Jump to content
THack

Round 494 [Space] Thack (Aff) Vs Embracethesuffering (Neg)

Recommended Posts

Cost?

 

Why isn't the US pursuing it right now?

 

"The President of the United States should issue an Executive Order to deploy Space-Based Solar Power. I’ll clarify upon request."This is that request, clarify whatever bs args you re gonna pull to try delink outta my args, also clarify what you mean by space based solar power-do you mean you'll launch satellites or will you give current sats solar power capabilities?

 

Does the US have sbsp sats ready to go and launch or do they just have the ability to make sbsp sats?

 

Explain how the plan solves debris

 

whats the brink on pres power?

 

How many solar power sats do you have to launch to solve your mil adv?

 

Your pop 2k evidence talks about how microwave beams can be classified as an electromagnetic weapon because it transmits energy to the ground, how is this a space WMD or laser?

 

"unlike traditional weapons of mass destruction, there are no controllable components[16] in an HPM weapon."[17] and this would make treaties that would limit their proliferation "virtually impossible to enforce given the common availability of suitable materials and tools."[18]. Regarding their use as means of causing lethal diseases, it is unlikely that SPSs would become instruments of mass destruction; the small power density of the microwave beam (about 1/4 the power density of sunlight) means that, "as a weapon, the SSP is less effective than a squirt gun"[19]. Foldes agrees, considering that the "[c]apability of SPS to cause radiation damage on the ground is small"[20]. Moss believes that a SPS "would not violate the dictates of Article 4 as the SPS is not a weapon. The alignment of the microwave beam would always be under positive control from the receiving station and could be quickly shut off should it stray from the precise path of the rectennas. Furthermore, and most importantly, contact with the microwave energy is not lethal. It has no thermal "zapping" qualities like a laser, nor is it ionising like X-ray radiation."

Thats literally quoted from your Pop card, why is SPS going to give us leverage from space?

 

Why doesn't previous militirization in space solve your adv?

 

Your Dolman 6 card says "Seizing the initiative and securing low-Earth orbit now, while the United States is unchallenged in space.." thats 6 years ago, when is the brink?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cost?

I don't specify an amount, but it'll be substantial

 

Why isn't the US pursuing it right now?

Politicians probably think it's not worth it, but most politicians are idiots

 

"The President of the United States should issue an Executive Order to deploy Space-Based Solar Power. I’ll clarify upon request."This is that request, clarify whatever bs args you re gonna pull to try delink outta my args, also clarify what you mean by space based solar power-do you mean you'll launch satellites or will you give current sats solar power capabilities?

No bs, basically I can only spike outta ASPEC, XO CP, Militarization DA, Spending DA, Debris DA, and probably Russia relations DA. New sats

 

Does the US have sbsp sats ready to go and launch or do they just have the ability to make sbsp sats?

Ability to make them, also the Examiner evidence cites a test done with an SPS to take out debris

 

Explain how the plan solves debris

SPSats can eject microsats to take put debris, Examiner evidence

 

whats the brink on pres power?

Pretty dang soon

 

How many solar power sats do you have to launch to solve your mil adv?

One would probably work considering other countries' perception, but the Plan does moar

 

Your pop 2k evidence talks about how microwave beams can be classified as an electromagnetic weapon because it transmits energy to the ground, how is this a space WMD or laser?

SPSats concentrate energy into beams, pretty laser-like

 

"unlike traditional weapons of mass destruction, there are no controllable components[16] in an HPM weapon."[17] and this would make treaties that would limit their proliferation "virtually impossible to enforce given the common availability of suitable materials and tools."[18]. Regarding their use as means of causing lethal diseases, it is unlikely that SPSs would become instruments of mass destruction; the small power density of the microwave beam (about 1/4 the power density of sunlight) means that, "as a weapon, the SSP is less effective than a squirt gun"[19]. Foldes agrees, considering that the "[c]apability of SPS to cause radiation damage on the ground is small"[20]. Moss believes that a SPS "would not violate the dictates of Article 4 as the SPS is not a weapon. The alignment of the microwave beam would always be under positive control from the receiving station and could be quickly shut off should it stray from the precise path of the rectennas. Furthermore, and most importantly, contact with the microwave energy is not lethal. It has no thermal "zapping" qualities like a laser, nor is it ionising like X-ray radiation."

Thats literally quoted from your Pop card, why is SPS going to give us leverage from space?

Perception from other countries is important, IE they'd be like "holy shit balls those satellites shoot lasers, better be careful"

 

Why doesn't previous militirization in space solve your adv?

What previous militarization?

