Jump to content
BeanieBeanie

MagicalBeanie (Aff) vs. KAA99 (neg)

Recommended Posts

Limit's/ Rules (To ensure fairness)

 

Maximum highlighted words in the constructive: 1800

 

Maximum highlighted words in the rebuttal: 900

 

Anyone who wants to check word count, You can use verbatim -> tools -> document stats to figure out how many highlighted words there are or you can use Microsoft selective word count.

 

 

Here's the 1AC

some cards aren't highlighted yet because of weird formatting

 

Judges are welcome

Ready for cross ex when you are. :)

1ac Otec.docx

Edited by MagicalBeanie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll judge, but not with this 1ac; did you get this from a camp file?

Yoza et al 10 is unhighlited and also there's no OTEC solves warming card.

 

Maybe this was a mistake?

Edited by deb8lover

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, Thanks for judging, my partner created this affirmative and asked me to run it as a test try so we can fix things later for a tournament we will have later. Normally we run Desal

I think I might have accidentally sent the wrong file because I was in a rush to class. Maybe this is the one?

 

also as for the Yoza et al 10 card, there was problem highlighting the doc, macs hate me. So does Verbatim and Microsoft word, so just read all the underlined portion of that card. Same goes to any other unhighlighted card.


***
Also if you all want we can just debate my desal affirmative, it's pretty old and from the beginning of the year, but regardless of what affirmative my partner and I run we usually revolve around the quality of how we debate, 

1ac Otec Repaired.docx

Edited by MagicalBeanie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, Thanks for judging, my partner created this affirmative and asked me to run it as a test try so we can fix things later for a tournament we will have later. Normally we run Desal

I think I might have accidentally sent the wrong file because I was in a rush to class. Maybe this is the one?

 

also as for the Yoza et al 10 card, there was problem highlighting the doc, macs hate me. So does Verbatim and Microsoft word, so just read all the underlined portion of that card. Same goes to any other unhighlighted card.

Ok cool lol, wondered how that was going to go down with no warming solvency card and inherency at the bottom B)

so anyway im good with anything as long as you explain it. especially true for K alts. Love me a good T debate

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok cool lol, wondered how that was going to go down with no warming solvency card and inherency at the bottom B)

so anyway im good with anything as long as you explain it. especially true for K alts. Love me a good T debate

 

ok thanks!

 

Also for the Kim 12 card, not suppose to be under no war. Oops

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you explain the demonstration part of your plan text?

 

Where will these OTEC plants be developed?

 

How long has warming been around?

 

On the Uehara, 04 card, how exactly does OTEC solve cosmetics and disease?

 

And could you also elaborate on how it solves overfishing also?

 

How long has warming been around?

 

Is the science there to build these plants?

Edited by KAA99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I just came back from a storm home hence forward my debate banquet lol

Could you explain the demonstration part of your plan text?

​We demonstrate the capabilities of the plant to show the awesome greatness of out plan while the plant also works at the same time to provide water and energy to solve our impacts. Demonstration is just a little word that people like to put sometimes.

 

Where will these OTEC plants be developed?

Currently project have been developed but vega 10 talks about how the tech is ready but federal action is key. Varley 11 emphasizes in it's warrants. With the newer technology created from pilot plant and studies, otec will be able to be developed on the coasts of the united states as well as any other part of the ocean that belongs to the eez or is usable by US capabilities to be implemented there such as like normal desalinisation plants would be located. 

 

How long has warming been around?

 

The GSA 13 card talks about how warming has increased rapidly recently as scientific advanced predict the recent rapid warming trend, heat storage in the oceans, glaciers melting, etc as said in the warrants. also the card talks about "by 2100 atmospheric CO2 concentrations will reach two to four times pre-industrial levels, for a total warming of 2 °C to 4.5 °C compared to 1850. " Thus meaning that Otec is the only plan that is capable of solving quick, Magesh 10, Larosa 6 Which states that warming has increased more rapidly over the years in the other parts of the card which is why otec is necessary to solve this.
 

On the Uehara, 04 card, how exactly does OTEC solve cosmetics and disease?

Well the warrants in the card say exactly how it does word for word lol... not much need to explain, card says it all pretty much but if you have any more questions regarding this card i'll answer it.

 

And could you also elaborate on how it solves overfishing also?

