Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
blackperson

DSCOVR POST

Recommended Posts

I recently made a post called dscovr is amazing with why i think DSCOVR's awesome and it produced some backlash about how none of my arguments are legit.

 

That might be true on the national circuit or a hard district, but i'm from a district where NO ONE runs Kritiks, the only way you can run a Counterplan is if it is a legit specific one without generic links to space, and a lot of the reg teams are noobs because the amazing ones go into champ..

 

Plus my district's teams, except for mine, rely on open evidence. They probably printed off the 5 page dscovr neg on debatecoaches and think thats enough. Plus no one has heard of my disasters advantage on DSCOVR. No one in my district runs DSCOVR until I started cutting a DSCOVR aff two weeks ago so come tournament day no one will know about it.

 

Plus i made a sick comprehensive aT: Dsiads and CP file covering every counterplan and disad that people in my district run.

 

 

And the fiat on politics DA works on le noobish teams.

 

 

So yeah, i'm not worried.

  • Downvote 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, there was no reason for you to make a new thread, you could've posted within that thread.

 

Second, don't justify potentially bad arguments by being in a crap area for debate, that just sets you up for failure elsewhere. To be a successful debater, you should always strive to have the best arguments by any standard. It's better for you as a debater, makes you more knowledgeable and a more critical thinker in general by constantly analyzing and revising your work, and raises the bar for your area, meaning potentially better debate around there and you'll have a name as a smart debater.

 

Third, stop being a cocky prick. It only makes people like to dislike you and sets you up for failure as a debater. If there is a huge difference between reg and champ in your area, then you're not going to succeed in champ if you don't put in the extra effort to question you abilities and work to fix any faults now. You're in an activity where success is only possible through consistent improvement and work.

  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, guys leave him alone. He's serious trollbait, but leave him alone. I'm not meaning to play devil's advocate here, but it might damn well be a great aff for his circuit. Not every team is striving for state quals or TOC bids. Even if you think his arguments suck (which some, admittedly, do,) trying to put him in his place by publicly humiliating him won't do anything to benefit him. Reactions to posts like this are what sets up novices to believe that policy debate is full of super-douches, and leads them to shy away from asking important questions for fear of being ridiculed in a similar way.

 

blackperson, one thing that I would suggest, especially when starting in the cross-x community, is to use questions instead of statements. Asking how to bolster your disasters advantage, asking someone to look at your aff, or asking for tips on making DSCOVR better will get you on a better foot than generalizations like your previous post. Personally, I think dscovr is, at the very least, one of the more original affs on the topic (I'm to disestablishment to go for mainstream ors aff and the like,) but it is definitely not impervious.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being in a "noob" circuit doesn't justify bastardizing what debate stands for. Also, before you get angry at the community for trying to help you understand why such arguments are debunk, remember that this is exactly the point of this website. If you post a strategy, expect feedback (helping you understand certain arguments isn't "backlash"). If you would love to remain ignorant on how to reach the best debate standard possible, then I would suggest stop introducing useless threads.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just apologizing for the post I made earlier which people didn't like, and I didn't mean to be cocky either. I'm just justifying my reasons on that post and I didn't know you aren't supposed to start a new thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a few questions on DSCOVR if someone can please help?

 

1. What exactly is the inherency story? I've seen multiple warrants like: DSCOVR didn't make cut for 2012 budget, DSCOVRs already 90% paid for, etc

Is there one card that explains it's inherent barrier because I can't find a set one. And if you have a card can we trade?

 

2. On solar storms, how do you win the "not empirically proven" arguments because the last major one was 1859.

 

3. I'm running a natural disasters advantage. What are some common arguments against natural disasters?

 

4. Is warming or disasters a better advantage? I think disasters because warming is too controversial. And no one can successfully argue natural disasters are good unless they connect to agriculture

 

5. Just in general, how would you attack justification. A lot of people in my district use J as a timeskew. For this case I'm thinking pushing the idea that USA is uniquely vulnerable to solar weather and disasters, meanig we should act ourselves

 

6, what's minor repair?

