space development and the politics and sociology of
environmentalism, 1995, Development and imperialism in space, Space Policy, V. 11, No. 1, pp. 41-52
Why should expansionist development occur in outer space? What is there to motivate governments
and private firms to develop space? Throughout the Space Age many officials in the US public sector,
as well as many entrepreneurially minded space writers, have set their minds on the utilization of
extraterrestrial resources. Some industries on Earth owe their existence (or a substantial amount of their revenue) to the utilization
of space resources (for instance; the telecommunications, weather forecasting and living marine resource industries). Other private firms owe
their success not to the utilization of space resources but to the vague pursuit of space resource utilization. Such companies succeed by
campaigning their respective governments into giving them multi-million dollar contracts based on the precept that at some time in the future
they will be able to utilize extraterrestrial resources commercially.
the
only nations that can afford to make use of the potential material wealth in space are those that can
now afford the enormous expense to reach them. It is likely that in exploiting space we shall continue
the same imbalances of resources and material wealth we experience on Earth.
is a way of ignoring or pushing aside the possible negative aspects of the exploitation of space. For example, although in space there are no Indians and no plasmoid buffaloes to exploit,
The outer space treaty will keep resources only for the rich
Alan Marshall, PhD Wollongong, 1995, Development and imperialism in space, Space Policy, Vol.
11, No. 1, pp. 41-52
What will be the nature of such development? Given that space expansion is only ever likely to
proceed due to economic forces, space development must thereby operate by economic principles,
which themselves are regulated by political regimes. Currently the political regimes in place (notably
the Outer Space Treaty) dictate that solar system development will be undertaken in an imperialistic
manner. Space advocates are not necessarily malevolently predisposed towards the welfare of the
worlds poor, but to hold to the view that extraterrestrial resource utilization is capable of positively
contributing the global community with the Outer Space Treaty intact is to bask in a vat of optimism
so large as to be unsupportable.
West Coast
2011
275
Neg Handbook
as the need to find an outlet for surplus capital or the search for new resources) might occur under the cover of sociopsychological desire to
explore reasons. This is evident in Antarctica, where geopolitical and geostrategic imperialist policies are pursued by a number of nations in the
guise of scientific exploration.
West Coast
2011
276
Neg Handbook
focus will rest directly on the spatial edge between metaphor and materiality used to
distinguish global and local: the planet, united and bounded by its atmospheric limit, revealed and
transcended by technoscience. The general argument I will advance here is that outer space reflects a practical
shadow of empire. I mean by this two things. The first is that space represents a kind of stabilization of
elsewhere, and its removal from the globe. From the very inception of influential modern dreams of
space exploration, the masculine adventure of earthly colonialism was a constant referent, and the
temporal pairing of rocket launches and the greatest anti-colonial movements only accentuated the
parallel. Indeed, the realization of outer space its initial domestication if you will represents the
effective provincialization of terrestrial empire from above. Once a few white men moved beyond the
atmosphere they became newly, artificially human by virtue of the nonhuman space around them,
cast as universal representatives by virtue of their transcendent, hazardous location. Once extended
beyond the planet, modernity acquired the possibility of another geographic frame, intermingled with
a new temporal order. Whatever the past may have been, the future was clearly out there, and everything else a local concern. Aliens
became extraterrestrials.
West Coast
2011
277
Neg Handbook
the universalist
visions of space developers--advanced space development will only be enacted by a few elite spacecapable nations for the near exclusive material benefit of aerospace and mining companies from
those nations.
Space exploration will only be for the priviledged and military industrial complex
Giancarlo Genta, Technical Univ. of Turin, Italy and Michael Rycroft, International Space University,
Strasbourg, France & DeMontfort University, Leicaster, UK, 2003, Space, The Final Frontier?, pp. XX
Other sceptics see space exploration as a toy for a privileged part of humanity. After seizing almost all
of the planet's resources, they are now wasting them on costly and useless technologies. An even
more cynical view is that space research is an instrument of the military/industrial/political
establishment, always on the lookout for new ways to increase its wealth and power.
West Coast
2011
278
Neg Handbook
The myth of
the frontier appeals to the popular imagination and acts as a tool to build the state. The captains of industry
and the government urged crowded easterners and newly arrived immigrants to Go West! The frontier myth suggested that
the pioneer would gain opportunity: land, work, or abstract personal fulfillment. Their backers gained
customers, new markets, and new institutional capabilities. The West was presented as a land of opportunity in order to incentivize people
to settle there, and that settlement was made possible by and in turn legitimized the large government-supported state-building projects that connected the west to the rest of the country
and supported its infrastructure. Such projects included land grants and subsidies for railroads. The government also bought land to give to settlers. It maintained a military presence across the
West, and in fact fought a war with Mexico from 184648 to expand the western border and firmly establish U.S. control of Texas and California. It subsidized mail service via the Pony Express
and the railroads. Mail service presupposes settlers who need mail delivered and, lured by the promise of the frontier, they came.