 

Golmen et al 10 talks about how otec will enable the enhancement of natural fish stocks, enhancing primary production that substains fisheries as said in the warants. Uehara 4 also talks about how by having otec solve for aquaculture, the need for people to fish out in the ocean causing overfishing from our discovery 10 card (as fishing is currently unrestricted for the fishing industry) will deplete as fish production will increase thanks to otec and the need to go out fishing will decrease.

 

How long has warming been around?
 

Is the science there to build these plants?
Varley 11, Vega 10, 

Edited by MagicalBeanie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

K cx starts

Status of the K (s) ?

Eco-Security

Your Franke 04 evidence seems to say that Environmental insecurity caused either by resource scarcities or by the overloading of planetary sinks seems,  in the unhighlighted portions of the card and also in your card it only talks about how environmental degradation only causes such thing as "Cold War" thinking. If our plan is attempting to solve environmental insecurity and prevent environmental humility, how do we link to the k at all?

Your Olivier 99 card seems to contradict to the first card, please explain to me, is this card talking about how environmental security is bad? Also if the aff is attempting to ensure species and the environment from being endangered, then what assumption with the affirmative do you base your k upon?

 

Should Humanity die?

 

Explain exactly what makes this k unique to our case only?

How does the alt exactly solve warming?

What does the world of the alt look like? 

Cap

Your Bookchin 71 tag talks about A social revolution that "fixes" the current capitalistic system. How will it  "fix" the system if your Bookchin 93 card capitalism being something of destruction?

Please Specify the alt, what social movement? Your Bookchin 71 evidence talks only about capitalistic destruction but nothing about a social revolution that would supposedly "fix" the system.

Bookchin was known to be an anarchist, Since the USFG is capitalist, are you suggesting to get rid of the state and replace it with anarchy?



ON

Your Aguiler 12 evidence only talks about Coral Reefs suffering but your Biello 1/15 evidence talks about Coral reefs becoming resilient and having the ability to adapt and survive near death experiences, how does this "destroy" the reefs?

Your NOAA 11 talks about genetic diversity of the Coral reefs, wouldn't that mean that the coral reefs will have different capabilities of adapting if you say that OTEC destroys them?

Coral reefs tend to only live in clear water or in deeper parts of the oceans, the complete bottom enabling them to be use to deep bloody water. Your Aguiler 12 evidence supports that Otec requires to be in deep areas of the ocean. How will the plant be able to affect the reefs if Otec is in the deep ocean and the coral reefs are near shallow shores?

Ok say that Otec destroys a few Coral Reefs , aren't there still coral reefs in other parts of the oceans to use for disease? 

How much Biodiversity must be lost in order to cause your impact?

Your NOAA 11 talks about how medicine is created from Organism from coral ecosystems, it says nothing about coral being the cure for medicine but "terrestrial plants, animals, and microorganisms"  and  "Stonefish, sea snakes, box jellyfish, cone shells, and pufferfish " where does it say anywhere in the warrants that Coral is used in medication? I see Coral Ecosystems  and Reef creatures but not Coral Reefs itself.

Any other "reef" in the unhighlighted portions in the NOAA11 card refer to Other country's areas such as the Caribbean sea and Coast near Japan. Where in the card does it talk about the US developing anytime of medicine out of reefs or any medicine at all from biodiversity?

You MacCallum 12 evidence talks about extinction from disease, why didn't humanity go extinct during the black plague? Ebola?



Your Arnold 14 card is from a user in the comment section as said in the citations, how can you ensure the credibility of this person and that everything they says about OTEC is true?


You zhou 12 evidence talks about Otec destroying ecosystems but your Arnold 14 card talks about otec having no serious environmental impacts, so how does Otec destroy ecosystems, I don't see it in the warrants either?

Your card's warrants talks about how one worry will be a less worry for another problem. Where does it state in your o Neil 9 evidence that the plan trades off with mitigation policies and how does the warrants of the card relate to the aff at all?

2ac will be posted Tomorrow or Monday/Tuesday, unfortunately I have some doctor appointments so I won't necessarily be able to access my computer during those times.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

K cx starts

 

Status of the K (s) ?

 

Both are conditional

 

Eco-Security

 

Your Franke 04 evidence seems to say that Environmental insecurity caused either by resource scarcities or by the overloading of planetary sinks seems,  in the unhighlighted portions of the card and also in your card it only talks about how environmental degradation only causes such thing as "Cold War" thinking. If our plan is attempting to solve environmental insecurity and prevent environmental humility, how do we link to the k at all?

