Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Negative Topicality
Explanation
This is a topicality violation that teams can read in addition to
the typical TUSFG argument. If you are not reading that
topicality argument, omit the opening sentence and insert the
Steffen card about ocean literacy into the 1NC shell. This
argument is best against cases that use broad definitions of
exploration to justify saying something or doing something
related to the oceans.
Changed Our View of the World, Phaidon Press, Oxford, 1981. Spanish translation by Luis Bou: Grandes
experimentos cientificos, Labor, Barcelona, 1986, pp. 14-16.
Interpretation Evidence
Ocean exploration requires systematic observation of all
facets of the ocean.
McNutt 1 Marcia K. McNutt, President and CEO of the Monterey Aquarium Research Institute,
Griswold Professor of Geophysics and Director of the Joint Program in Oceanography and Applied Ocean
Science and Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, President of the American
Geophysical Union, holds a Ph.D. in Earth Sciences from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, 2001
(Ocean Exploration and Coastal Ocean Observing Systems, Prepared Statement for a Joint Oversight
Hearing before the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards and the Subcommittee on
Research of the Committee on Science and the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and
Oceans of the Committee on Resources of the United States House of Representatives, July 12 th, Available
Online at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-107hhrg73840/pdf/CHRG-107hhrg73840.pdf, Accessed 0715-2014, p. 54)
What is Ocean Exploration?
Violation Evidence
Ocean exploration is distinct from research. Even if the affs
research is related to the oceans, they arent ocean
exploration.
McNutt 1 Marcia K. McNutt, President and CEO of the Monterey Aquarium Research Institute,
Griswold Professor of Geophysics and Director of the Joint Program in Oceanography and Applied Ocean
Science and Engineering at the Massachussets Institute of Technology, President of the American
Geophysical Union, holds a Ph.D. in Earth Sciences from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, 2001
(Ocean Exploration and Coastal Ocean Observing Systems, Prepared Statement for a Joint Oversight
Hearing before the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards and the Subcommittee on
Research of the Committee on Science and the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and
Oceans of the Committee on Resources of the United States House of Representatives, July 12 th, Available
Online at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-107hhrg73840/pdf/CHRG-107hhrg73840.pdf, Accessed 0715-2014, p. 54)
Why does the U.S. need a program in ocean exploration?
great era of exploration from the 15th through the 18th centuries, the target was unknown lands: the New
World, the Dark Continent, Terra Incognita. Many of the explorers of that era were indeed superb mariners
Columbus, Magellan, Drake, Cookbut the ocean itself was not the target of their journeys. It was
merely a barrier that needed to be crossed in order to claim new lands and discover new riches. The
By the time we
developed the platforms and instruments that could explore the ocean
and its depths, exploration had gone out of favor as most of the land surface had
already been catalogued, and the vast resources of the oceans were
unappreciated. To be sure, much has been learned about the oceans
through research programs supported by Federal agencies, primarily NSF, the Navy, and
NOAA. But research is distinct from exploration. Exploration leads to
questions. Research finds answers. Every day Congress and other
legislative bodies are asked to make policy decisions concerning the
oceans, based on the best scientific answers to those posed questions.
But what if we dont know enough to ask the right questions? For
technology did not even exist at that time to explore the ocean itself.
example, some are now proposing direct sequestration of carbon dioxide in the ocean, below 3 km depth,
as a way to circumvent the atmospheric release that leads to global warming. But how can we assess the
biological impact of ocean sequestration when we dont know all of the creatures that live in those regions,
much less the role they play in the over- all health of the ocean ecosystem? As another example, my
institutions ocean observatories documented a 25% drop in ocean productivity in Monterey Bay in the
decade of the 1990s caused by a 1 degree Fahrenheit rise in ocean surface tempera- ture. This extreme
effect was not predicted by the sophisticated computer models because we have not explored the ocean
Impact Evidence
Ocean exploration is important it offers tangible benefits to
everyone.
