Skip header content and main navigation Binghamton University, State University of New York - Patrick
Banner Brandon Evans Brittney Bleyle Trevor Reddick Phillip George Sonya Robinson Maneo Choudhury Daniel Friedman Joe Leeson-Schatz Anna Pinchuk Masakazu Kurihara Joshua Frumkin

Binghamton Speech & Debate

Proposition: Ronald Cheung (Binghamton University) vs. Opposition: Jack Keating (Wood River High School)

Judge: Trevor Reddick (Baylor University)

Resolution: THBT: An overriding ethical obligation to protect and preserve extraterrestrial microbial life and ecosystems should be incorporated into international law.

  • Ronald Cheung
    Ronald Cheung
    vs.



    Jack  Keating
    Jack Keating
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at April 11, 2016 09:02:09PM EST by Ronald Cheung

    Citations

    Show

    Margaret S. Race, Senior Research scientist specializing in extraterrestrial organisms for SETI Institute and Richard O. Randolph, scientist for SETI Institute. 2002.

    "The Need For Operating Guidelines and a Decision Making Framework Applicable to the Discovery of Non-Intelligent Extraterrestrial Life"

    Page 5 and 6

    http://archive.seti.org/pdfs/m_race_guidelines.pdf

    Posted at April 13, 2016 01:04:59AM EST by Jack Keating

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 13, 2016 06:03:34PM EST by Ronald Cheung

    Citations

    Show

    United Nations - 2011 Treaty Event: Towards Universal Participation and Implementation.

    "How are Treaties Enforced?"


    https://treaties.un.org/doc/source/events/2011/Press_kit/fact_sheet_1_english.pdf

    Posted at April 14, 2016 09:28:27PM EST by Jack Keating

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 15, 2016 05:06:34AM EST by Ronald Cheung

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at April 15, 2016 09:13:32PM EST by Trevor Reddick

    Category Ronald Cheung Jack Keating
    Use of evidence: 4 3
    Delivery skill: 4 4.2
    Coherence of arguments: 4 3
    Responsiveness to opponent: 4.2 2.5
    Identification of key points: 4.2 3
    Comments: Could have done a better job explaining the reasons why international relations works in this instance rather than simply saying you read evidence that says as much. Spend less time harping on the fact he has no evidence and spend more time explaining yours Jack I think that you let your definitions get in the way of engaging the meat of the debate which seems to be if limits on preservation of extraterrestrial microbes are good or bad for the success of space colonization, not that preservation of microbes is a yes/no referendum on space colonization writ large. Your opponents case should have indicated as much, or you needed to do a better job on explaining why your definitions meant the affirmative was non-topical or problematic for some reason.

    The decision is for the Proposition: Ronald Cheung

    Reason for Decision:

    The opposition functions under the belief that the proposition is defending "no future space colonization" when Ronald is actually defending "no future space colonization without environmental standards for engaging microbes." Thus the proposition is not truly clashed with by a majority of the opposition's argument, and the potential that international relations may fail is outweighed by specificity of evidence on this question. i have no reason to believe in this debate that an international agreement recognizing an ethical obligation to preserve microbes will foster racism or unfair representation in space colonization, but I think that's a fault of debating and evidence here rather than truth of the matter. All in all, opposition spend more time getting to the heart of the debate (eg. shift more toward why microbe standards would MAKE space colonization impossible because of their stringency and go for why unfettered space colonization is good), and proposition spend more time explaining your evidence and what your proposition would look like.


    Add Comment

    Please Create an Account or Log-In to post comments.

    Connect with Binghamton:
    Twitter icon links to Binghamton University's Twitter page YouTube icon links to Binghamton University's YouTube page Facebook icon links to Binghamton University's Facebook page Pinterest icon links to Binghamton University's Pinterest page

    Binghamton University Online Debate Platform powered by:

    PHP MySQL SUIT