 

Your plan tries to solve environmental destruction, not insecurity. You link to the K by implementing this environmental security rhetoric that causes a hysteria towards global climate change. 

 

Your Olivier 99 card seems to contradict to the first card, please explain to me, is this card talking about how environmental security is bad? Also if the aff is attempting to ensure species and the environment from being endangered, then what assumption with the affirmative do you base your k upon?

 

Yes this card does talk about how environmental security is bad. You establish an eco-governance where you claim that you are solving warming and this gives you a right to use environmental resources. 

I base my K on the assumption that you claim the environment will die and that, with saving it, you think this gives you a right to use it.

 

Should Humanity die?

 

I am assuming that you are referring to your impact cards. To answer this question I can say that humanity should not use the environment as crutch to stay alive.

 

Explain exactly what makes this k unique to our case only?

How does the alt exactly solve warming?

 

This K is not just unique to one specific case. It is unique to all cases that attempt to use environmental destruction rhetoric to use the environment. 

What does the world of the alt look like?\

 

The world of the alt is to use the environment on a legitimate basis. One where you do not claim that "solving for global climate change" gives you a right to use the environment. 

 

Cap

 

Your Bookchin 71 tag talks about A social revolution that "fixes" the current capitalistic system. How will it  "fix" the system if your Bookchin 93 card capitalism being something of destruction?

 

It fixes this through a micro-political revolution. It is about on the brink of destruction and desolation. Fixing through a revolution will ensure that the destruction will never happen.

 

Please Specify the alt, what social movement? Your Bookchin 71 evidence talks only about capitalistic destruction but nothing about a social revolution that would supposedly "fix" the system.

 

Actually the card does talk about the revolution we are witnessing is the breakdown of a century and a half of embourgeoisement and a pulverization of all bourgeois institutions, we break down the bourgeois institution of capitalism for this social movement.

Bookchin was known to be an anarchist, Since the USFG is capitalist, are you suggesting to get rid of the state and replace it with anarchy?

 

No not at all. I am not Bookchin and do not follow all of his ideas. I only advocate some of his ideas. And I would say that calling Bookchin an anarchist is trying to cover up the true bourgeoise institutions as work.

 

ON

 

Your Aguiler 12 evidence only talks about Coral Reefs suffering but your Biello 1/15 evidence talks about Coral reefs becoming resilient and having the ability to adapt and survive near death experiences, how does this "destroy" the reefs?

 

Biello talks about how coral reefs can adapt to natural harms but not human harms. Your plan destroys coral reefs by implementing anthropogenic activities. 

 

Your NOAA 11 talks about genetic diversity of the Coral reefs, wouldn't that mean that the coral reefs will have different capabilities of adapting if you say that OTEC destroys them?

 

Genetic diversity means that their is a plethora of genetic codes is the reef. This does not say that it can adapt. And obviously they can't adapt if with have reefs dying from activities like this. 

 

Coral reefs tend to only live in clear water or in deeper parts of the oceans, the complete bottom enabling them to be use to deep bloody water. Your Aguiler 12 evidence supports that Otec requires to be in deep areas of the ocean. How will the plant be able to affect the reefs if Otec is in the deep ocean and the coral reefs are near shallow shores?

 

The card says that it requires "large flows of deep sea water". This does not concede that plants are in deep areas of the ocean. You should know that the plants are actually near shores and that it gets the cold water flows from the deep. And also the first part of that question contradicts itself. You said that reefs tend to live in clear water or in DEEPER parts of the ocean. And if OTEC is in deep parts of the ocean, then it will harm the reefs.

 

Ok say that Otec destroys a few Coral Reefs , aren't there still coral reefs in other parts of the oceans to use for disease? 

 

Coral reefs only grow in certain places. Your Irena, 14 card says it spills over internationally and so this will ensure the destruction of coral reefs. And my NOAA, 11 says a devastating loss of biod will cause the impact. So if you kill off the majority of the reefs, then the impact will happen.

 

How much Biodiversity must be lost in order to cause your impact?

 

A substantial amount. I can't give you an approximate estimate, but it would have to be substantial to be considered devastating. 