NOAA 13 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, last updated in 2013 (What Is Ocean
Exploration and Why Is It Important?, January 7th, Available Online at
http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/backmatter/whatisexploration.html, Accessed 07-14-2014)
The need for ocean literacy is simple. The most dominant feature on
Earth is the ocean. Understanding the ocean is integral to
understanding the planet on which we live. This understanding is
essential to sustaining our planet and our own well-being.
However, for many years core curricula for grades K-12 have not included
ocean topics. In fact, in some cases, the ocean has been completely
ignored in formal K-12 education. The challenge facing ocean literacy
proponents has been how to incorporate concepts about the ocean into
accepted curricula. In the last several years, several institutions have grappled with this
challenge in a variety of ways.
This report represents the completion and documentation of the multiphase, national effort to improve ocean literacy. The ocean sciences
and education communities were able to come to consensus about
what every person should know about the ocean in order to make
wise and informed decisions about it and about our future. In so
doing, the two communities have taken great and unprecedented
strides toward becoming a single, more unified community. Though we are
not nave about the different worlds and cultures in which scientists and educators live, we are heartened
that so many have [end page 5] worked together so effectively on this important issue. We also recognize
that the inclusion of scientists in development of educational policy and resources is one that must
continue.
Shortly before the 1960s, scientists, explorers, and writers had begun
to characterize the ocean, particularly the undersea world, as a [end page 3] frontier.
Many who were involved in ocean exploration associated the sea
with outer space, sometimes pointing to similarities and sometimes to contrasts between these
two forbidding, yet promising, environments. As an example, consider how the engineer
and popular author Seabrook Hull characterized the sea in 1964:
Of the two great frontiers, space and the ocean, being opened up
in the 20th Century, only the ocean is close, tangible, and of direct
personal significance to every man, woman, and child on the
face of the globe. Another war might be won or lost in its depths,
rather than in outer space. It is a cornucopia of raw materials for
mans industries, food for his stomach, health for his body,
challenges to his mind, and inspiration to his soul.4
Hull labeled both the sea and space as frontiers, and then he
enumerated some of the reasons why champions of ocean exploration
believed it might prove more pressing, and also more rewarding, to
concentrate on the ocean. Reference to the provision of food and the
potential for creating wealth echoed cultural assumptions about
what the American West offered as a frontier. In addition, the
suggestion that the sea promised strength and spiritual sustenance
likewise evoked associations between the western frontier and
American individualism and democracy.5
As Hulls quote makes clear, promoters of underwater exploration felt it held more immediate potential
compared with space exploration. This was especially the case during the 1950s before Sputnik and the
race for the moon. A single invention, the Aqualung, was most responsible for opening the undersea world,
not only to experts but to ordinary people as well. In 1949 Jacques Cousteau and a colleague invented the
Aqualung, the first free-swimming underwater breathing set.6 Previous underwater breathing gear
included helmeted diving suits and wartime innovations such as re-breathers that used carbon dioxide
scrubbers to avoid the escape of air bubbles that might reveal the diver below. Such equipment required
significant expertise and was dangerous to use even for professional divers. The Aqualung or, as
subsequent generations of the technology were called, Self-Contained Underwater Breathing Apparatus, or
SCUBA, was eagerly embraced by skin divers and spear fishers, and also by newcomers to the sport,
including recreationalists, scientists, filmmakers, and others.7
Among the early users of the Aqualung was Arthur C. Clarke. Relative to his fame for science fiction and
space prognostication, Clarke is less well known for his early and enthusiastic pursuit of diving, spear
fishing, underwater photography and treasure hunting; for his promotion of undersea exploration; and for
his predictions of [end page 4] futuristic ocean industries, technologies, and uses of the sea. He dove and
wrote about the oceans in the late 1950s and early 1960s, and the ideas and preoccupations found in his
ocean writings appear and re- appear in popular and scientific works throughout the 1960s.8 Although
many of Clarkes expectations and predictions regarding the ocean were not fulfilled, they fell firmly within
the range of what ocean scientists and engineers also anticipated.
emerging relationship with the ocean formed part of what they considered an evolutionary trajectory for
humanity. In a very concrete sense, the oceans resources would in the near future prove essential for the
survival of the growing population. But the relationship with the ocean had another dimension as well
because Clarke believed that humanity required new challenges in order to survive. People had evolved
from the sea, and now the oceans depths were expected to serve as the testing ground for both the
technology and the spirit that would be required for humans to break free of the earth to explore space.
