ISS Affirmative - MSDI 2016

MSDI 2016 ISS Cooperation Aff
#debatelikeabear 1
ISS Co-op Affirmative
Contents
ISS Co-op Affirmative......................................................................................................................1
1AC.........................................................................................................................................3
Inherency..............................................................................................................................15
Solvency 16
Solvency – Trust....................................................................................................................18
Solvency – Conflict Resolution..............................................................................................20
Solvency – China Says Yes.....................................................................................................22
Solvency - Russia Says Yes....................................................................................................26
Solvency – ESA says Yes........................................................................................................27
Solvency – A2: China is a bad partner...................................................................................28
Solvency – A2: Law bans cooperation...................................................................................29
Economy Add-on..................................................................................................................30
A2: Unpopular.......................................................................................................................32
Inherency: illegal Now..........................................................................................................33
Inherency: Attitudinal...........................................................................................................36
A2: China is Authoritarian.....................................................................................................38
A2: China Steals Tech/China Pulls ahead of US.....................................................................39
Space Mil Adv – Now Key......................................................................................................41
Yes Space Militarization........................................................................................................42
Space Mil Adv – Spills Over...................................................................................................43
Space Warfare Probability....................................................................................................44
Need China on our side – A threat........................................................................................45
China won’t attack................................................................................................................46
Space Mil Adv – 2AC Climate Change/Environment Add-On................................................47
Space Mil Adv – Impact Framing...........................................................................................52
Space Mil Adv – A2: Privatization CP/DA..............................................................................53
Leadership Advantage – Solvency Extension........................................................................54
Leadership Advantage..........................................................................................................55
#debatelikeabear 2
Leadership Advantage – ISS Key to Soft Power.....................................................................57

Leadership Advantage – He3 key to Solve Climate Change..................................................60
Leadership Advantage – He3 Fusion Feasible.......................................................................61
Leadership Advantage – Now key for Fusion........................................................................62
Leadership Advantage – 2AC Colonization Internal Link.......................................................63
Colonization Advantage........................................................................................................64
Colonization Advantage: Its cheap........................................................................................65
Colonization Advantage – A2: No procreation....................................................................66
Colonization Advantage – A2: Radiation.............................................................................67
Colonization Advantage – A2:No Gravity............................................................................68
Colonization Advantage – A2: No Place to go.....................................................................69
Colonization Advantage – A2: Xeno Disease Turn...............................................................70
Colonization Advantage: Solves war.....................................................................................71
Colonization Advantage: Space Solves Resources.................................................................72
Colonization Advantage: Solves Disease...............................................................................73
Colonization Advantage – Impact Framing...........................................................................76
Topicality – Diplomacy..........................................................................................................77
Topicality – Space Diplomacy................................................................................................79
A2: Shunning K......................................................................................................................80
A2: Elections DA....................................................................................................................81
1AR: Election DA/2AC Politics DA.........................................................................................82
A2: Spending DA...................................................................................................................83
TEXT of Law Banning Cooperation........................................................................................84
#debatelikeabear 3
#debatelikeabear 4
1AC
Contention 1: Inherency
Current law prohibits NASA engagement with China in space, and the law has
no chance of being repealed soon
Libo Liu. Staff Writer, Voice of America News. “NASA Chief: Congress Should Revise US-China
Space Cooperation Law” May 24, 2016. <http://www.voanews.com/content/nasa-congress-us-
china-space-cooperation-law/3344926.html> accessed June 25, 2016.
Current law prohibits NASA from engaging with its Chinese counterparts on such projects. But
Bolden, who will travel to Beijing later this year, says Congress should consider revising the law.
Peter Huessy, a senior adviser at the Mitchell Institute and prominent defense consultant, tells
VOA he is not opposed to a revision of relevant law, but cautions against any premature
enthusiasm. "We tend to engage in a lot of wishful thinking when it comes to China," he said.
"We should understand China is an explicit adversary and enemy of the United States, according
to their own internal documents and strategies and publications." Brendan Curry, vice president
of the Space Foundation, tells VOA that small steps can be taken in bilateral relations to calm
lawmakers' fears about China's threat to U.S. space assets. The initial steps, he said, would
perhaps involve such projects as "working on weather satellite data sharing and things like that
— things that will make critics on China on Capitol Hill a little bit more relaxed about the idea of
cooperation." Currently there is no strong voice on the Hill to lift the ban on space cooperation
with China, given Beijing's growing military capabilities in space. NASA's Bolden says he does not
expect the ban to be lifted during his tenure.
Thus we present the following plan.
The United States federal government should substantially increase its

diplomatic engagement with the People’s Republic of China by inviting the
People’s Republic of China to become a partner on the International Space
Station.
#debatelikeabear 5
Contention 2: Solvency
China says Yes: Only the US is holding back China’s participation in the ISS
Hannah Kohler 2015. Georgetown Law, J.D. expected 2015 “The Eagle and the Hare: U.S.-
Chinese Relations, the Wolf Amendment, and the Future of International Cooperation in Space.”
103 Georgetown Law Journal 1135 April 2015. Accessed June 10, 2016.
One of the most visible examples of China's continuing isolation in the international space forum
is the International Space Station, a triumph of collaboration and scientific vision and one in
which China has never had the opportunity to participate. Initially, perhaps, this was a result of
China's selfimposed isolationism with regard to its space program and the widespread
perception of the early ISS as a "U.S." station; more recently, however, China has expressed
clear interest in becoming a partner on the space station, and at least several other countries
are amenable to the idea. n69 However, NASA may not have a choice in the matter. When in
2012 the five ISS partners n70 expressed interest in reaching out to other countries (such as
China) for ISS participation, n71 thenU.S. Congressman Frank Wolf (RVA) wrote a scathing letter
forbidding it. "NASA," Wolf wrote, "should make clear that the U.S. will not accept Chinese
participation in any station related activities" because the "Chinese 'civilian' space program is
directly run by the Peoples [sic] Liberation Army (PLA)," and that "I believe that any effort to
involve the Chinese in the space program would be misguided, and not in our national interest."
Inviting China to join the ISS can be done without leaking sensitive military
technology, without extra expense to the US and will develop relations
between the US and China
Abbey and Chiao 2012. George W.S. Abbey is the Baker Botts Senior Fellow in Space Policy
at the Baker Institute, at Rice University. Dr. Leroy Chiao is a former NASA astronaut and ISS
commander. “It’s time for the US to partner with China in space” Commentary, NBCNews.
11/28/2012. <http://www.nbcnews.com/id/49997774/ns/technology_and_science-
science/#.V0XZm_krJQI> accessed May 25, 2016
A partnership with China could be developed along the same lines as was done with integrating
the Russian space program into the ISS partnership. Using this model, no military-sensitive
technology would be transferred. China's economy would allow for it to fully fund its own
efforts. Thus there would be little increased expense to the United States for developing this
advantageous relationship. As Joan Johnson-Freese, a professor of national security affairs at
the Naval War College and author of numerous books on space, including "Heavenly Ambitions:
America's Quest to Dominate Space" (University of Pennsylvania Press), told CNN on June 20,
prohibiting NASA by law from working with China makes no sense: "If one believes that China
and the United States are not inherently enemies, then working together on space projects —
with technology transfer controls — will benefit both countries. If one believes that China is
inherently a threat to the United States, then the adage "keep your friends close and your
enemies closer" comes to mind. The script for U.S.-China relations — and space relations in
particular — is constantly evolving. The United States can influence the direction, but only if we
engage and persuade the Chinese to engage with us. It's one way of preventing a scenario of a
#debatelikeabear 6
galactic Wild West in which China has become the world's leader in space." It is clear the United
States' international partners see the benefits of working with the Chinese on the space station;
it is time for the United States to provide the leadership to make it a reality.
US-China space relations are the defining issue in space stability as more actors
enter space
James Clay Moltz 2014. Professor, Naval Postgraduate School. Crowded Orbits: Conflict and
Cooperation in Space. 2014 Columbia University Press. p.89-90. accessed June 12, 2016.
The future of international relations in space poses a series of questions that remain difficult to
answer. It was similarly hard to predict the future of U.S. relations with the Soviet Union in
space in the late 1950s or even the early 1980s; most signs pointed to possible conflict or even
warfare instead of the eventual détente that developed in the early 1970s or the close
cooperation that emerged after the Soviet breakup in the early 1990s. The evolving status of
U.S. space relations with China presents a complex subject for analysts . But this relationship will
likely go a long way toward determining the stability of space relations through at least the
first half of the twenty-first century. Of course, other space actors will matter too: a changing
Russia, a rising India, a more broadly active Japan, an expanding European Space Agency (ESA),
fledgling but unpredictable Iran and North Korea, an increasingly capable South Korea, an
aspiring Brazil, as well as a host of other countries with a range of capabilities. Their national
programs will be joined by private companies and international consortia, plus universities,
international organizations, and even some wealthy individuals. All indicators suggest that space
is going to be a much more complicated place as the twenty-first century moves forward.
#debatelikeabear 7
Contention 3: Harms
Advantage 1: Space Militarization