 

Your Dolman 6 card says "Seizing the initiative and securing low-Earth orbit now, while the United States is unchallenged in space.." thats 6 years ago, when is the brink?

Now, cuz other countries are prepared to challenge us now and we gotta beat them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couple of follow ups:

Explain how the plan solves debris

SPSats can eject microsats to take put debris, Examiner evidence.

These microsats arent mandated by the plan are they? theyre just possible capabilities of SPS right?

 

How many solar power sats do you have to launch to solve your mil adv?

One would probably work considering other countries' perception, but the Plan does moar

Speakng of this, how many does the plan do?

 

Cost?

I don't specify an amount, but it'll be substantial

Can you specify how much now, rather than later? Itll just save us a bunch of time..

 

Why doesn't previous militirization in space solve your adv?

What previous militarization?

x-37b, ors/ssa projects, why dont those solve the adv?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couple of follow ups:

Explain how the plan solves debris

SPSats can eject microsats to take put debris, Examiner evidence.

These microsats arent mandated by the plan are they? theyre just possible capabilities of SPS right?

Nope they're mandates

 

How many solar power sats do you have to launch to solve your mil adv?

One would probably work considering other countries' perception, but the Plan does moar

Speakng of this, how many does the plan do?

No specific number, but a lot. Enough to link to a disad and to be substantial

 

Cost?

I don't specify an amount, but it'll be substantial

Can you specify how much now, rather than later? Itll just save us a bunch of time..

I didn't specificy cuz I don't know, but it's gonna be a lot, enough to be substantial and to link to a DA

 

Why doesn't previous militirization in space solve your adv?

What previous militarization?

x-37b, ors/ssa projects, why dont those solve the adv?

Those aren't straight-up weapons, they're just responsive capabilities

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should be, I didnt have any good miscalc defense cards, so when i saw it on a vdebate.....Im sorry

Haha, I don't care. I'd be a hypocrite if I did.

Just thought it was funny, I saw it, and it looked familiar, and I looked down, there's my initials!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Embrace the suffering of CX. Jk.

 

OSPEC/Its T-

 

1. How do you lose ground if you now could run, for example, a Congress CP?

 

2. Where in your interps does it say I have to use ALL of the branches?

 

Staffed T-

 

1. 5 Affs that meet this?

 

2. Explain how the framework of Competing Interps gives a "logical understanding of what interp is better." Doesn't judge bias factor into Standards comparison?

 

3. What ground have you lost?

 

Substantial T-

 

1. Why does one instance of a "substantial" increase being 50% mean that every single increase must be 50% to be "substantial?"

 

2. What ground have you lost?

 

Russia Nationalism DA-

 

1. Explain the Link Scenario. Basically by sending SPSats into space I invigorate Russian Nationalism?

 

2. What's the brightline for the amount of Nationalism required to cause a nuke war?

 

3. Has any Russian citizen ever had Nationalistic thoughts before?

 

4. Your Isrealyan evidence references Hitler; is the only way for Russian Nationalism to cause extinction through the rise of another Hitler?

 

Warming-

 

1. Doesn't your Fox News evidence say that "The average global temperature in 2011 was 0.36 C above average," meaning there's a rising trend?

 

2. "Global Change Biology concluding global warming will benefit marine life," <--- Directly quoted from your Idso evidence. So the aff, which concludes global warming, would benefit marine life right?

 

3. Where does your Kraig evidence talk about extinction?

 

Debris-

 

1. Your AP evidence says the Swiss machine will be deployed in 3 to 5 years. So if I win that the impacts of debris will happen before then, do I win uniqueness for the Debris advantage?

 

2. Same as ^ with the Physics arXiv evidence, but the period is 35 years.

 

Econ scenario-

 

1. Miller talks about economic crises in Latin America and Asia. How is this relevant to US economic collapse?

 

Miscalc scenario-

 

1. What does Ryabikhin know about Debris?

 

Colonization scenario-

 

1. What are the warrants in your Economist's View evidence?

 

2. Even if surviving on Mars is tough, if we are BOUND to die on Earth, isn't it just try or die?

 

3. Why does depletion of the Earth's ozone matter if everybody's on Mars?

 

Pres Powers-

 

1. Considering we just pulled our troops out of Iraq, how do we have influence in the region?

 

Solvency-

 

1. Where does your Mankins evidence say that those obstacles destroy all solvency?

 

2. Just because Bansel says the transmission isn't large-scale, how does that mean it's impossible?

 

3. How is Rouge relevant if that was written 3 years before Betancourt?

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...

×
×
  • Create New...