Clarkes writings and biography, then, offer a window into how the ocean was perceived, how experts
expected to be able to use it and its resources, and even how the ocean might figure in world history.
from the frontierism experienced in history. The fact that there is confusion between these sociopsychological elements and the actual economic nature of fronterism in modern day calls for space
development gives credit to the nineteenth century idealogues who so convincingly tied bourgeois
economic policy with populist ideology that it continues to fool so many into believing fronterism is a
worthy nationalist (even universalist) ideal.
Because frontierism is ultimately an economic philosophy its success as a rationale for extraterrestrial
development relies on economic forces. As such, it is as doomed a rationale as the other economic [end
page 46] models of space development discussed earlier. But what of the socio-psychological and sociobiological aspects inherent in modern frontierist thought. Might they offer a convincing rationale for Solar
System development?
breathtaking optimism about the expected scale and extent of new uses for the ocean and, predictably for
his time, exhibited blindness about what groups of people would and would not be involved in or benefit
page 18] for the proposed International Decade of Ocean Exploration reflected this view. The overall goal
articulated for the Decade was To achieve more comprehensive knowledge of ocean characteristics and
their changes and more profound understanding of oceanic processes for the purpose of more effective
utilization of the ocean and its resources [italics in original]. The sentence immediately following this goal
in the Steering Committee report pressed the point: The
simply bend to the will of the engineers and entrepreneurs of the 1950s and 1960s, however much they
expected it to do so. The technologies, industries, and capabilities that Clarke and others predictedsuch
as atomic submarine engines transporting cargo underwater in giant rubber bags, massive-scale farming
of plank- ton or ranching of whales, profitable mining of a host of minerals and metals from seawater, or
the possibility of communication with whales and dolphinsdid not come to fruition. While the offshore oil
and gas industry did emerge, other undersea industries involving workers operating, even living, deep
under water did not. In 1969 the experimental saturation diving program, SEALAB III, was terminated after
the death of diver Barry Cannon during emplacement of the habitat. Two years earlier, the Apollo program
continued after the fiery death of three astronauts on the launch pad. There are many reasons for the
failure of the dreams for using the ocean harbored by the likes of Clarke and his contemporariesand for
the continuation of space exploration when it seemed, to ocean enthusiasts, that the promise represented
by Trieste and SEALAB went regrettably unfulfilled.
Because the space frontier overshadowed the ocean frontier in the decades after the Second World War, it
is essential to examine these frontiers relative to one another. The ocean possessed characteristics
recognized as associated with Turners frontier: resources to fuel economic development and increase
standard of living as well as the setting for the outlet of human energy and the progressive development of
human culture. At times the space and ocean frontiers seemed similar, but analysis of the writings and life
of Arthur C. Clarke, who immersed himself in both of these realms, reveal a crucial difference. The value of
the ocean frontier rested in the vastness of its potential economic resources. Space, however, was
ultimately judged a better frontier because of its potential to serve human spiritual and cultural needs
endlessly into the future.
Articulation of this difference offers insight into current ocean issues. It illuminates the frustration
expressed by ocean boosters from the postwar period to the present that ocean exploration is [end page
19] wrongly neglected relative to exploration of outer space. Boosters of ocean exploration apparently
have a hard time arguing that earthbound exploration is not simply a mopping-up operation. The cultural
promise offered by the infinite extent of space came to resonate more strongly, by the end of the 1960s,
The
stubborn persistence in viewing the ocean in terms of its economic
resources has contributed to massive global overfishing, depletion of
other marine resources, and cascades of unintended ecosystem
effects. While concepts of conservation and preservation were applied to land at the turn of the
than the fading dreams of the fabulous wealth to be derived from the oceans depths.
twentieth century, and Aldo Leopold articulated the need for a land ethic at midcentury, recognition of the
ocean as an environment in need of protection and ethical treatment has emerged slowly and recently.63
joint hearing, as we begin to refine our policy for ocean exploration so we move forward into the new
millennium with a blueprint for the future.