Competition in space only creates tension and military build-ups. Cooperation
eases tensions and creates incentives for peace. The ISS is a key place to begin
this coop
A primary stimulus for U.S. and Soviet space science and exploration during the Cold War was
competitive politics in a race for global supremacy that people on both sides generally
supported. But this rivalry fueled mistrust and military tensions, as well as wasteful duplication
of scientific effort. Today, U.S. and Russian civil space missions typically must be justified on the
more tremulous ground of scientific value or service to national economic aims. But more
amorphous goals such as international prestige have not disappeared entirely. In other
countries, such as in today’s Asian political scene, traditional competitive motivations still prevail
frequently and help drive funding. Indeed, some leading spokespeople for increasing U.S. space
science funding, such as the physicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, speak almost wistfully about past
political hostilities and promote new competition (such as with China) to stimulate NASA
spending.63 But these arguments neglect the frequent accompaniments to such rivalries:
increased military buildups and hair-trigger space tensions. Instead, space politics and
exploration in the twenty-first century might be better served by developing more innovative
and mutually beneficial collaborative approaches to mission planning, funding, and operations,
as has occurred with the ISS. Indeed, the ESA official Andreas Diekmann argues that the ISS
should be viewed as a model for the future of space science.64 But he contends that the
membership must be broadened going forward. He proposes that the remaining years of the ISS
might be a “test bed” for such a concept, which would presumably have to include both India
and China—quite a tall order. Still, the alternative may be worse—either no funding for such
missions or a bruising competition that is likely to result in military tensions and a related space
arms buildup. President Bush’s second NASA administrator, Michael Griffin, supports such
efforts. Over the hostile politics that have dominated the U.S. Congress, he has called for NASA
cooperation with China in space science and in human spaceflight. While recognizing existing
hurdles and differences in history and political culture, Griffin argues, “We should go that extra
mile” to achieve scientific cooperation with China, given its potential benefits for reducing
political tensions, stimulating joint research and missions, and making sensible use of the finite
space resources available among spacefaring countries.65 Indeed, one incentive for such efforts
is the high cost of major space science missions. The same incentives exist in major commercial
space ventures, which have in the past two decades driven even erstwhile adversaries into
highly integrated forms of self-interested cooperation. This topic and the challenges involved in
carrying them out are the focus of chapter 4.
#debatelikeabear 8
A war in space will devastate the global economy, break down

communications, and begin nuclear war
Omar Lamrani 2016. Senior Military Analyst, Stratfor. “Avoiding a War in Space” Stratfor
Geopolitical Weekly. May 17, 2016. <https://www.stratfor.com/weekly/avoiding-war-space>
accessed May 25, 2016.
Increased competition in space is reviving fears of a war there, one with devastating
consequences. Humanity depends on space systems for communication, exploration, navigation
and a host of other functions integral to modern life. Moreover, future breakthroughs may await
in space, including solar energy improvements, nuclear waste disposal and extraterrestrial
mining. A war in space would disable a number of key satellites, and the resulting debris would
place vital orbital regions at risk. The damage to the world economy could also be disastrous. In
severity, the consequences of space warfare could be comparable to those of nuclear war.
What's more, disabling key constellations that give early launch warnings could be seen as the
opening salvo in a nuclear attack, driving the threat of a wider conflagration.
Global economic crisis causes war---strong statistical support—also causes great

power transitions
Royal 10 – Jedediah Royal, Director of Cooperative Threat Reduction at the U.S. Department of
Defense, 2010, “Economic Integration, Economic Signaling and the Problem of Economic Crises,”
in Economics of War and Peace: Economic, Legal and Political Perspectives, ed. Goldsmith and
Brauer, p. 213-214
Less intuitive is how periods of economic decline may increase the likelihood of external conflict.
Political science literature has contributed a moderate degree of attention to the impact of
economic decline and the security and defence behaviour of interdependent states. Research in
this vein has been considered at systemic, dyadic and national levels. Several notable
contributions follow. First, on the systemic level, Pollins (2008) advances Modelski and
Thompson’s (1996) work on leadership cycle theory, finding that rhythms in the global economy
are associated with the rise and fall of pre-eminent power and the often bloody transition from
one pre-eminent leader to the next. As such, exogenous shocks such as economic crises could
usher in a redistribution of relative power (see also Gilpin, 10981) that leads to uncertainty
about power balances, increasing the risk of miscalculation (Fearon, 1995). Alternatively, even a
relatively certain redistribution of power could lead to a permissive environment for conflict as a
rising power may seek to challenge a declining power (Werner, 1999). Seperately, Polllins (1996)
also shows that global economic cycles combined with parallel leadership cycles impact the
likelihood of conflict among major, medium, and small powers, although he suggests that the
causes and connections between global economic conditions and security conditions remain
unknown. Second, on a dyadic level, Copeland’s (1996,2000) theory of trade expectations
suggests that ‘future expectation of trade’ is a significant variable in understanding economic
conditions and security behavior of states. He argues that interdependent states are likely to
gain pacific benefits from trade so long as they have an optimistic view of future trade relations.
However, if the expectation of future trade decline, particularly for difficult to replace items such
as energy resources, the likelihood for conflict increases , as states will be inclined to use force to
gain access to those resources. Crises could potentially be the trigger for decreased trade
expectations either on its own or because it triggers protectionist moves by interdependent
#debatelikeabear 9
states. Third, others have considered the link between economic decline and external armed
conflict at a national level. Blomberg and Hess (2002) find a strong correlation between internal
conflict and external conflict, particularly during periods of economic downturn. They write, The
linkages between internal and external conflict and prosperity are strong and mutually
reinforcing. Economic conflict tends to spawn internal conflict, which in turn returns the favour.
Moreover, the presence of a recession tends to amplify the extent to which international and
external conflicts self-reinforce each other. (Blomberg & Hess, 2002, p.89). Economic decline has
also been linked with an increase in the likelihood of terrorism (Blomberg, Hess, & Weerapana,
2004), which has the capacity to spill across borders and lead to external tensions. Furthermore,
crises generally reduce the popularity of a sitting government. ‘Diversionary theory’ suggests
that, when facing unpopularity arising from economic decline, sitting governments have
increased incentives to create a ‘rally round the flag’ effect. Wang (1996), DeRouen (1995), and
Blomberg, Hess and Thacker (2006) find supporting evidence showing that economic decline and
use of force are at least indirectly correlated. Gelpi (1997) Miller (1999) and Kisanganie and
Pickering (2009) suggest that the tendency towards diversionary tactics are greater for
democratic states than autocratic states, due to the fact that democratic leaders are generally
more susceptible to being removed from office due to lack of domestic support. DeRouen (2000)
has provided evidence showing that periods of weak economic performance in the United
States, and thus weak presidential popularity, are statistically linked to an increase in the use of
force..
Nuclear war causes extinction – nuclear winter, food, ozone collapse

Prof. Alan Robock, pub. date: 2008, a Prof. in the Department of Environmental Sciences @
Rutgers University who participated in the original nuclear winter research, “Climatic Effects of
Nuclear Conflict,” accessed: 2-15-09,
http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/nuclear/RobockToonSummary.pdf
There are several wrong impressions that people have about nuclear winter. One is that there
was a flaw in the theory – that the large climatic effects were disproved. Another is that the
problem, even if it existed, has been solved by the end of the nuclear arms race. But these are
both wrong. What’s New. Based on new work published in 2007 and 2008 by some of the
pioneers of nuclear winter research, we now can say several new things about this topic.
Nuclear arsenals with 50 nuclear weapons, such as currently possessed by India and Pakistan
and 6 other nations, threaten more fatalities than in previous wars to any nation attacked. With
global delivery systems any such nation is as dangerous as any of the superpowers. • A nuclear
war between any two countries using 50 Hiroshima-sized atom bombs, such as India and
Pakistan, could produce climate change unprecedented in recorded human history. This is less
than 0.05% of the explosive power of the current global arsenal. (See graph below.) • Nuclear
arsenals with 50 nuclear weapons can produce a global pall of smoke leading to global ozone
depletion. The smoke, once in the stratosphere, heats the air, which speeds up reactions that
destroy ozone, and also lofts reactive chemicals by altering the winds. • A nuclear war between
the United States and Russia today, or even after reductions planned for 2012 under the SORT
treaty, could produce nuclear winter, with temperatures plunging below freezing in the summer
in major agricultural regions, threatening the food supply for most of the planet. • The climatic
effects of the smoke from burning cities and industrial areas would last for several years, much
longer than we previously thought. New climate model simulations, which have the capability of
#debatelikeabear 10
including the entire atmosphere and oceans, show that the smoke would be lofted by solar
heating to the upper stratosphere, where it would remain for years. • The spread of nuclear
weapons to newly emerging states threatens not only the people of those countries, but the
entire planet.
#debatelikeabear 11
Advantage 2: Leadership
Bringing China into the ISS allows the US to maintain leadership in space
Abbey and Chiao 2012. George W.S. Abbey is the Baker Botts Senior Fellow in Space Policy
at the Baker Institute, at Rice University. Dr. Leroy Chiao is a former NASA astronaut and ISS
commander. “It’s time for the US to partner with China in space” Commentary, NBCNews.
11/28/2012. <http://www.nbcnews.com/id/49997774/ns/technology_and_science-
science/#.V0XZm_krJQI> accessed May 25, 2016
The U.S. is at a decision point. On its present course, the United States will lose at least the
perceived leadership role in human space exploration. But there is an alternate path and one
that would again provide for dual access to the space station. The U.S. could lead the way to
bring China into the ISS program, and lead the work to adapt the Shenzhou spacecraft to be
compatible with the ISS. The U.S. would continue funding the three commercial space
endeavors to supplement and support the logistic needs of the station. This path would allow
the U.S. to retain its leadership position in the current human spaceflight program (on the ISS)
while it re-evaluates the real needs of an optimized exploration program. A program that would
transition the ISS partnership, with all its capabilities, to a beyond-LEO program with the United
States remaining as the lead partner.
Abandoning leadership of space to China means the US loses access to key

energy resources on the moon
Harrison H. Schmitt 2009. Former U.S. senator and NASA astronaut who flew on the Apollo 17
mission, chaired the NASA Advisory Council from 2005-2008. “Liberty and Space Leadership”
SpaceNews. August 10, 2009. < http://spacenews.com/liberty-and-space-leadership/> accessed
June 25, 2016.
In spite of these difficulties, history tells us that an aggressive program to return Americans to
deep space, initially the Moon and then to Mars, must form an essential component of national
policy. Americans would find it unacceptable, as well as devastating to human liberty, if we
abandon leadership in deep space to the Chinese, Europe or any other nation or group of
nations. Potentially equally devastating would be loss of access to the energy resources of the
Moon as fossil fuels diminish on Earth. In the harsh light of history, it is frightening to
contemplate the long-term, totally adverse consequences to the standing of the United States in
modern civilization of a decision to abandon deep space.
#debatelikeabear 12
He3 from the moon solves climate change