 

7. Whats a perfcon?

 

8. How would you win the link on DSCOVR when it's clearly not popular in congress?

 

9. What classifies as earth science stuff? I think DSCOVR Is earth science

 

10. Do people run jpss counterplans? Does jpss even solve for solar storms?

 

11. What's a smart grid? I've heard of the smart grid advantage CP for the solar storms.

 

12. Is it smart to argue a saving satellites= k2 military=u2 heg? I don't really like heg arguments

 

13. What's the dif between soft power and hard power?

 

14. Is it good to specify agent in plan text? In general, my plan text goes the USFG should launch DSCOVR through the space agency NOAA. We claim fiat blahblah..

 

15. Should I have a solvency advocate saying that our agent solves or is that unnecessary?

 

SHANKS <3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can answer a few of these, i dont run dscovr

 

Here's a few questions on DSCOVR if someone can please help?

 

1. What exactly is the inherency story? I've seen multiple warrants like: DSCOVR didn't make cut for 2012 budget, DSCOVRs already 90% paid for, etc

Is there one card that explains it's inherent barrier because I can't find a set one. And if you have a card can we trade?

I would recommend 2 inherency cards saying what you said above

 

3. I'm running a natural disasters advantage. What are some common arguments against natural disasters?

Inevitable, Don't cause extinction, good for economic reasons (countries rush to help a country in need bolstering its economy, Japan is empirical)

 

4. Is warming or disasters a better advantage? I think disasters because warming is too controversial. And no one can successfully argue natural disasters are good unless they connect to agriculture

Warming definitly is a better advantage than disasters, there is more literature for warming and its a lot better than for disasters.

 

7. Whats a perfcon?

Perfcon is a performative contradiction, its like the neg runs a spending disad and then reads new spending good on case. its abusive because it makes all arguments conditional and therefore making debate about whoever is a better cheater is going to win.

 

9. What classifies as earth science stuff? I think DSCOVR Is earth science

DSCOVR is earth science in a way, but telescopes that monitor the earth are a better idea for "earth science" if anyone runs this then i guess you can link turn it, and there is a lot of evidence on open evidence for you to make an AT file.

 

13. What's the dif between soft power and hard power?

Soft power hegemony is a global power that got to its position through diplomacy, Hard Power hegemony is a global power that got to its position through military strength aka UNITED STATES. jk the US uses both forms to maintain its heg status.

 

14. Is it good to specify agent in plan text? In general, my plan text goes the USFG should launch DSCOVR through the space agency NOAA. We claim fiat blahblah..

Yes it is good

 

15. Should I have a solvency advocate saying that our agent solves or is that unnecessary?

If your using an agent that is not the USFG like the private sector then ya, but the NOAA... i guess you could include atleast one card saying that the NOAA can and will do this.

 

 

Correct me if im wrong guys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a few questions on DSCOVR if someone can please help?

I don't run DIscover either so yeah...

 

2. On solar storms, how do you win the "not empirically proven" arguments because the last major one was 1859.

I think you mean how the impact was empirically denied but dude, it was in 1859, we relied way less on electricity and technology back then in 1859 which means that our reliance on technology nowadays leads to global catastrophe.

 

 

5. Just in general, how would you attack justification. A lot of people in my district use J as a timeskew. For this case I'm thinking pushing the idea that USA is uniquely vulnerable to solar weather and disasters, meanig we should act ourselves

Maybe you mean significance as in stock issues, which is up to you, mine would be the USA is uniquely vulnerable to solar storms due to its power grids lacking protection against solar storms.

 

6, what's minor repair?

It's a status quo solves argument. For example, your plan uses the NOAA to use discover to solve for solar storms and whatever else advantage and then the neg would get up and be like minor repair, NASA has a solar shield project in space right now to solve for that.

 

 

 

8. How would you win the link on DSCOVR when it's clearly not popular in congress?

Argue that it is and explain why, or else you risk losing to ptx

 

 

 

 

That's all I can help you with

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To be a successful debater, you should always strive to have the best arguments by any standard.

I'm pretty sure this has actually made me less successful in both policy and LD because now I'm no longer willing or even really able to make bad arguments of the type which judges easily understand. Familiarity is more persuasive, but familiarity isn't very compatible with logical argumentation. Fallacies are some of the most familiar and persuasive arguments that there are.

