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: Bray Krumenacker (Homeschool) vs. Opposition: Aarinie Pradhan (B.D Somani International School)

Judge: Peter Beadle (Binghamton University)

Resolution: Finals Week: This House Believes that Animal Testing Should be Banned.

  • Bray Krumenacker
    Bray Krumenacker
    vs.



    Aarinie Pradhan
    Aarinie Pradhan
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at May 18, 2020 04:53:41PM EST by Bray Krumenacker

    Citations

    Show

    Science.org

    Posted at May 20, 2020 03:48:15AM EST by Aarinie Pradhan

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at May 20, 2020 06:54:15PM EST by Bray Krumenacker

    Citations

    Show

    Worldnuclear.org
    NRC

    Posted at May 22, 2020 02:21:16PM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz

    Citations

    Show

    citations:
    https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/non-renewable-energy/



    https://engineering.stanford.edu/magazine/article/how-extract-uranium-seawater-nuclear-power

    Posted at May 22, 2020 05:32:57PM EST by Bray Krumenacker

    Citations

    Show

    Science.org

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at May 22, 2020 10:35:41PM EST by Peter Beadle

    Category Bray Krumenacker Aarinie Pradhan
    Use of evidence: 5 5
    Delivery skill: 5 4.5
    Coherence of arguments: 5 4.2
    Responsiveness to opponent: 5 3.2
    Identification of key points: 5 3.2
    Comments: Good constructive. Well structured and lays out a good case. Though there could have been more of an impact stated. You had the time to give more evidence that FF use is bad, rather than trusting I would get it. Your 1.8 million deaths from pollution argument in your closing would have been better used here. And a climate change impact (war, famine, etc) would be good to have here. But good job. In your constructive you laid out the strong arguments on the potential risks and costs of NE but this could have been developed a bit more. Your speech was a bit short at 2:28, did it cut off prematurely? Also, I think arguing other renewable/ sustainable energy options can save our problems without a resort to NE might have helped. But good job responding to your opponent's arguments.

    The decision is for the Proposition: Bray Krumenacker

    Reason for Decision:

    By the end of the round, Nuclear Energy is an abundant resource, that would more than satisfy our energy needs in place of dangerous fossil fuels. There are costs and risk associated with Nuclear Energy, however, those risks are low and can largely be mitigated. Thus the Proposition is justified.

    Video from the judge:


    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