Christopher Barnatt 2014 – Associate Professor of Strategy and Future Studies in Nottingham
University Business School. “Helium-3 Power Generation”
Explainingthefuture.com is written and maintained by Christopher Barnatt -- a futurist, author,

videographer http://www.explainingthefuture.com/helium3.html (Connor W.
Forbeck/MoState)
The subject of mining helium-3 on the Moon as a fuel for future clean, safe nuclear power plants
is a fascinating one that raises many questions. Some of these questions are highly technical,
and relate to the feasibility of the involved nuclear physics. Other questions concern the not
inconsiderable practicalities associated with getting to the Moon, mining and super-heating
large quantities of lunar rock (Space.com have reported a suggestion of roughly one million tons
of lunar soil being needed to be mined and processed for every 70 tonnes of helium-3 yield),
and then getting the precious cargo back to the Earth. However, the far more interesting
questions arguably relate to why this is a topic that is receiving so little media and public
attention. As noted above, several of the largest governments on the planet have on various
occasions made announcements that they are either actively considering or would like to go to
the Moon to mine helium-3. Whether or not the science will actually work, this is surely major
news. Given that public debates concerning the construction of future nuclear fission power
plants and even wind farms now rage with great vigour and a high media profile, why helium-3
power plants as part of a potential future energy strategy are rarely if ever even mentioned is
exceptionally hard to fathom. Nobody is trying to hide the potential of future lunar helium-3
power generation. However, like a rose in a dark room, there is a potential danger that something
of beauty will fail to gain the light it requires if more attention does not start to be languished on
what could end up as a very big part of the solution to Peak Oil and other fossil fuel resource
depletion, not to mention climate change.
Climate change threatens all life on Earth
Richard Schiffman 13, environmental writer @ The Atlantic citing the Fifth Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, “What Leading Scientists Want You to Know About Today's
Frightening Climate Report,” The Atlantic, 9/27,
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/09/leading-scientists-weigh-in-on-the-
mother-of-all-climate-reports/280045/
The polar icecaps are melting faster than we thought they would; seas are rising faster than we
thought they would; extreme weather events are increasing. Have a nice day! That’s a less than scientifically
rigorous summary of the findings of the Fifth Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report released this
morning in Stockholm.¶ Appearing exhausted after a nearly two sleepless days fine-tuning the language of the report, co-chair Thomas
Stocker called climate change “the greatest challenge of our time," adding that “each of the last
three decades has been successively warmer than the past,” and that this trend is likely to
continue into the foreseeable future.¶ Pledging further action to cut carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, U.S. Secretary of State John
Kerry said, "This isn’t a run of the mill report to be dumped in a filing cabinet. This isn’t a political document produced by
politicians... It’s science."¶ And that science needs to be communicated to the public, loudly and clearly. I canvassed leading climate
researchers for their take on the findings of the vastly influential IPCC report. What headline would they put on the news? What do they hope people
hear about this report?¶ When I asked him for his headline, Michael Mann, the Director of the Earth Systems Science
#debatelikeabear 13
Center at Penn State (a former IPCC author himself) suggested: "Jury In: Climate Change Real, Caused by
Us, and a Threat We Must Deal With."¶ Ted Scambos, a glaciologist and head scientist of the National Snow and Ice Data Center
(NSIDC) based in Boulder would lead with: "IPCC 2013, Similar Forecasts, Better Certainty." While the report, which is issued every six to seven
years, offers no radically new or alarming news, Scambos told me, it puts an exclamation point on what we already know,
and refines our evolving understanding of global warming. ¶ The IPCC, the indisputable rock star of UN
documents, serves as the basis for global climate negotiations, like the ones that took place in Kyoto, Rio, and, more recently, Copenhagen. (The next
big international climate meeting is scheduled for 2015 in Paris.) It is also arguably the
most elaborately vetted and
exhaustively researched scientific paper in existence. Founded in 1988 by the United Nations and the World
Meteorological Organization, the IPCC represents the distilled wisdom of over 600 climate researchers in 32
countries on changes in the Earth’s atmosphere, ice and seas. It endeavors to answer the late New York mayor Ed Koch’s famous question “How
am I doing?” for all of us. The answer, which won’t surprise anyone who has been following the climate change story, is not very well at all. ¶ It is
now 95 percent likely that human spewed heat-trapping gases — rather than natural variability
— are the main cause of climate change, according to today’s report. In 2007 the IPCC’s confidence level was 90 percent, and in
2001 it was 66 percent, and just over 50 percent in 1995. ¶ What’s more, things are getting worse more quickly than
almost anyone thought would happen a few years back.¶ “If you look at the early IPCC predictions back from 1990 and
what has taken place since, climate change is proceeding faster than we expected,” Mann told me by email. Mann helped develop the famous hockey-
stick graph, which Al Gore used in his film “An Inconvenient Truth” to dramatize the sharp rise in temperatures in recent times. ¶ Mann cites the
decline of Arctic sea ice to explain : “Given the current trajectory, we're on track for ice-free summer conditions in the Arctic in a matter of a decade or
two... There is a similar story with the continental ice sheets, which are losing ice — and contributing to sea level rise — at a faster rate than the [earlier
IPCC] models had predicted.”¶ But there is a lot that we still don’t understand. Reuters noted in a sneak preview of IPCC draft which was leaked in
August that, while the broad global trends are clear, climate scientists were “finding it harder than expected to predict the impact in specific regions in
coming decades.”¶ From year to year, the world’s hotspots are not consistent, but move erratically around the globe. The
same has been true of heat waves, mega-storms and catastrophic floods, like the recent ones that ravaged the Colorado Front Range. There is
broad agreement that climate change is increasing the severity of extreme weather events, but
we’re not yet able to predict where and when these will show up. ¶ “It is like watching a pot boil,” Danish astrophysicist and climate
scientist Peter Thejll told me. “We understand why it boils but cannot predict where the next bubble will be.” ¶ There is
also uncertainty about an apparent slowdown over the last decade in the rate of air temperature increase. While some critics claim
that global warming has “stalled,” others point out that, when rising ocean temperatures are factored in,
the Earth is actually gaining heat faster than previously anticipated.¶ “Temperatures measured
over the short term are just one parameter ,” said Dr Tim Barnett of the Scripps Institute of Oceanography in an interview. “ There are
far more critical things going on; the acidification of the ocean is happening a lot faster than
anybody thought that it would, it’s sucking up more CO2, plankton, the basic food chain of the
planet, are dying, it’s such a hugely important signal . Why aren’t people using that as a measure of what is going on?”¶
Barnett thinks that recent increases in volcanic activity , which spews smog-forming aerosols into the air that deflect solar radiation and
cool the atmosphere, might help account for the temporary slowing of global temperature rise. But he says we
shouldn’t let short term fluctuations cause us to lose sight of the big picture.¶ The dispute over temperatures underscores just how formidable the
IPCC’s task of modeling the complexity of climate change is. Issued in three parts (the next two installments are due out in the spring), the full version
of the IPCC will end up several times the length of Leo Tolstoy’s epic War and Peace. Yet every last word of the U.N. document needs to be signed off
on by all of the nations on earth. ¶ “I
do not know of any other area of any complexity and importance at all where there is
unanimous agreement... and the statements so strong,” Mike MacCracken, Chief Scientist for Climate Change Programs,
Climate Institute in Washington, D.C. told me in an email. “What IPCC has achieved is remarkable (and why it merited the Nobel Peace Prize granted in
2007).”¶ Not surprisingly, the IPCC’s conclusions tend to be “conservative by design,” Ken Caldeira, an atmospheric
scientist with the Carnegie Institution’s Department of Global Ecology told me: “The IPCC is not supposed to represent the
controversial forefront of climate science. It is supposed to represents what nearly all scientists
agree on, and it does that quite effectively.” ¶ Nevertheless, even these understated findings are inevitably controversial.
Roger Pielke Jr., the Director of the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado, Boulder suggested a headline that
focuses on the cat fight that today’s report is sure to revive: "Fresh Red Meat Offered Up in the Climate Debate, Activists and Skeptics Continue Fighting
Over It." Pielke should know. A critic of Al Gore, who has called his own detractors "climate McCarthyists," Pielke has been a lightning rod for the
political controversy which continues to swirl around the question of global warming, and what, if anything, we should do about it. ¶ The public’s
skepticism of climate change took a dive after Hurricane Sandy. Fifty-four percent of Americans are now saying that the effects of global warming have
#debatelikeabear 14
already begun. But 41 percent surveyed in the same Gallup poll believe news about global warming is generally exaggerated, and there is a smaller but
highly passionate minority that continues to believe the whole thing is a hoax. ¶ For most climate
experts, however, the battle is
long over — at least when it comes to the science . What remains in dispute is not whether climate change is happening,
but how fast things are going to get worse.¶ There are some possibilities that are deliberately left out of the IPCC projections, because we simply don’t
have enough data yet to model them. Jason Box, a visiting scholar at the Byrd Polar Research Center told me in an email interview that: “ The scary
elephant in the closet is terrestrial and oceanic methane release triggered by warming.” The IPCC projections don’t include
the possibility — some scientists say likelihood — that huge quantities of methane (a greenhouse gas thirty times as potent as CO2) will eventually be
released from thawing permafrost and undersea methane hydrate reserves. Box said that the threshhold “when humans lose
control of potential management of the problem, may be sooner than expected.” ¶ Box, whose work has
been instrumental in documenting the rapid deterioration of the Greenland ice sheet, also believes that the latest IPCC predictions (of a
maximum just under three foot ocean rise by the end of the century) may turn out to be wildly optimistic , if the Greenland ice
sheet breaks up. “We are heading into uncharted territory” he said. “We are creating a different climate
than the Earth has ever seen.” ¶ The head of the IPCC, Rajendra Pachauri, speaks for the scientific consensus when he says that
time is fast running out to avoid the catastrophic collapse of the natural systems on which
human life depends. What he recently told a group of climate scientist could be the most chilling headline of all for the U.N. report: ¶
"We have five minutes before midnight."
#debatelikeabear 15
Advantage 3: Colonization
Cooperation with China on the ISS will be key to developing solutions to the
problems in taking astronauts to the Moon and beyond
James Clay Moltz 2011. Professor, Naval Postgraduate School. “China, the United States, and
Prospects for Asian Space Cooperation” Journal of Contemporary China (2011), 20(68), January,
p. 69–87 Accessed June 6, 2016.
Most experts believe the space science will be the first step in any road to ‘normalizing’ US–
Chinese space relations. The three main areas of activity on the agendas of all of the world’s
leading space programs—including those in Asia—in the coming two decades are long-duration
Earth orbital missions, lunar missions, and Mars exploration. In the first instance, China is now
barred by informal US and Japanese opposition from participation in the ISS. A decision by the
Obama administration to attempt to change this policy could possibly cause China to give up its
plan to deploy an autonomous space station, or, more likely, limit it to one small prototype; but
the fact that US shuttle missions to the ISS are already planned to end in 2011 make such
prospects unlikely, although China could conceivably use its own booster or a Russian one.39
Notably, in one of his first interviews after being confirmed as President Obama’s director of the
White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Dr John Holdren held out the possibility of
significant new space cooperation with China, even in the previously controversial area of
human spaceflight. Despite conservative Congressional opposition to such cooperation, Holdren
speculated that in the gap period between the end of the shuttle and the development of a
new, man-rated US launcher between 2010 and 2015, the United States would rely on Russia
and potentially other foreign partners, adding: ‘It might also be the Chinese, depending on how
our relationship develops’.40 Bolden’s trip in the fall of 2010 may have opened other possible
avenues. While falling far short of a clear commitment, these comments and initiatives signal
high-level Obama administration support for investigating such previously closed options.
Another forward-looking prospect for greater US–Chinese cooperation relates to future missions
to the Moon. President George W. Bush’s speech in January 2004 outlining the new US Vision
for Space Exploration specifically rejected the idea of another space race and invited foreign
participation in the lunar effort. China participated in early meetings on the US Vision for Space
Exploration during this period, as did Russia, ESA, Japan, South Korea, and other countries. China
is now active in the NASA-led Global Exploration Strategy, a space coordination effort among 14
national space programs. Developing a plan to include Chinese taikonauts in any future post-
space station missions would be a means of beginning to bridge the current gap in the all-
important human spaceflight sector and build a truly international coalition for this work.
Similarly, Mars research remains an important long-term target of both space exploration and
eventual human spaceflight. A major NASA, CNSA, or other effort to begin to combine forces in
Mar research could help build on common interests, develop experience in coordinated (or even
combined) operations, begin real burden-sharing, and expand mutual knowledge and trust.
#debatelikeabear 16
ISS research is uniquely key for breaking down the barriers for long-term
human space exploration
Frank Morring, Jr. “Buying Time” 1/13/2014, Aviation Week & Space Technology. Vol. 176
Issue 1, p18-19. Accessed June 6, 2016.
"It is allowing us to have a planning horizon that is really 10 years long," says William
Gerstenmaier, NASA's human-spaceflight chief. "That really changes the way folks see their
investment, especially the commercial side." With a 2020 deadline, he says, researchers may
gain only a year or &o of on-orbit operation after spending three or four years getting a
microgravity experiment ready. The life extension "opens up a large avenue of research on
board the space station," he said in a brief Jan. 8 telephone press conference. That research is
already starting to bear fruit, with advances in drug research, robotics technology and the life
sciences needed to mitigate the health effects of long-term human exploration in deep space
(AW&ST July 29, 2013, p. 14). While NASA also is using the station to expand its skills and
technology for deep-space operations, including logistics, communications and life support, the
spinoff benefits on Earth promise to be a major administration selling point for the longer
service life. "ISS extension will extend the broader flow of societal benefits from research on the
Station," Administrator Charles Bolden and John Holdren, Obama's science adviser, wrote in a
joint blog.
Human extinction is inevitable absent lunar colonization
Garan, 10 – Astronaut (Ron, 3/30/10, Speech published in an article by Nancy Atkinson, “The
Importance of Returning to the Moon,” http://www.universetoday.com/61256/astronaut-
explains-why-we-should-return-to-the-moon)
Resources and Other Benefits: Since we live in a world of finite resources and the global
population continues to grow, at some point the human race must utilize resources from
space in order to survive. We are already constrained by our limited resources, and the
decisions we make today will have a profound affect on the future of humanity. Using
resources and energy from space will enable continued growth and the spread of prosperity to
the developing world without destroying our planet. Our minimal investment in space
exploration (less than 1 percent of the U.S. budget) reaps tremendous intangible benefits in
almost every aspect of society, from technology development to high-tech jobs. When we reach
the point of sustainable space operations we will be able to transform the world from a place
where nations quarrel over scarce resources to one where the basic needs of all people are
met and we unite in the common adventure of exploration. The first step is a sustainable
permanent human lunar settlement.
#debatelikeabear 17
Inherency
US suspicion and the Wolf Amendment prevent US-Chinese space cooperation
and are unlikely to change anytime soon
As one of the world's oldest and most active space powers, the United States has been involved
in bilateral and multilateral projects with most other major spacefaring nations with one notable
exception: the People's Republic of China (PRC). The PRC and its national space program, the
China National Space Administration (CNSA), have remained strangely isolated from the rest of
the world's forays into space. Deepseated U.S. suspicion against their policies and the recent
enactment of the restrictive "Wolf Amendment" suggest that this is unlikely to change in the
near future. To examine the impact of this problematic legislation, this Note will begin by
considering the origins and development of the uniquely isolated Chinese space program in Part
I, from the period of SinoSoviet cooperation after World War II through China's first successful
taikonaut n3 and on to the Chang'e lunar module and ongoing construction of the Tiangong
space station. In Part II, this Note will examine the modern relationship between the United
States and China, with particular focus on incidents [*1137] that demonstrate the difficulties
they face in moving toward a shared future in space.
Attitudes are changing on international space cooperation, only Congressional

