Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
RyeZOAM

Round 470: [Space] Ted Trainer (Aff) Vs. Awumbologist (Neg)

Recommended Posts

That is a really dumb aff... No wonder you didn't get any DCI bids, LOL.

 

and you're a really bad troll. seriously, only shitty Kansas teams would think that this aff was South's A strat.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I judge?

 

I'm tab, I'll basically vote on mostly anything, but for some guidelines -

 

T - reasonability can be persuasive, I default to competing interpretations, impact your standards, tell me why they actually matter.

 

Kritiks - enjoy many and am familiar with a lot of them and run them often in debate, please stay away from the k jargon, have a clear impact, and alt. framing the debate is important, why should 'x' come first. If you don't have an alt. I'm not really going to weigh the K in the debate.

 

CP/disads - I enjoy them, have a clear net benefit, they should be competitive with the aff, I default neg on condo.

 

case - i like case, Impact/case turns are awesome

Any questions just ask me

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I thought I posted the CX, but I guess not. Here it is:

 

How much money will it cost?

 

How do you plan to fund this?

 

Is it for military only?

 

What do you do specifically? Is it just putting new panals on existing sats, or is it a whole new sat system?

 

If the answer to the above is the former, then how do you plan to do this? Just go up there and stick em on? (If it is the latter then don't answer.)

 

How many panals/sat modifications will be made to get the entire system running, and how long will this take?

 

Why has it only been implemented on a small scale?

 

Now let me get this correct, the plan is specifically for military use?

 

How do solar energy panals result in super awsome ASAT proof sat systems? Does it make them stronger or is it more of an ORS idea where they are

smaller and easier to replace?

Is this going to completely replace the United States Military dependance on oil? If it will then how long will it take to do that? If not, then how much will you replace, and how long will that take?

Just for complete clarification: I am guessing you wont mandate that this is exploration, so is it development?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well I thought I posted the CX, but I guess not. Here it is:

 

How much money will it cost?

I don't give a specific cost, but Micklinko & Sagar suggest that the small sats will be much more cost efficent than the large 1-km wide ones.

 

How do you plan to fund this?

Um... probably the DoD budget/normal means. whatever the usual process is for funding military programs. i'm not gonna spike out of any funding-based DAs with my lack of specifying.

 

Is it for military only?

Yes. The SBSP will be deployed strictly for US military use

 

What do you do specifically? Is it just putting new panals on existing sats, or is it a whole new sat system?

We actually develop and deploy Space Based Solar power satellites. we use the small sat technology for the purposes listed in the 1AC advantages.

 

How many panals/sat modifications will be made to get the entire system running, and how long will this take?

I don't specify a number, but it will be considerably low since it's for military use only (as opposed to commercial/global). Ashworth says that we can start deploying the technology now.

 

Why has it only been implemented on a small scale?

idk. testing, market's reluctance to adopt tech over oil, political unpopularity, i mean, it could be any of those.

 

Now let me get this correct, the plan is specifically for military use?

Yup. all of my advantages stem specifically from military deployment of SBSP.

 

How do solar energy panals result in super awsome ASAT proof sat systems? Does it make them stronger or is it more of an ORS idea where they are smaller and easier to replace?

We aren't ORS. There are two primary ways that we allow for super awesome ASAT defense: 1) microsats can power our ASAT weapons 2) they allow for rapid reconstitution where we send up UAVs to temporarily deter against ASAT threats (they're powered by SBSP)

 

Is this going to completely replace the United States Military dependance on oil? If it will then how long will it take to do that? If not, then how much will you replace, and how long will that take?

i don't know exactly how many barrels of oil we're going to replace, but our NSSO '8 evidence says that we could replace our hydrogen based fuel with a synthetic carbon-neutral type. even if we don't solve for 100% oil independence, the fuel our military gets from SBSP is probably going to help our budget significantly.

 

Just for complete clarification: I am guessing you wont mandate that this is exploration, so is it development?

it could be either. i would say it's definitely a form of development... i sure hope you aren't reading T-Humans ;)

 

just post the 1NC whenever. ask more questions if you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CX

 

1. Would an aff that increased more than 50% be substantial? or does it have to be exactly 50% (also, 50% of what?)

 

2. status of the K?

 

3. on the K: what happens when the judge votes neg?

 

4. Why does Dickens say that Capitalism is the root cause of our specific China-War scenarios and nuclear reactor adv?

 

5. Does your Dickens & Ormrod evidence assume a world with or without military SBSP?

 

6. what does the alt do to reject capitalism?

 

7. why do we need a complete rejection to solve the harms of capitalism?

 

8. why will space wars happen post plan?

 

9. on the DA: is it SBSP, or the reconstitutional capabilities like powering sats or drones that triggers the link?

 

10. you read this China-war defense cards on the ASATs adv, how do any of these answer the warrant of the 1AC Tellis evidence that says that US fear of a Chinese strike causes us to attack them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CX

 

1. Would an aff that increased more than 50% be substantial? or does it have to be exactly 50% (also, 50% of what?)

Obviously over 50% would be.Increase 50% of all sats.

2. status of the K?

Condo

3. on the K: what happens when the judge votes neg?

Read the alt card. I'm not sure how to be any more clear than this.

4. Why does Dickens say that Capitalism is the root cause of our specific China-War scenarios and nuclear reactor adv?

He talks about how when we go to space to solve capitalism we will inevitably see war over things like resources and space heg.