For years now, we have referred to space as the last frontier and in the
words of Star Trek, felt we must go where no one has gone before. I
strongly believe America must maintain its lead in space exploration but it is by no means the last
frontier.
Ironically, we now have better maps of the far side of the moon that
has never faced Earth than we do of Earth itself. We have better maps
of Mars and Venus than of Earth.
Most people do not know that Neil Armstrong TOOK that giant leap for
mankind on the surface of the moon BEFORE earthbound explorers
using tiny deep diving submersibles entered the largest mountain
range on our own home planet. We had to wait until 1973 for that, four year after
Armstrongs giant leap.
Today we have explored only a fraction of the worlds oceans, which cover
more than 71% of the Earth. This is particularly true in the Southern Hemisphere, where the oceans occupy
81% of the planets surface area.
Going back in time, you will find that, during the 18th and 19th centuries, England commonly had more
survey ships in the Southern Hemisphere of Earth than America had in the 20th century.
we need to develop the technology future farmers and ranchers of the sea will need.
must understand the role, history and impact of humans upon the ocean from pollution to historic wrecks
and structures on the ocean floor. We must make this information readily available to educators and
environmental, political, industrial and research leaders, so that effective plans for new aquaculture, new
ocean industries, and new ocean conservation initiatives can be laid.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has taken an effective lead by
creating the Office of Ocean Exploration. This has been a bold move towards this new
interdisciplinary, inter-cultural and inter-agency arena. This is a fresh start and a catalyst that will enable
our nation to take a lead in the wholistic understanding of our oceans. This is a critical step for our nation
to take and everyone should be behind it.
miniaturized underwater vehicles, autonomous observatories, and in situ robotic laboratories. This U.S.-led
Ocean Exploration Program will also attract international partners with a dazzling array of ocean
observational systems spanning the globe.
stretching the length of over 1,200 miles, a home for most of Americas tropical coral mass, very little is
known about the nature and life of the ocean floor north of the inhabited windward islands. The Hawaiian
Islands are strategically located in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, a physical and cultural presence of the
United States in the middle of the worlds largest ocean.
The frontier analogy was particularly important for Clarke, who was among the
first writers to elaborate on it to make sense of human interaction with both oceans and space. Clarkes
vision of the frontier derived from that made popular by the historian Frederick Jackson Turner who
theorized that the western frontier had forged a distinct, democratic American culture and provided an
outlet for the restless energy of its people. Turner first articulated his argument about the influence of the
frontier in American history in 1893, at the very moment that the U.S. Census Bureau declared the western
frontier to be closed. To politicians and others, the obvious problem emerged of finding new outlets for
expansion; solutions included overseas territories, Alaska, polar regions, and even the frontier of new
knowledge, especially discoveries in the natural sciences.
By the mid-1950s, the ocean, too, had acquired the status of frontier,
as observers including Clarke expected the sea soon to provide food to
feed a growing population as well as mineral and other critical
resources including fresh water. In November 1953, the American Association for the
Advancement of Science included at its annual meeting a special session on The Sea Frontier, which
included topics ranging from the geology of ocean basins to the productivity [end page 12] and biological
resources of the sea, to the potential for extracting resources such as fresh water or minerals.35 A 1954
advertisement in Life magazine placed by the American Petroleum Institute declared, In the open waters
of the Gulf of Mexico, against every hazard of wind, wave, and sudden storm, sea-going oilmen are
may hold the key to his survival on this planetnot only in terms of attack and defense but in terms of
minerals, chemicals and food . . . . Beneath the sea, man is still a tentative intruder, just learning how to
farm and mine its depths. This characterization of the ocean appeared in a 1962 Life magazine article
describing a novel 300-foot instrument-vehicle for ocean exploration, the Floating Instrument Platform, or
FLIP, designed by and built for researchers at Scripps Institution of Oceanography.37 While FLIP was mainly
intended as a stable platform for performing delicate acoustic measurements, work with explicit military
applications, the enthusiasm surrounding such new technological means for probing the sea frequently
used the frontier analogy.