barriers block bilateral US-China space collaboration
Andrew M. Johnson 2014. writes on cybersecurity, sensitive technology and the aerospace
industry. He is an undergraduate physics major at Clemson University and attended Nanjing
University of Aeronautics and Astronautics in China in the fall of 2014. “Time for U.S. To
Collaborate with China in Space” March 24, 2014 SpaceNews Since 1989 dedicated to covering
the business and politics of the global space industry. <http://spacenews.com/39961time-for-
us-to-collaborate-with-china-in-space/> Accessed May 20, 2016
It appears that some preliminary progress has been made regarding the potential for future
bilateral U.S.-China cooperation in space. Officials from 30 spacefaring nations met in
Washington in January for the International Space Exploration Forum to discuss potential
avenues for international space exploration. Among several encouraging remarks made at the
gathering, the U.S. Deputy Secretary of State William Burns stated, “Now is the time to come
together to make space exploration a shared global priority, to unlock the mysteries of the
universe and accelerate human progress here on Earth.” I could not agree more, but level-
headed rhetoric from the State Department is hardly a reason for celebration. The real
impediment to the future of bilateral U.S.-China space cooperation is in Congress.
#debatelikeabear 18
Solvency
Opening the ISS to China opens the door for future collaboration and also has
the potential to spread democracy to China through cultural exchanges
Blocking the United States and NASA from cooperating with one of the major space powers of
the world a country with demonstrated ambition and an increasing capability to achieve
dominance in space may hobble us beyond recovery, at least for the next generation of space
advancements. Space exploration is no longer the province of individual nations operating
alone, and international cooperation is both widespread and necessary. Just as the international
sharing of such sensitive and cutting-edge technology is a valid national security concern, so too
should be rejecting the contributions of a major developing power, especially considering the
relative political stagnation of space exploration in the United States and the burgeoning
enthusiasm for it in China. Although it is impossible to predict what the future will hold for the
space explorers of tomorrow, it seems fully necessary to initiate cautious, but optimistic,
cooperation with China in space: inviting them as a party to the ISS, certainly, and potentially
opening the door for future joint or even bilateral projects. The Hughes/Loral debacle limited
the U.S. communicationssatellite industry for decades, n130 and its consequences have only
recently been corrected in part; Congress must take care not to make the same mistakes with
regard to other U.S. investments in space. Isolating NASA from a country that is both a space
superpower and one of the largest economies in the world will only hurt the United States in the
long run. China has a long history of selfsufficiency in space, and it is demonstrably capable of
overcoming the challenges posed by having to reinvent the wheel (or, as it may be, the rocket)
because its global neighbors have historically been too afraid of its military capabilities and
ambitions to share what they know. Would a free flow of technologyif not launching systems or
ballistic information, then at least those many nonmilitary elements of space travel, exploration,
and studytruly hurt the United States? Or would it pique the desire of the Chinese citizens to be
free from their repressive government and experience the freedom of a democratic society? If
NASA is truly the pinnacle of American ingenuity, courage, optimism, and grace, then (sensibly)
open communication between the scientists and engineers in the CNSA can only inspire the
latter to demand better for themselves, their country, and their space program.
#debatelikeabear 19
The US’s ban doesn’t isolate China in space; Inviting China to the ISS ensures
that space exploration funds are used effectively, creating bigger returns for all
of humanity.
Adam Minter. American writer who serves as an Asia-based columnist at Bloomberg View. “NASA Should Boldly
Go ... to China” October 19, 2015. Bloomberg View. <https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2015-10-19/nasa-
should-cooperate-with-china-in-space> Accessed June 19, 2016.
Such objections, however, presume that the U.S. can somehow isolate China from a globalized
scientific and industrial endeavor in which collaboration is the norm. Already, long-standing U.S.
space partners like the European Space Agency and Russia are working with China’s National
Space Agency in order to take advantage of the country’s funding largesse and ambition. This
can have embarrassing consequences: NASA is so keen to join a proposed 2021 Sino-European
solar-science mission that it’s devising ways to funnel its hardware and personnel through the
European Space Agency, so as to follow the spirit of U.S. law. That’s hardly in the interest of the
U.S. space program, which has thrived in part because it has remained open to cooperating with
nations around the world, including the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War (the Apollo-
Soyuz collaboration) and Russia (the International Space Station). Remaining aloof means
depriving U.S. scientists of rich opportunities for innovation and exploration. Meanwhile, the
current restrictions may well limit the potential for future collaboration, too. For example, in
pursuit of its own space station (it’s currently excluded from the ISS), China has developed its
own docking technology for space modules instead of committing to a standard being
developed in the U.S. and Europe. That may seem like a small matter now, but such
international rules of the road for space will grow in importance in coming years. As with trade,
maritime navigation and multilateral finance, this is the time to strengthen standards and rules
that all countries, including China, accept. Finally, there are the financial practicalities of a large-
scale space mission such as one to Mars (whose cost could reach into the hundreds of billions of
dollars). At its high point during the Apollo lunar program, NASA’s budget represented 5.3
percent of the federal budget. Today, it’s less than one percent -- a serious constraint on NASA’s
ambitions. China is already repeating NASA’s past exploration path, going from simple orbital
missions to unmanned lunar probes to its own space station. Though the Chinese can’t be
expected to renounce their solo ambitions, both the U.S. and China would benefit from ensuring
that China’s programs don’t needlessly overlap with NASA’s, and instead advance the cause of
space exploration. A good place to start would be to bring China into the ISS. Russia, a U.S.
geopolitical rival, is already a core member. China should be offered the opportunity to take part
as well.
#debatelikeabear 20
Solvency – Trust
Cooperation with China in space is critical to begin to build trust between the
two counties, deescalating crises and solving international problems
Listner and Johnson-Freese 2014. Michael J. Listner is an attorney and the founder and
principal of Space Law and Policy Solutions, a think tank and consultation firm that concentrates
on legal and policy matters relating to space security and development. Joan Johnson-Freese is a
professor of national security affairs at the Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island. “Two
Perspectives on U.S.-China Space Cooperation” July 14, 2014. SpaceNews Since 1989 dedicated
to covering the business and politics of the global space industry.
<http://spacenews.com/41256two-perspectives-on-us-china-space-cooperation/> Accessed
May 20, 2016
Second, Wolf’s rationale assumes the United States has nothing to gain by working with the
Chinese. On the contrary, the United States could learn about how they work — their decision-
making processes, institutional policies and standard operating procedures. This is valuable
information in accurately deciphering the intended use of dual-use space technology, long a
weakness and so a vulnerability in U.S. analysis. Working together on an actual project where
people confront and solve problems together, perhaps beginning with a space science or
space debris project where both parties can contribute something of value, builds trust on
both sides, trust that is currently severely lacking. It also allows each side to understand the
other’s cultural proclivities, reasoning and institutional constraints with minimal risk of
technology sharing. From a practical perspective, working with China could diversify U.S. options
for reaching the ISS. The need for diversification has become painfully apparent consequent to
Vladimir Putin’s expansionist actions in Ukraine resulting in U.S. sanctions. Russian Deputy Prime
Minister Dmitry Rogozin subsequently stated, “I propose that the United States delivers its
astronauts to the ISS with the help of a trampoline.”
#debatelikeabear 21
Opening the ISS to China also forces China to open up their space activities,
building trust
Yun Zhao 2013. Associate Professor of International Law at the University of Hong Kong.
“Legal Issues of China’s Possible Participation in the International Space Station: Comparing to
the Russian Experience” VI Journal of East Asia and International Law 1 2013. P.155-174.
Accessed June 6, 2014.
It is in the interests of the US to cooperate with China with regards to the ISS. Allowing China to
visit the ISS would “require the Chinese to build new facilities, such as a tracking station to cover
the ISS orbit, and work hard at gaining experience necessary for such a rendezvous.”21 China
would have to open up its program to Western experts to demonstrate its safety.22 It is
consistent with the transparency principle to be upheld in the future Inter-Governmental
Agreement (“IGA”). Consequently, optimistic attitudes could be held towards China’s
participation in the ISS.
China Should be Invited to be a part of the ISS