5. Does your Dickens & Ormrod evidence assume a world with or without military SBSP?

It assumes a world in which we go to space to support a capitalist system. In the previous card, Dickens talks about satellites.

6. what does the alt do to reject capitalism?

It prevents us from engaging in a solution that ignores the real problem.

7. why do we need a complete rejection to solve the harms of capitalism?

Any amount of solvency from your plan occurs from a capitalistic lens, meaning the entirety of the plan needs to be rejected.

8. why will space wars happen post plan?

Same reason war happens here on earth, because we all want something to gain superiority.

9. on the DA: is it SBSP, or the reconstitutional capabilities like powering sats or drones that triggers the link?

The things that we will do with the SBSP sats when they are up there.

10. you read this China-war defense cards on the ASATs adv, how do any of these answer the warrant of the 1AC Tellis evidence that says that US fear of a Chinese strike causes us to attack them?

Because that card says the US preemptive strike is the result of a Chinese threat, but China wont attack because they don't want to so there is no chance of US attacking in fear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do all your "non-uq, sbsp inevitable" non non-inherent your entire affirmative?

 

You didn't give a number in the last CX, so why can't I call BS on your first argument against T-Substantially?

 

Explain what you mean when you said "Other words in the resolution check – we are topical and give links under any other word".

 

Tell me how all three perms would function.

 

Explain the subpoint 5 Williams '05 argument.

 

Explain the argument in the subpoint 9 Williams '05 card.

 

What is omnicide and what does a transition from Cap do to result in it?

 

Do Russia, India, and Pakistan all have ASATs? And, if they do, where do you get this info?

 

If I prove that we have/will see war even with heg, then does this destroy the warrants in the Friedberg card?

 

So you got your "militarization solves warming" card from blogspot.com?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do all your "non-uq, sbsp inevitable" non non-inherent your entire affirmative?

Because all of your links are tech-based. SBSP is inevitable in the status quo, but the DoD being the anchor tennant isn't. It's through DoD deployment (not Foreign/Commercial) that we claim all of our advantages.

 

You didn't give a number in the last CX, so why can't I call BS on your first argument against T-Substantially?

Because even if i only increased by 1 satillite, that would still be a 100% increase in DoD ussage of SBSP small sats (although lets be reasonable, the USFG is probably going to launch more than 1). Your substantially T interp is based off percent, not number.

 

Explain what you mean when you said "Other words in the resolution check – we are topical and give links under any other word".

We're still an increase, we're beyond the mes, we're development, all 3 of these are different catagories underwhich you could reasonably attempt to garner a link. like, if you read ptx, a developement link would probably be fair game based on perception, etc.

 

Tell me how all three perms would function.

Do both: Pass the plan and withdraw from the system of capital.

Plan + non-mutually exlusive parts of the alt: plan + alt without the rejection of the aff

Reject the alt in every other instance: people read Cap Ks all the time, there's no reason why this particular plan is the one that has to be rejected.

 

Explain the subpoint 5 Williams '05 argument.

There are two Williams '5 cards:

1) we should evaluate ethics based off calculation. ending capitalism and stuff sounds cool and liberating, but people die in the process (via aff impacts and K impact turns).

2) the second is an alt solvency deficit: Williams says that when the way you represent the Capitalistic economy as monolithic and overpowering inhibits us from imagining a world without capitalism, making any hope of a successful alternative impossible.

 

Explain the argument in the subpoint 9 Williams '05 card.

my bad. i guess i answered that above.

 

What is omnicide and what does a transition from Cap do to result in it?

omnicide is basically global death; when you reject capitalism, you ignore things like collapse of the state, collapse of the interconnected globalized economy, the variety of services and resources that people today are dependent upon to survive that the system gives us.

 

Do Russia, India, and Pakistan all have ASATs? And, if they do, where do you get this info?

Kueter '7 and Putnam '9 say Russia has had ASATs for years. i didn't read evidence specific to India and Pakistan, but the warrant of Putnam '9 is that countries other than China and Russia have ASAT weapons. i mean, India probably has them since they're pretty industrialized, and Pakistan has got to have something to defend against India. lots of countries are starting to get them.

 

If I prove that we have/will see war even with heg, then does this destroy the warrants in the Friedberg card?

no. Friedberg is offense against your Heg bad arguments. Kagan '7 however indicates that even if there is war, US heg controls conflict escalation (i.e. the war in Afghanistan. still war, it sucked, but we've significantly deterred anti-US threats in the area).

 

So you got your "militarization solves warming" card from blogspot.com?

Come on man, get off my balls. the guy writes for a military news site and i figured that he'd have some experience in the field of military tech. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So are you saying your links to the advantages are based on the DoD just doing the plan?

 

In an over-simplified way, yes. Dod development is key.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think the 2NC is straight forward. you can post the 1NR whenever you're ready

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, can i just ask a couple of quick questions about the 1NR for clarification?

 

1. Which perm is your intrinsic perms bad theory applying to?

 

2. Does making a permutation = advocating the perm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, can i just ask a couple of quick questions about the 1NR for clarification?

 

1. Which perm is your intrinsic perms bad theory applying to?

The second and third perm (all non-mutually exclusive and alt in every other instance.

 

2. Does making a permutation = advocating the perm?

yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, i know it's taken a ridiculous amount of time, but i've got the 1AR if anybody cares. School work, national tournaments, and primarily a bad memory were all contributing factors to the delay.

 

http://www.mediafire...dbklj9tfjiggjrg

 

T, Nukes, Heg, ASATs, Solvency, The K (Framework and theory stuff first, and then K proper below)

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...