Futurists believed that, like the western frontier, the sea would be
the site of dramatic innovation in transportation, communication, and
other technologies. As with all his work, Clarkes ocean-focused writing rested on his knowledge
of contemporary science and technology. As he did for space (famously predicting earth-orbiting satellites
for telecommunication), he envisaged uses that people would soon make of the sea and its resources.
Stories from Tales from the White Hart, dating from the days when Clarke first met Wilson, included two
works that evoked anticipated new uses of the ocean. The Man Who Ploughed the Sea revolved around a
plan to extract minerals from seawater, and Cold War revealed a scheme by California to destroy
Floridas appeal to tourists by landing icebergs on Miami Beach. Both proposals, although presented by
Clarke in the context of Harry Purviss tall tales, were believed by experts to be firmly within reach or
nearly so by the late 1950s and early 1960s.38 The communication with dolphins depicted in Dolphin
Island reflected the work of physician and neurophysiologist John C. Lilly.39 Farming the sea, as outlined in
The Deep Range, likewise seemed an obvious and achievable goal to scientists and engineers.40
Directorate. So clearly, the term is tightly woven into the fabric of the space program. But exactly what
does exploration encompass?
When the race to the Moon began 50 years ago, space was considered
just another field of exploration, similar to Earth-bound exploration of
the oceans, Antarctica, and even more abstract fields such as medical
research and technology development. Moreover, many used the term
frontier when speaking about space, touching a very familiar
chord in our national psyche by drawing an analogy with the
westward movement in American history. What better way to
motivate a nation shaped by the development of the western frontier
than by enticing it with the prospect of a new (and boundless) frontier
to explore? After all, we are descended from immigrants and
explorers. Over time however, few recognized that there had been a
shift in the definition and understanding of just what exploration
represented.
Starting around the turn of the last century, while still retaining its
geopolitical context, exploration became closely associated with
science. Although first detectable in the 19th Century exploration of America and Africa, the
tendency to use science as the rationale for geopolitical exploration reached its acme during the heroic
age of polar exploration. Amundsen, Nansen, Cook, Peary, Scott and Shackleton all had personal
motivations to spend years of their lives in the polar regions, but all of them cloaked their ego-driven
Science has been part of the space program from the beginning and has served as both an activity and a
rationale. The more scientists got, the more they wanted. They realized that their access to space
depended upon the appropriation of enormous amounts of public money and hence, supported the non-
Because science
occurs on the cutting edge of human knowledge, its conflation with
exploration is understandable. But originally, exploration was a much
broader and richer term. Which brings us back to the analogy with
the westward movement in American history and the changed
meaning of the word exploration. A true frontier has explorers and
scientists, but it also has miners, transportation builders, settlers and
entrepreneurs. Many are perfectly satisfied to limit space access to
only the former.
scientific aspects of the space program (although not without some resentment).
words they [end page 7] use have real effects. Words initiate, interpret,
frame, legitimate, debate, evaluate, explain, justify and
rationalize public policies. Words, just as much as policies, can cause
death and suffering. The words may not accurately portray the speakers or writers motives
and ideals. Indeed, the words are often laced with large doses of fiction. They treat real people as if they
Rather than offer prescriptions, Butler uses her own writing to illustrate
the power of resignification. In her rhetorical readings of Supreme Court decisions, for
example, the justices' words become surprisingly rich and suggestive. She is herself an expert resignifier.
Central to this study is the exploration of how we are to live with and in
the technological society without becoming another component in its
machinery. However, theorizing about communication will never be
more than an exploration, in the sense that exploration does not
entail end. The purpose of this paper, therefore, is not to provide a
solution but rather to question the meaning of communication and
its technology in this technological milieu, because, as Heidegger (1977)
suggests, questioning builds a way (p. 4).
Exploration includes theorizing it doesnt entail end.