Adam Minter 2015 Adam is an American writer based in Asia where he writes for Bloomberg
and covers social issues and politics. https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2015-10-
19/nasa-should-cooperate-with-china-in-space
China is already repeating NASA’s past exploration path, going from simple orbital missions to
unmanned lunar probes to its own space station. Though the Chinese can’t be expected to
renounce their solo ambitions, both the U.S. and China would benefit from ensuring that China’s
programs don’t needlessly overlap with NASA’s, and instead advance the cause of space
exploration. A good place to start would be to bring China into the ISS. Russia, a U.S. geopolitical
rival, is already a core member. China should be offered the opportunity to take part as well.
#debatelikeabear 22
Solvency – Conflict Resolution

Ties between Chinese and US researchers are critical to help ease tensions that
could escalate to conflict
Ian Sample 2013. Science Editor of the Guardian, PhD in biomedical materials from Queen
Mary's College, University of London. “US scientists boycott Nasa conference over China ban”
October 4, 2013. <https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/oct/05/us-scientists-boycott-
nasa-china-ban> Accessed May 17, 2016
The recent Congressional action refers to a broader law passed in July which prohibits Nasa
funds from being used to participate or collaborate with China in any way. The law has raised
fears among some Nasa-funded scientists that they will have to sever ties with their Chinese
collaborators, and no longer take on Chinese students. Marcy said the law would damage
relationships built up between US and Chinese researchers that could be valuable lines of
communication if conflicts arose between the two nations in the future. Sir Martin Rees,
Britain's astronomer royal, said he "fully supported" Marcy's position and called the ban "a
deplorable 'own goal' by the US". Chris Lintott, an astronomer at Oxford University, called for a
total boycott of the conference until the situation had been resolved. "I'm shocked and upset by
the way this policy has been applied. Science is supposed to be open to all and restricting those
who can attend by nationality goes against years of practice, going right back to cold war
conferences of Russian and western physicists," he said. "The Kepler team should move their
conference somewhere else – and I hope everyone boycotts until they do."
US must cooperate with China in space or will be left behind

Leonard David 15, 6-16-2015, "US-China Cooperation in Space: Is It Possible, and What's in
Store?," Space, http://www.space.com/29671-china-nasa-space-station-cooperation.html
Leonard David has been reporting on the space industry for more than five decades. He is
former director of research for the National Commission on Space and is co-author of Buzz
Aldrin's 2013 book "Mission to Mars – My Vision for Space Exploration," published by National
Geographic (da-6/21/16)
"It is in the interest of U.S. national security to engage China in space," said Joan Johnson-
Freese, a professor of national security affairs at the Naval War College in Newport, Rhode
Island. Johnson-Freese noted that her views do not necessarily represent those of the Naval War
College, the Department of the Navy or the Department of Defense. "The United States has
unnecessarily created the perception of a space race between the U.S. and China , and that the
U.S. is losing, by its unwillingness to be inclusive in ISS space partnerships," Johnson-Freese said.
Refusing Chinese participation in the International Space Station, at least in part, has spurred
China to build its own station, Johnson-Freese said, "which could well be the de facto
international space station when the U.S.-led ISS is deorbited." [China's Space Station Plans in
Photos] Cooperation stonewalled Apollo-Soyuz demonstrated that space can be a venue to build
cooperation and trust during difficult political times, when they are most needed, and without
dangerous technology transferal, Johnson-Freese said. "However, that demonstration has gone
unheeded regarding China," she noted. Johnson-Freese said the reasoning given by those who
have stonewalled cooperation in space with the Chinese "often has little to do with space or
#debatelikeabear 23
national security." Rather, "space is merely a token for complaints about China in other areas,
such as human rights," she said. Other countries are eager to work with China in space, Johnson-
Freese said, and "the U.S. merely appears petulant" in its refusal to engage in any meaningful
way with China in space.
Cooperation and communication on space can reduce any potential tensions

and increase the bilateral relationship
Brian Weeden and Xiao He 16, April 26, 2016, "Use Outer Space to Strengthen U.S.-China
Ties," War on the Rocks, http://warontherocks.com/2016/04/use-outer-space-to-strengthen-u-
s-china-ties/ (da-6/27/16) Brian Weeden is the Technical Adviser at the Secure World
Foundation in Washington, D.C. Xiao He is an Assistant Research Fellow at the Institute of World
Economics and Politics in the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. APRIL 26, 2016
The United States and China have identified space as a strategic domain that is critical to their
national interests and development. Both nations are dedicating considerable resources to
developing their civil, military, and commercial space sectors. Beijing and Washington see their
space accomplishments as important to boosting national pride and international prestige. Over
time, what happens in space could serve as either a source of instability, or a means of
strengthening the U.S.-China relationship. The United States and China have differing goals and
priorities in space. The United States is focused on assuring continued access to space and sees
it as a critical domain to its security and prosperity. Space-based capabilities and services
provide the foundation for U.S. national security, enabling communications with U.S. strategic
forces, allowing the verification and monitoring of arms control treaties, forming the
cornerstone of the United States’ intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR)
capabilities, and serving as essential enablers for the United States’ ability to defend its borders,
project power to protect its allies and interests overseas, and defeat adversaries. Space
capabilities are also a critical piece of the U.S. — and the global — economy. China is focused on
developing its own capabilities in the space domain, and increasingly depends on space-based
assets for both economic and military aims that may be partly incompatible, and even in
competition, with other key players, especially the United States. China sees space as critical to
defending its national security and securing its role as a rising power. From China’s perspective,
the most urgent problem is that the space capability gap between the United States and China is
growing. China also seeks a voice in the creation of international norms and institutions —
particularly because it perceives that it must accept rules that have been decided mainly by the
United States. As the two nations act on these differing priorities and goals, tensions in the
space domain have had ramifications for the overall bilateral relationship. Recent testing and
development of anti-satellite capabilities by China, and adoctrinal focus on “active defense”
have caused the United States to openly call for a stronger focus on space protection and
warfighting. From the Chinese perspective, it is necessary to develop such capabilities to support
national security, close the power gap, and defend itself from American aggression., Failure to
reconcile their differences in this domain could lead to a renewed arms race that could be to the
detriment of both sides. Both countries have acknowledged the importance of developing a
more stable, cooperative, and long-lasting bilateral relationship in space. Washington still hopes
#debatelikeabear 24
that Beijing can be a constructive partner for greater international space security. While China
still chafes at the largely American constructed rules-based order, it likewise has a clear interest
in using its development of space capabilities to promote bilateral cooperation and to play a role
the formation of new international regimes. Both of these dynamics were evident in recent
United Nations discussions on space governance, with an isolated Russia attempting to
undermine international consensus on new guidelines for enhancing the long-term sustainability
of space activities. Thus, the two sides have overlapping interests that present opportunities for
cooperation and bilateral engagement. Accordingly, the United States and China should
continue to engage in both bilateral and multilateral initiatives that enhance the long-term
sustainability and security of space. Working together, and with other stakeholders, to help
ensure the success of these initiatives would go a long way toward reinforcing the desire of both
countries to be seen as playing leading roles in space governance and being responsible space
powers. The United States and China, as well as the private sectors of the two countries, should
also find a way to engage in bilateral and multilateral civil space projects, including science and
human exploration, though doing so will need to overcome strong political challenges. At the
same time, both the United States and China should be cognizant of where their interests differ
in space and look to enact confidence-building measures to reduce tensions and the risk of a
crisis escalating into outright conflict. While the prospects for legally binding arms control
measures are slim at this stage, they could put in place unilateral and bilateral measures to
reduce tensions and development of direct ascent kinetic-kill and rendezvous and proximity
operations (RPO) capabilities. Finally, both countries would benefit significantly from improving
their national space situational awareness (SSA) capabilities, and increasing data sharing with
each other and the spacefaring community
#debatelikeabear 25
Solvency – China Says Yes