 

Your NOAA 11 talks about how medicine is created from Organism from coral ecosystems, it says nothing about coral being the cure for medicine but "terrestrial plants, animals, and microorganisms"  and  "Stonefish, sea snakes, box jellyfish, cone shells, and pufferfish " where does it say anywhere in the warrants that Coral is used in medication? I see Coral Ecosystems  and Reef creatures but not Coral Reefs itself.

 

These creatures (especially terrestrial plants) use the reefs as homes. Destroying the reef will ensure that the animals will not have a home and they will eventually die or are most likely to die. Killing coral = killing biod

 

Any other "reef" in the unhighlighted portions in the NOAA11 card refer to Other country's areas such as the Caribbean sea and Coast near Japan. Where in the card does it talk about the US developing anytime of medicine out of reefs or any medicine at all from biodiversity?

 

This is not an excuse to kill the reefs. The US will realize that the reefs have medicinal benefits and will start bioprospecting. And it does seem that they have realized this. The author is NOAA (this is an institution in the USFG).

 

You MacCallum 12 evidence talks about extinction from disease, why didn't humanity go extinct during the black plague? Ebola?

 

Ebola and the black plague are lucky examples. This is an impact with a long time frame. (I'll concede that). Cancer has no cure and could one day consume us genetically. Bioprospecting could be key to solving that. 

 

Your Arnold 14 card is from a user in the comment section as said in the citations, how can you ensure the credibility of this person and that everything they says about OTEC is true?

 

If you read the first sentence of the credentials, it says that he is also systems architect. I would trust someone with that kind of expertise. 

 

You zhou 12 evidence talks about Otec destroying ecosystems but your Arnold 14 card talks about otec having no serious environmental impacts, so how does Otec destroy ecosystems, I don't see it in the warrants either?

 

This is an even if scenario. Even if OTEC does not cause environmental impacts, it still won't work. 

 

Your card's warrants talks about how one worry will be a less worry for another problem. Where does it state in your o Neil 9 evidence that the plan trades off with mitigation policies and how does the warrants of the card relate to the aff at all?

 

The card says that environmental fear rhetoric causes fear that stifles progress. 

fear approaches need to be made more intense as time goes by because of repeated exposure to threatening information

...communicating particularly fearful messages about certain climatic phenomena (e.g., dramatically rising sea levels because of ice sheet melt) might desensitize individuals to be concerned about other potentially more salient concerns

 

 

 

Edited by KAA99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yay 2ac is up! Gladly I had some time to access my computer today :) 

p.s. if something doesn't seem right, please do so tell, my computer was glitching up and there were a lot of problems for some reason because Microsoft, Macs, and all those things hate me.

Solvency 
Aquaculture 
Warming

Eco 
Bookchin
DA

Update*
The document seemed to not have saved because i remember writing everything then shortening it afterwards to about 1700-1800 ish highlighted words. Repaired document will be posted monday or tuesday

Edited by MagicalBeanie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MAKE SURE ALL YOUR ANALYTICS ARE IN TAGS! that is to say, make sure that they appear in the navigation pane. ALL ANALYTICS! I put them in tags and you were at 2981 words...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MAKE SURE ALL YOUR ANALYTICS ARE IN TAGS! that is to say, make sure that they appear in the navigation pane. ALL ANALYTICS! I put them in tags and you were at 2981 words...

The 2AC did seem a bit long..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MAKE SURE ALL YOUR ANALYTICS ARE IN TAGS! that is to say, make sure that they appear in the navigation pane. ALL ANALYTICS! I put them in tags and you were at 2981 words...

yup didn't save confirmed, looks like i'm going to have to do everything all over again :/ I'll try to post it by tomorrow, sorry for the trouble.

Edited by MagicalBeanie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought I shortened it? There was a possibility that the file didn't save

So when is the 2AC going to be posted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today or early tomorrow is the time I'll try to finish it, my school had finals this week so the latest it should be posted is Tuesday night

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok I'm so glad I had a study hall today. I had my partner check my 2ac because for some reason the word count after i shortened it again and didn't seam right at all because i could finish spreading it with about a minute left, turns out there was a card that was messed up in invisibility mode causing it to be 2200 something. My partner did it on his and got 1865 fixing the portions of the glitched up parts.

2ac vs KAA99 Repaired.docx

Edited by MagicalBeanie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought I shortened it? There was a possibility that the file didn't save

nvm

Edited by KAA99

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...