 

I've exacerbated this problem because I gravitate towards the counterintuitive, but even my basic arguments often aren't comprehendable. For example, last year I argued that BMD would destroy deterrence, and often my judges weren't able to grasp that deterrence is more complicated than building as many weapons as possible so that we are the strongest nation. This was true no matter how much I emphasized that point.

 

It's also difficult for me to answer certain arguments. I've worked hard on training myself to avoid fallacies, but sometimes fallacies are extremely useful ways to get out of tough situations, especially when the judge doesn't know the difference. Although it sounds ironic, knowledge can make you a worse debater in some cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Relevant. This card was cut for a tournament where this happened the Monday of the week of our NFL district tournament.

 

 

None of you guys know this but there was literally a severe solar storm thisyear and I'm pretty sure (*INTENSE SARCASM) there has been no damage.

Asia News Intl 11/9

 

[“Huge solar flare slams into Earth.†11/9/2011.http://www.hindustantimes.com/HTNext/LifeAndUniverse/Huge-solar-flare-slams-into-Earth/Article1-750691.aspx#.ToKBLaNgtEw.blogger]

 

NASA has revealed that a massive solar flare that eruptedon the Sun over the weekend has hit the Earth’s magnetic field at approximately8:15 a.m.EDT on Monday, following the impact of a coronal mass ejection (CME).It started when an X1.9-category flare erupted from the Sunspot 1302 — a60,000-mile-long region that NASA calls ‘behemoth’ — at 5:40 am EDT onSeptember 24. According to the space agency, the Goddard Space Weather Labreported a strong compression of Earth’s magnetosphere. Simulationsindicate that solar wind plasma has penetrated close to geosynchronous orbitstarting at 9am. The strong-to-severe (Kp=8) geomagnetic storm is likely to disrupt GPS signals, radiocommunications and power grids, although no interruptions had been reported. It could alsogive sky gazers in select locations a treat, creating dazzling auroras.

 

And we lost a round against this aff while running this card in front of lay judges at NFL. Their RFD's were "pretty sure doesn't cut it." -_-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm pretty sure this has actually made me less successful in both policy and LD because now I'm no longer willing or even really able to make bad arguments of the type which judges easily understand. Familiarity is more persuasive, but familiarity isn't very compatible with logical argumentation. Fallacies are some of the most familiar and persuasive arguments that there are. I've exacerbated this problem because I gravitate towards the counterintuitive, but even my basic arguments often aren't comprehendable. For example, last year I argued that BMD would destroy deterrence, and often my judges weren't able to grasp that deterrence is more complicated than building as many weapons as possible so that we are the strongest nation. This was true no matter how much I emphasized that point. It's also difficult for me to answer certain arguments. I've worked hard on training myself to avoid fallacies, but sometimes fallacies are extremely useful ways to get out of tough situations, especially when the judge doesn't know the difference. Although it sounds ironic, knowledge can make you a worse debater in some cases.

 

Knowledge doesn't make you a worse debater. It's how you apply your knowledge. Debate is still a communicative activity. As much as you gain knowledge, you need to have the ability to explain that knowledge. The best K debaters in the nation can win local rounds on even the strangest Ks. You just need to be able to explain it completely.

 

If you cannot communicate the ideas, then you should be working on that. The better arguments will win if you can communicate those arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Black Person

You seriously need to chill bro. You complain about everyone in your area only relying on open evidence yet im pretty sure about 90%+ of my evi on SBSP was hand cut. Also what's wrong with running CPs that have specific links? I feel like if you want to bash our district, debate champ; otherwise, please save us your insolent intrusions of ignorance. Just a reminder from your local concerned debator.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Black Person

You seriously need to chill bro. You complain about everyone in your area only relying on open evidence yet im pretty sure about 90%+ of my evi on SBSP was hand cut. Also what's wrong with running CPs that have specific links? I feel like if you want to bash our district, debate champ; otherwise, please save us your insolent intrusions of ignorance. Just a reminder from your local concerned debator.

I agree with this post 100%

The OP is basically saying DSCOVR is awesome because people in his district don't have answers to it, so people don't have to debate it. Lol the OP is so bad

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...