China is ready and willing to join the ISS
Yun Zhao 2013. Associate Professor of International Law at the University of Hong Kong.
“Legal Issues of China’s Possible Participation in the International Space Station: Comparing to
the Russian Experience” VI Journal of East Asia and International Law 1 2013. P.155-174.
China has made great achievements in space activities in recent years. It has developed a
concrete plan for space exploration in order to build national space station by 2020.3 While
emphasizing the principle of self-independence, China also acknowledges the importance of
space cooperation.4 Bilaterally, China has reached cooperation agreements with many
countries; multilaterally, China hosts the Asia- Pacific Space Cooperation Organization
(“APSCO”).Since 2001, China has indicated its interest in joining the ISS.6 While the United
States vetoed China’s participation early on, China’s rapid technological development and
international cooperation with regard to outer space activities have led to increased
cooperation between the two countries. President Barak Obama’s visit to China in 2009 resulted
in a press release announcing Chinese-American Rapprochement in the space field.7 Recently,
the European Space Agency (“ESA”) also indicated its support for China’s inclusion in the ISS.8
All these positive signs show that China has a great chance to become part of the ISS. As such,
both the ISS Partner States and China should all prepare for China’s future possible participation
in the ISS. Although technologically ready for possible participation, China should begin seriously
considering the potential legal issues involved with such participation.
China wants the ban to be lifted, and cooperation can start small and expand to
larger projects
Irene Klotz 2015, Staff Writer, Reuters. “NASA chief says ban on Chinese partnerships is temporary” October 12
2015. <http://www.reuters.com/article/us-space-usa-china-idUSKCN0S61SU20151012> Accessed May 17, 2016.
“We certainly hope that this temporary timeframe can be shortened,” Xu Dazhe,
administrator of the China National Space Agency, said through a translator. “China has no
difficulties in our cooperation policies with other agencies.” China is the only other country
besides the United States and Russia that have flown people in orbit. In addition to developing
its own space station - so far at the prototype stage - , China has flown a series of robotic
spacecraft to the moon. The last probe included a lander that touched down in December 2013.
Xu later told reporters China planned to launch a lunar sample return mission in 2017 and was
looking for partners for a 2019 robotic excursion to the far side of the moon. NASA is working on
a heavy-lift rocket and capsule that can carry astronauts to the moon and eventually to Mars.
Collaborations with China could begin with very straightforward projects, such as deciding on a
common system for docking spaceships, European Space Agency Director General Johann-
Dietrich Woerner told reporters. “What we have to do is to try not to be competitive. We should
work together to tackle all different types of challenges in a common project,” Woerner said.
#debatelikeabear 26
China is willing to work with the US on space missions

(Xinhua) 4-25-2016, "China open to Sino-US space cooperation," China Daily,
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2016-04/25/content_24813817.htm (Would need to go back and
find credentials)
China is open to space cooperation with all nations including the United States, the
heavyweights of China's space program said on Sunday, the anniversary of China's first
satellite launch 46 years ago. "China will not rule out cooperating with any country, and that
includes the United States," said Yang Liwei, China's first astronaut. Payload has been
reserved in the Chinese space station, due to enter service around 2022, for international
projects and foreign astronauts, said Yang on the occasion of the first China Space Day, an
annual celebration newly designated by the government. Upon request, China will also train
astronauts for other countries, and jointly train astronauts with the European space station,
Yang said. "The future of space exploration lies in international cooperation. It's true for us, and
for the United States too," according to the senior astronaut. His words were echoed by Zhou
Jianping, chief engineer of China's manned space program. Zhou said, "It is well understood that
the United States is a global leader in space technology. But China is no less ambitious in
contributing to human development." "Cooperation between major space players will be
conducive to the development of all mankind," Zhou added. Citing security reasons, the US
Congress passed a law in 2011 to prohibit NASA from hosting Chinese visitors at its
facilities and working with researchers affiliated to any Chinese government entity or
enterprise.
China wants to cooperate in Space, only the US ban is holding back cooperation
Shanghai Daily 2016. The Only Daily English language Newspaper in Shanghai, China. “Xi
calls for new chapter in space” April 25, 2016. <http://www.shanghaidaily.com/national/Xi-calls-
for-new-chapter-in-space/shdaily.shtml> accessed May 17, 2016.
Meanwhile, senior figures in China’s space program said the nation was open to cooperation with
all nations, including the US. “China will not rule out cooperating with any country, and that
includes the United States,” said Yang Liwei, China’s first astronaut. Payload has been reserved in China’s
space station, due to enter service around 2022, for international projects and foreign astronauts, Yang said. On request, China will
train astronauts for other countries, and jointly train astronauts with the European space station, he said. “The future of
space exploration lies in international cooperation. It’s true for us, and for the United States
too,” he said. Zhou added: “It is well understood that the United States is a global leader in space technology. But China is no less
ambitious in contributing to human development. Cooperation between major space players will be
conducive to the development of all mankind.” In 2011, citing security reasons, the US Congress passed
a law to prohibit NASA from hosting Chinese visitors at its facilities and working with researchers
affiliated to any Chinese government entity or enterprise. The ban remains in effect.
#debatelikeabear 27
China is open to space collaboration

Jeff Foust 2014. Senior Staff Writer, SpaceNews. Ph.D. in planetary sciences from the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “The Role of International Cooperation in China’s Space
Station Plans” SpaceNews Since 1989 dedicated to covering the business and politics of the
global space industry. October 14, 2014. <http://spacenews.com/42183sn-blog-the-role-of-
international-cooperation-in-chinas-space-station-plans/> Accessed May 20, 2016
“The Chinese people stand ready to work together with people from all over the world,” said
Zhou Lini of the Center for National Security and Strategic Studies at China’s National University
of Defense Technology in a presentation at the IAC on September 30. International cooperation
in China’s human spaceflight program has been limited so far. A few Shenzhou missions have
flown experiments from Canada and Europe. Russia supported development of Chinese
spacecraft development and astronaut training, and also provided one spacesuit used on China’s
first — and, to date, only — spacewalk on the Shenzhou-7 mission in 2008 (a second spacesuit
used in the spacewalk was developed in China.) However, China’s human spaceflight program
has otherwise relied exclusively on domestic resources, capabilities, and personnel. However, in
her presentation and accompanying paper, Zhou suggested China would be open to far more
significant cooperation with other nations as it develops its space station. That three-person
station, as currently envisioned, would consist of three modules: a core module named “Tianhe”
and two experiment modules, “Xuntian” and “Tianwen.” The three modules would join together
at a central node, giving the station an appearance not unlike the Soviet/Russian Mir station at
an early phase of its life. Zhou suggested that China would be open to having other nations
contribute modules to the station. “China’s space station will still have three docking locations
for other modules,” she said, referring to three unoccupied docking ports on that central node.
(One of those three, in illustrations of the station, is occupied by a visiting Shenzhou spacecraft;
presumably at least one additional module would need to include a Shenzhou docking port.)
Those modules, she said, could either be developed by other nations independently, or jointly
with China. “US, Russia, ESA, and Japan may all have the ability to develop experiment modules
and collaborate with China,” she said. The concept of other nations developing modules for
China’s space station is supported by comments made last month by Yang Liwei, China’s first
astronaut and currently deputy director of the China Manned Space Agency. “We’ve reserved a
platform to cooperate with other countries in missions by having designed interfaces for our
space modules so that they can dock with modules of other countries,” he said at a meeting of
the Association of Space Explorers last month in Bejing, as reported by the state-run news
agency Xinhua.
#debatelikeabear 28
China will cooperate

Xinhua News Agency 16, 4-26-2016, "China open to Sino-US space cooperation," Space
Daily,
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/China_open_to_Sino_US_space_cooperation_999.html
(da-6/21/16)
China is open to space cooperation with all nations including the United States, the
heavyweights of China's space program said on Sunday, the anniversary of China's first satellite
launch 46 years ago. "China will not rule out cooperating with any country, and that includes the
United States," said Yang Liwei, China's first astronaut. Payload has been reserved in the Chinese
space station, due to enter service around 2022, for international projects and foreign
astronauts, said Yang on the occasion of the first China Space Day, an annual celebration newly
designated by the government. Upon request, China will also train astronauts for other
countries, and jointly train astronauts with the European space station, Yang said. "The future of
space exploration lies in international cooperation. It's true for us, and for the United States
too," according to the senior astronaut. His words were echoed by Zhou Jianping, chief engineer
of China's manned space program. Zhou said, "It is well understood that the United States is a
global leader in space technology. But China is no less ambitious in contributing to human
development." "Cooperation between major space players will be conducive to the
development of all mankind," Zhou added. Citing security reasons, the U.S. Congress passed a
law in 2011 to prohibit NASA from hosting Chinese visitors at its facilities and working with
researchers affiliated to any Chinese government entity or enterprise. Ban remains in effect The
U.S.-dominated International Space Station, which unsurprisingly blocks China, is scheduled to
end its service in 2024. China's space station could be the only operational one in outer space, at
least for a while. Commenting on Sino-U.S. space relations earlier this week, Xu Dazhe, the head
of China's National Space Administration, cites Hollywood sci-fi blockbuster "The Martian," in
which a U.S. astronaut gets stranded on Mars and is eventually brought back to Earth by NASA,
with help from China. Xu Dazhe noted that China and the United States established a special
dialogue mechanism last year and talks would continue this year. For chief engineer Zhou, the
movie simply reflects what most people want. "Many American astronauts and scientists that I
have met said they would like to work with us, if given the freedom of choice." The China Space
Day was designated to mark the launch of China's first satellite on April 24, 1970.
#debatelikeabear 29
Solvency - Russia Says Yes
Russia wants to open the ISS to China

Frank Morring Jr. Staff “Support Grows For China Human-spaceflight Role.” Aviation Week &
Space Technology. October 19, 2015. Accessed June 6, 2016.
On the 16-year-old International Space Station (ISS), China is a participant in the Alpha Magnetic
Spectrometer particle physics experiment and has a small commercial payload on board that
was brokered by the U.S. company NanoRacks LLC. The head of Roscosmos said during the
International Astronautical Congress (IAC) in Jerusalem that he would like to open the station up
to participation beyond the original five partners--NASA, Roscosmos, ESA, the Japan Aerospace
Exploration Agency (JAXA) and the Canadian Space Agency. "That is my hope," said Igor
Komarov, when asked about a larger role for China on the ISS. "I think that we discuss [this] with
our partners, and principally we discuss that it should be open structure, so if there are some
requirements we should develop them. And if countries should follow these rules and
requirements, then they should have a chance to join us. That is our principal position."
#debatelikeabear 30
Solvency – ESA says Yes