Chang 7 Briankle G. Chang, Associate Professor of Communication at the University of
Massachusetts Amherst, 2007 (Deconstructing Communication, Theorizing Communication: Readings
Across Traditions, Edited by Robert T. Craig and Heidi L. Muller, Published by SAGE, ISBN 1412952379, p.
255)
Seen in this light, we, as communicating subjects, can no longer be regarded as free agents who choose
(or choose not) to communicate. For the exoteric autonomy of the subjects in communication, of my
visitors and me, and of everyone else, too, is in effect a conditioned freedom bestowed on us by a prior
contract. Agency, as the freedom to exchange, therefore means the university responsibility to honor a
contract delivered to us by we-know-not-what and from we-know-not-where. It is by obeying this
imperative that we, as communicators, can be free to communicate as well as not to communicate.
Communication cannot not take place. This is the paradoxical freedom of communication, the unbearable
freedom that one cannot not communicate, even if one chooses not to do so. One cannot not
communicate; communication cannot be avoided even when the void of communication, its negativity, is
communicated.8 This is the agony of communication, the ordeal of the autonomos of the communicating
subjects, caused by what I called earlier the postal paradox of communication. This agony, this ordeal,
accompanies communication at every turn. As a result, we, the communicating subjects, are both
autonomous and other-dependentfree to receive as well as to reject the other and yet bound to play this
double role by the contractual force of an an-archic imperative. By the same token, communication
theorists, to the extent that their metareflective statements say somethingintelligible or notabout
communication, are destined to reenact the same double play, exhibiting, in their very enunciations, the
kind of duplicity that cannot not take place whenever one meets and says something to the other. That
conversation worth its name, will never be able to have the last word on the subject matter they choose to
address; their ostensive endingwhether it is caused by the addressers avoidance of being
communicative, by the addressees stupid noncomprehension, or by the messages own vacuousnessis
but a promise that another ending will come.
Exploration is open-ended.
Pace 72 C. Robert Pace, Professor of Education at the University of California-Los Angeles, 1972
(Thoughts on Evaluation in Higher Education, Thoughts on Evaluation in Higher Education, Published by
the American College Testing Program, Available Online at http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED066132.pdf,
Accessed 07-07-2014, p. 2)
The second necessary element in a new model is one which relates to the
appropriate style of inquiry. An apt term for this is "exploration."
The spirit
research. I offer discussion of two data extracts, a short text written by a student and an extract from field
notes. A key feature of ethnographic research is that it aims to weave together different types of data in
order to understand a particular phenomenon (Lillis 2008). For this reason an ethnographer would not
normally isolate data extracts as I do here. However, I have chosen to do so because it enables me to
focus on discussing the concept of timescapes and demonstrating its relevance to ethnographic studies of
literacy. Findings and insights generated by the study are reported elsewhere (Burgess 2008, forthcoming).
Exploration is never-ending.
Blanchot 2k Maurice Blanchot, French poststructuralist philosopher and literary critic, 2000
(The Task of Criticism Today, Oxford Literary Review, Volume 22, Issue 1, July, Available Online to
Subscribing Institutions via Edinburgh University Press, p. 22-23)
This, if you will, is one ultimate consequence (and a strange manifestation) of the movement of selfeffacement which is one of the senses of the presence of criticism: by dint of its disappearance before the
work, criticism recovers itself in the work as one of the work's essential moments. Here, we find ourselves
rediscovering a process that the present time has seen develop in many different ways. [end page 22]
Criticism is no longer a form of external judgement which confers value on the literary work and, after the
event, pronounces on its value. It has become inseparable from the inner workings of the text, it belongs
to the movement by which the work comes to itself, searches for itself, and experiences its own possibility.
However (to prevent any misunderstanding), this is no longer criticism in the limited sense given to the
term by Valery when he describes it as part of the intellect, or a response to the kind of creative work
which is deemed valid only when produced in the clear light of reflective thought. 'Criticism', in the sense
intended here, might be said to be closer (though the comparison is misleading) to critique in the Kantian
sense: in the same way that critical reason in Kant is a questioning of the conditions of possibility of
scientific experimentation, so criticism, or critique in the sense I am using it here, is inseparable from an