West Coast
2011
279
Neg Handbook
Rhetoric of space exploration and development expands state power and capitalism
Fletcher Fernau, International Studies, American University, May, 2009, Putting U.S. Space Policy in
Context, How Have Policymakers Drawn on Existing Rhetorical Commonplaces to Legitimate U.S. Space
Policy?, Capstone Project for Honors in International Studies, http://wrlcsun3ge.wrlc.org/bitstream/1961/7793/1/ Fernau,%20Fletcher,%202009S.pdf
Space development has incontrovertibly had a tremendous effect on the capabilities of the American
state. Yet space exploration has so far failed to deliver fully on the promises of the frontier
commonplace myth. Launius and McCurdy suggest: Invoking the ideas of Frederick Jackson Turner has become increasingly
counterproductive for anyone attempting to carry on a discourse in a postmodern, multicultural society. Linda Billings echoes this thinking :
The rhetoric of space advocacy has sustained an ideology of American exceptionalism and reinforced
longstanding beliefs in progress, growth, and capitalist democracy. This rhetoric conveys an ideology
of spaceflight that can be described, at its worst, as a sort of space fundamentalism. . . Although the social,
political, economic, and cultural context for space exploration has changed radically since the 1960s, the rhetoric of space advocacy has not.
West Coast
2011
280
Neg Handbook
policy, at least, could also have been framed as a purely scientific endeavor, thus avoiding the dangers or
controversy of militarization while still emphasizing American preeminence. However, this was essentially what
Eisenhower had done, and Kennedys rhetoric would have to be differentiated against the Eisenhower/Nixon program. Furthermore, the series
of stinging Soviet firsts in space undermined the assumption of American technical and scientific supremacy.
West Coast
2011
281
Neg Handbook
"to climb the fiery ladder that the spore bearers have used," to reach
that point in our evolutionary, historical, and technological development when space travel even
becomes a possibility, it has been necessary, as Eiseley reminds us, to first "consume the resources of a
world," to become what he calls world eaters, all in order to hurl only a few spore-individuals into the
reaches of space, where, as is the case with the slime molds, only a handful will survive. History, Eiseley
endeavors to show, is therefore an "invisible pyramid"--an all-consuming project, secretly enslaved to a monomaniacal yearning: to construct
the means for leaving the planet Earth.
As a rational alternative to such a rash and momentous course of action, Arendt suggested more than thirty
stop for a moment in order "to think what we are doing". With some notable exceptions, however, few have
heeded her recommendation. ("Considering the quarter-century duration of the Space Age, its primacy in national and international affairs, and the way it has affected our lives," David
West Coast
2011
282
Neg Handbook
Western modes of thinking seek to gain ontological dominion over the planet
William V. Spanos, professor of English and Comparative Literature, Binghamton University, 2000,
Americas Shadow: Anatomy of An Empire, p. 61
If the genealogy of the triumphalist imperial thinking I have undertaken in this chapter teaches us anything at all, it is to take this telling "qualification" of the end-of-history discourse seriously.
Doing so puts one in a position to perceive not only the inordinately persuasive power of this kind of contradiction-defying "technological" thinking, but also its weakness, a weakness that up
to now has been obscured by oppositional discourses that contradictorily think resistance in the logic prescribed by the dominant thought of the Enlightenment, the very thought they would
If, indeed, the highly prized Western consciousness as such is a technological optical machine of
conquest, if the Western will to know is simultaneously a will to total power, if the Western subject in fact
defines itself as "I think; therefore I conquer," and if it is this imperial ocularcentric Western mode of thinking that
has gained complete discursive dominion over the planet, then surely in this interregnum the time has
come for those who would effectively resist the practical fulfillment of the Pax Metaphysica as the Pax
Americana to return to the site of ontology as point of departure. I mean the site of Heidegger's de-struction and of
oppose.
the deconstruction of those like Derrida, Levinas, Lyotard, Lacoue-Labarthe, Nancy, and others whose thoughteven their critique of
Heidegger'sHeidegger's catalyzed. In
thus calling for such a "step back," I am not positing the ontological in
opposition to the other more "political" sites that, admittedly, these thinkers originally neglected or
rarefied. I am suggesting, rather, that the "triumphant" liberal/capitalist democratic culture's
overdetermination of the "truth" (the correspondence of mind and thing) in justifying its "triumph" has rendered a rigorous analysis of the ontological ground of
this imperial truth an imperative of political resistance against the New World Order, the Pax Americana, that would follow this Pax Metaphysica. I mean an analysis such as that inaugurated in
Value and emotion approaches is better than maintaining the frontier mentality
Bob Mahoney, Staff Writer, February 5, 2007, Space for improvement: re-engaging the public with
the greatest adventure of our time (part 1), Space Review,
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/802/1
Tagging space exploration as primarily an emotional experience isnt much better than offering up the
manifest destiny mantra that exploration is in our souls. The key is to capitalize on the connection.
Unfortunately, during the past three decades NASAs public affairs organization has done nearly the
opposite. Caught between trying to present NASA in a favorable light (NASA is, after all, dependent on public
monies) and conveying often complex content (the stereotypical rocket science) to a mostly nontechnical
audience, NASAs Public Affairs Office (PAO) presents each new space mission as just another set of bland (yet always upbeat)
statistics couched in a gee-whiz (but always understatedly competent) shell. Even though some of the accompanying pictures and videos have
been spectacular, PAOs fundamental approach has gone a long way toward convincing the public that spaceflight has no emotional content at
all.