The ESA wants China to join the ISS
Despite the competitive motivations of many of the world’s leading civil space programs, it is
not a foregone conclusion that their respective activities will result in future conflicts. The
international scientific community cooperates more closely than ever before because of the
influence of the Internet and the relative ease of sharing data (and, indeed, the difficulty of
controlling it). There is also pressure on all space programs to participate in missions that are
going to succeed, which provides incentives to share both costs and technology, at least in terms
of putting experiments and equipment on shared “buses.” For the country building the main
spacecraft, there is an incentive to reduce construction and launch costs by reaching out to
others. The ISS is a good example. The spacecraft has cost much more than anyone anticipated,
approximately $150 billion in total contributions pledged up to 2015 for what was once
estimated to be a $30 billion project.46 The initiator of the project, the United States, has
shouldered about $126 billion (or 84 percent) of the total expense, although it has received
valuable technology for the station from its partners. Of course, operating the station after 2015
will cost money too. For this reason, a number of ISS partner nations are considering opening
the station to new members. In December 2011, ESA’s director of human spaceflight and
operations proposed that China become a partner in the ISS, saying that Chinese participation
“offers great potential.”47 The United States has mentioned India as a possible member as well.
But adjusting the existing membership structure and access agreements would be complicated.
Still, with adequate political will, such an expansion of the station’s membership is conceivable
and might promote future lunar cooperation as well.
#debatelikeabear 31
Solvency – A2: China is a bad partner

The United States has worked with China in the past, to advance space
exploration. Thus, making China a good partner
Kevin PollPetters, No date, "," IGCC,
http://origin.www.uscc.gov/sites/default/files/Research/China%20Dream%20Space
%20Dream_Report.pdf
As with its overall relationship, China’s relationship with the U.S. space program has been
turbulent. Cooperative activities started small, with the two countries signing an Understanding
on Cooperation in Space Technology in 1979. In 1986 China set up a ground station to receive
satellite imagery from the U.S. Geological Survey’s Landsat remote sensing satellite, and in 1992
two small student experiments flew on a space shuttle mission. 182 The most prominent
cooperative activities between the two countries occurred in the 1990s when China began
launching U.S.-manufactured commercial satellites. The use of Chinese launch services came
about due to the phasing out of expendable rockets in favor of the space shuttle, whose launch
costs promised to be cheaper. The loss of the space shuttle Challenger in 1986 and the
subsequent grounding of the fleet for two years, and the resultant prohibition against using the
shuttle for commercial launches, resulted in a backlog that could not be resolved by European
launchers, leaving only Chinese launchers to fill the gap. China launched the first U.S.
manufactured commercial satellite in 1990 and launched a total of 19 U.S.- manufactured
satellites between 1990 and 1999. During this time, Chinese launchers failed six times, including
three times in 1995 and 1996. Investigations conducted by Hughes Space and Communications
into launch failures of Hughes satellites in 1992 and 1995 and by Loral of a launch failure
involving one of their satellites built for Intelsat identified the failures as resulting from a faulty
fairing for the Hughes launches and from a faulty inertial measurement unit for the Loral
launches. These investigations also involved their counterparts from Chinese industry, including
a joint investigation by Hughes, Loral, and China’s space industry. Subsequent disclosures of
these investigations led to allegations that Hughes and Loral had illegally transferred technical
assistance to the Chinese that could have been used to improve the reliability of Chinese
ballistic missiles.183 In 2002, Loral reached a settlement with the U.S. government to pay a $14
million fine, but neither admitted nor denied the government’s charges as part of the
settlement.184 In 2003, Hughes Electronics Corporation and Boeing, which had acquired Hughes
Space and Communications in 2000, reached a settlement with the U.S. government to pay $32
million in fines and expressed “regret for not having obtained licenses that should have been
obtained” and acknowledged “the nature and seriousness of the offenses charged by the
Department of State, including the harm such
Sino-American Space cooperation is net beneficial to both countries

John C. Baker And Kevin L. Pollpeter. "A Future for U.S.-China Space Cooperation? | RAND." Rand.org. n.d.
Web. 27 Jun. 2016. <http://www.rand.org/blog/2004/12/a-future-for-u_s_-china-space-cooperation.html>
In addition to launching its first human into space, China has approved plans for robotic
lunar exploration that could lay the foundation for human missions and hopes to eventually
orbit a permanent manned space station. China's emergent role in human space flight
coincides with the announcement last January of NASA's goal to return to the moon and lay
#debatelikeabear 32
the foundation for human exploration of Mars. During the post-Apollo era, U.S. space
exploration programs have been burdened by unrealistic expectations and inadequate funding that
sometimes led to canceled or scaled-back programs. Transporting humans into space for
extended periods remains expensive, risky and technically demanding. Cooperation with
China on human space flight provides opportunities for collaboration that could reduce the cost of
major missions such as returning to the moon and long-duration flights to Mars. The Chinese
would expect to benefit from cooperation with the more advanced U.S. space program, gaining
increased prestige and taking a great leap forward by getting access to U.S. knowledge,
experience and technology. However, because most space technologies and skills are dual-
use in nature — meaning they also can be used to develop space systems for military use —
America wants to be sure China doesn't use space cooperation as a tool to strengthen its military
might.
#debatelikeabear 33
Solvency – A2: Law bans cooperation

US is not banned from cooperating with China on the ISS, which is multilateral,
not bilateral
Leonard David 2015. Reporter on space activities for nearly 50 years. He is the 2010 winner of
the prestigious National Space Club Press Award. “US-China Cooperation in Space: Is It Possible,
& and What's in Store?” June 16, 2015. <http://space.com/29671-china-nasa-space-
cooperation.html> accesed June 25, 2016.
"It is not clear either how much leverage Europe would have on this issue or whether Dordain's
successor will share this view, but with U.S. backing, Europe could serve as an American
surrogate," Logsdon said. Logsdon said it is worth remembering that the U.S. congressional
prohibition regarding China is on bilateral U.S.-Chinese cooperation. "Starting the cooperation
on the multilateral International Space Station may offer an escape route from current
limitations," Logsdon said.
The law only bans bilateral cooperation

Section 531 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016. Signed into law
12/18/2015. <www.congress.gov/bill114th-congress/house-bill/2029/text> Accessed June 10,
2016
SEC. 531. (a) None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) or the Office of Science and Technology Policy
(OSTP) to develop, design, plan, promulgate, implement, or execute a bilateral policy, program,
order, or contract of any kind to participate, collaborate, or coordinate bilaterally in any way
with China or any Chinese-owned company unless such activities are specifically authorized by a
law enacted after the date of enactment of this Act.
#debatelikeabear 34
Economy Add-on
Space cooperation stimulates economic growth
Pollpeter. Kevin et al (Kevin Pollpeter is a senior research analyst at Defense Group, Inc.)
"China Dream, Space Dream China’s Progress in Space Technologies and Implications for the
United States" Origin.www.uscc.gov. 2 Mar. 2015. Web. 27 Jun. 2016.
%20Dream_Report.pdf pg.
According to Chinese analysts, space has its most profound effect on high technology
development, with investments in space technologies said to yield $10 in gross domestic
product growth for every dollar spent. 93 Space programs can be large endeavors requiring the
participation of numerous government and commercial entities and involving many different
technologies, including propulsion, electronics, computers, guidance, power supply, and
materials.94 The demand created by space projects can spur advancement in computers,
microelectronics, precision manufacturing, automatic control, new energy, and new materials.
Chinese analysts point to the U.S. Apollo program as the best example of this, which is said to
have led to advances in radar, radio-guidance, synthetic materials, computers, and biological
engineering and laid a solid foundation for U.S. high-technology development and technology-
based military innovation. 95 Chinese analysts point to a similar effect in their country. China’s
first computer was used to develop space technology.96 Of the 1,000 new materials developed
in China, 80 percent are said to have resulted from research in space technology; and more than
2,000 space technology achievements have been reported in various sectors of the national
economy and nearly 1,000 products developed by the space industry have been converted for
civilian use. Finally, the work of the more than 3,000 enterprises involved in China’s human
spaceflight program is said to have contributed to technological progress in electronics, new
materials, and automatic control.97 The creation of markets for high technology products is also
intended to support the development of China’s other strategic emerging industries through the
introduction of spin off technologies―technologies originally developed for the space industry
that have found a civilian application. This effort is conducted through eight industrial parks
called “aerospace bases” formed through partnerships between the space industry and the
governments of Beijing, Shanghai, Xi’an, Chengdu, Tianjin, Inner Mongolia, Shenzhen, and
Hainan. These bases are not only designed to manufacture space products, but also to leverage
the industry’s capabilities in space technologies to build civilian products. In doing so, the space
industry focuses on technologies and products in areas identified as strategic emerging
industries by the central government. These include high-end manufacturing, alternative
energy, new materials, alternative energy automobiles, and new generation information
technologies.98
#debatelikeabear 35
US-CHINA Space cooperation leads into a more vibrant economy, and more
developed technology.
Kevin Poll Petters, No date, "," IGCC,
%20Dream_Report.pdf
According to Chinese analysts, space has its most profound effect on high technology
development, with investments in space technologies said to yield $10 in gross domestic
product growth for every dollar spent. 93 Space programs can be large endeavors requiring the
participation of numerous government and commercial entities and involving many different
technologies, including propulsion, electronics, computers, guidance, power supply, and
materials.94 The demand created by space projects can spur advancement in computers,
microelectronics, precision manufacturing, automatic control, new energy, and new materials.
Chinese analysts point to the U.S. Apollo program as the best example of this, which is said to
have led to advances in radar, radio-guidance, synthetic materials, computers, and biological
engineering and laid a solid foundation for U.S. high-technology development and technology-
based military innovation. 95 Chinese analysts point to a similar effect in their country. China’s
first computer was used to develop space technology. 96 Of the 1,000 new materials developed
in China, 80 percent are said to have resulted from research in space technology; and more than
2,000 space technology achievements have been reported in various sectors of the national
economy and nearly 1,000 products developed by the space industry have been converted for
civilian use. Finally, the work of the more than 3,000 enterprises involved in China’s human
spaceflight program is said to have contributed to technological progress in electronics, new
materials, and automatic control.97 The creation of markets for high technology products is also
intended to support the development of China’s other strategic emerging industries through the
introduction of spin off technologies―technologies originally developed for the space industry
that have found a civilian application. This effort is conducted through eight industrial parks
called “aerospace bases” formed through partnerships between the space industry and the
governments of Beijing, Shanghai, Xi’an, Chengdu, Tianjin, Inner Mongolia, Shenzhen, and
Hainan. These bases are not only designed to manufacture space products, but also to leverage
the industry’s capabilities in space technologies to build civilian products. In doing so, the space
industry focuses on technologies and products in areas identified as strategic emerging
industries by the central government. These include high-end manufacturing, alternative
energy, new materials, alternative energy automobiles, and new generation information
technologies.98
#debatelikeabear 36
A2: Unpopular
Many reasons to cooperate on ISS and Chinese Space Station.

Chen Lan, independent Chinese space analyst, 3-14- 2016, "The Space Review: One track, two
stations: A proposal for cooperation on the ISS and the Chinese Space Station," No Publication,
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2944/1
Mutual rescue: in case of an emergency on one station where its rescue vehicles are damaged,
as long as one crewed transportation vehicle at any of the stations is available, it would be
possible to transfer the crew to another station to wait for later vehicles to bring them back to
the Earth. The two stations provide a shelter for each other, which is extremely important for
both the aging ISS and the Chinese, who have little experience on long-duration space station
operation. It would be a capability never before realized in the history of space flight and will
provide a doubled safety guarantee to both crews . Mutual support: the two stations provide
redundancy on many basic capabilities and can also support each other, especially when there is
something one station lacks. For example, sharing of orbit re-boosting vehicles, storage space
and supplies, ground-station data links, onboard medical support, and back-up docking/berthing
ports, etc. The free-flyer telescope planned for the Chinese station can also be serviced by the
ISS, if needed. Without such mutual support capability, as currently on ISS, the same job will
cost more and even need a new launch to complete. Joint experiment: it enables experiments
relying on two stations, for example, laser communication and long baseline astronomical
observation. And also, the dual-station model makes it possible to do the same experiment
simultaneously on two stations for comparison. In fact, it opens a door for innovative
experiments we have never imagined before. Crewed formation flying: in the early days of space
flight, there have been two crewed spacecraft flying closely, but they all were short-duration
flights. Crewed formation flight may be valuable for future human deep-space missions. It
provides more redundancy and flexibility for long-duration missions. This proposal provides a
chance to experiment with this concept.
There will be Innumerable Scientific Benefits to China Joining the ISS

Buzz Aldrin 15, 06/11/15, "Buzz Aldrin: Why the U.S. Should Partner with China in Space,"
TIME, http://time.com/3916379/buzz-aldrin-china-space-partnership/ Buzz Aldrin-astronaut
The ISS is an orbiting test bed for scientific utility and sharpening our exploration knowhow. It is
also an incubator for commercial development and free enterprise . Those activities will soon
include U.S. government support to appraise a privately supplied expandable module. That
technology is useful for establishing habitats elsewhere in low Earth orbit , at L-points in Earth-
Moon locations, and even on the Moon itself. The U.S. can assist other nations to gain a
foothold on the Moon, just as we did when Neil Armstrong and I made that “one small step”
back in 1969. China can, as other nations have already, reap rewards by using the ISS. There are
many benefits to opening the airlocks on the ISS to accept visitors from China and other nations.
America would be taking the high road, not just offering cooperation but also assistance in
#debatelikeabear 37
making Earth orbit a busy place for commerce, transforming the Moon into a multi-nation
beehive of activity, and tapping the global wherewithal and talent to venture outward to Mars.
#debatelikeabear 38
Inherency: illegal Now

Even though China wants on the ISS they aren’t allowed to because of US
Congress
Jeffrey Kluger 15, May 29,2015, "The silly reason the Chinese aren't allowed on the space
station," TIME, http://time.com/3901419/space-station-no-chinese/ (da-6/30/16) Editor at
Large for TIME.
Geopolitics can be child’s play—literally. How else would you describe the did-not! did-too! brawl that can result when one country crosses
another country’s invisible line in the playroom that is the South China Sea? How else would you describe the G-8 canceling its playdate in
Sochi after Russia climbed over the fence to Ukraine’s yard? Something similar is true of the International Space Station (ISS), the biggest,
coolest, most excellent tree house there ever was. Principally built and operated by the U.S., the ISS has welcomed aboard astronauts from
15 different countries, including such space newbies as South Africa, Brazil, The Netherlands and Malaysia. But China? Nuh-uh. Never has
happened, never gonna’ happen. China has been barred from the ISS since 2011, when Congress passed a
law prohibiting official American contact with the Chinese space program due to concerns about
national security. “National security,” of course, is the lingua franca excuse for any country to do
anything it jolly well wants to do even if it has nothing to do with, you know, the security of the
nation. But never mind. Few people in the U.S. paid much attention to the no-Chinese law, but it’s at last taking deserved heat, thanks to
a CNN interview with the three Chinese astronauts—or taikonauts—who flew China’s Shenzhou 10 mission in 2013. The network’s visit to
China’s usually closed Space City, which will air on May 30, is a reporting coup, especially because of the entirely familiar, entirely un-scary
world it reveals: serious taikonauts doing serious work with serious mission planners—every bit what you see behind the scenes at NASA or
Russia’s Roscosmos. And similar to the nature of those other space agencies too is the professed wish of the Chinese crews to work across
national borders. “As
an astronaut, I have a strong desire to fly with astronauts from other countries,”
said Nie Haisheng, the Shenzhou 10 commander. “I also look forward to going to the
International Space Station. Space is a family affair; many countries are developing their space
programs and China, as a big country, should make our own contributions in this field.” But that
contribution can’t happen aboard the ISS. The 2011 law draws a sort of ex post facto justification from a study that was
released in 2012 by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, warning that China’s policymakers “view space power as
one aspect of a broad international competition in comprehensive national strength and science and technology.” More darkly, there is
the 2015 report prepared by the University of California, San Diego’s Institute on Global Conflict
and Cooperation, ominously titled “China Dream, Space Dream“, which concludes: “China’s
efforts to use its space program to transform itself into a military, economic, and technological
power may come at the expense of U.S. leadership and has serious implications for U.S.
interests.” OK, deep, cleansing breaths please. On the surface, the studies make a kind of nervous, reflexive sense. China is big, China is
assertive, China has made clear its intentions to project its military power in ways it never has before—including to the high ground of
space. But if that sounds familiar it’s because it’s an echo of the Cold War hysteria that greeted the launch the Soviet Union’s Sputnik. The
world’s first satellite, Sputnik was a terrifying, beach ball sized object that orbited the Earth from Oct. 1957 to January 1958, presenting the
clear and present danger that at some point it might beep at us as it flew overhead. Every Soviet space feat that followed was one more log
on the Cold War fire, one more reason to conclude that we were in a mortal arms and technology race and woe betide us if the guys on the
other side got so much as a peek at what we were doing. That argument failed for a lot of reasons. For one thing, the Soviets hardly needed a
peek at our tech since they were the ones who were winning. When you’re in first place in your division you don’t to steal ideas from the
guys in last. Something similar is true of the Chinese now. After launching their first solo astronaut in 2003, they have followed in rapid
succession with two-person and then three-person crews, and have mastered both spacewalking and orbital docking. They have orbited a
core module for their own eventual space station, have sent multiple spacecraft to the moon and are planning a Mars rover. They didn’t do
all that by filching American tech. The doubters are unappeased, however. Both
these reports warn that all of China’s
technological know-how, no matter how they acquired it, has multiple uses, and can be put to
either good or nefarious ends, a fact that is pretty much true of every, single technological
innovation from fire through the Apple Watch. Even if all of the fears were well-founded—even
if a Chinese Death Star were under construction at this moment in a mountain lair in Xinjiang—
forbidding the kind of international handshaking and cooperating that is made possible by a
facility like the ISS is precisely the wrong way to to go about reducing the threat . The joint Apollo-Soyuz
mission in 1975 achieved little of technological significance, but it was part of a broader thaw between Moscow and Washington. That
mattered, in the same way ping pong diplomacy between the U.S. and China in 1971 was about nothing more than a game—until it was
suddenly about much more. Well before the ISS was built and occupied, the shuttle was already flying American crews to Russia’s Mir space
#debatelikeabear 39
station. Russia later became America’s leading partner in operating and building the ISS—a shrewd American move that both offloaded
some of the cost of the station and provided work for Russian missile engineers who found themselves idle after the Berlin Wall fell and
could easily have sold their services to nuclear nasties like North Korea or Iran. The technology aboard the ISS is not the kind that a Chinese
astronaut with ill will would want to or need to steal. And
more to the point, if there’s one thing the men and
women who fly in space will tell you, it’s that once they get there, terrestrial politics mean
nothing at all—the sandbox silliness of politicians who are not relying on the cooperation of a
few close crewmates to keep them alive and safe as they race through low Earth orbit. From
space, as astronauts like to say, you can’t see borders. It’s a perspective the lawmakers in
Washington could use.
The OSTP and NASA can’t cooperate with China because of a clause in the US
spending bill
William Pentland (Managing Partner at Brookside Strategies, LLC, a small law firm focused on
utility regulation and energy policy based in Kennebunk, Maine), 5-7-20 11, "Congress Bans
Scientific Collaboration with China, Cites High Espionage Risks," Forbes,
http://www.forbes.com/sites/williampentland/2011/05/07/congress-bans-scientific-
collaboration-with-china-cites-high-espionage-risks/#1d6e00382b86
A two-sentence clause included in the U.S. spending bill approved by Congress a few weeks
ago threatens to reverse more than three decades of constructive U.S. engagement with the
People’s Republic of China. The clause prohibits the White House Office of Science and
Technology Policy (OSTP) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) from
coordinating any joint scientific activity with China. Representative Frank Wolf (R-VA), a long-
time critic of the Chinese government who chairs a House spending committee that oversees
several science agencies, inserted the language into the spending legislation to prevent NASA
or OSTP from using federal funds “to develop, design, plan, promulgate, implement or execute
a bilateral policy, program, order, or contract of any kind to participate, collaborate, or
coordinate bilaterally in any way with China or any Chinese-owned company.” By prohibiting
the OSTP from working with China, Wolf claims the ban will bear on “the entire bilateral
relationship on science and technology.”
#debatelikeabear 40
The Wolf Amendment prohibits any bilateral cooperation with China.

Hannah Kohler (Georgetown Law, J.D. expected 2015; B.A. Penn State 2012), 2015, The
Georgetown Law Journal, http://georgetownlawjournal.org/issue/103-4/
If American-made communications satellites could not even be launched by a Chinese rocket in

2013, it is perhaps not surprising that a statutory provision prohibiting bilateral aerospace
cooperation was able to gain traction in Congress. Such is the nature of the Wolf Amendment
included in each annual appropriations act governing the budget of NASA since 2011.
Nicknamed for its drafter, former Congressman of Virginia Frank Wolf, this budgetary
stipulation forbids involvement by NASA and the National Science Foundation (NSF) in any
bilateral program or forum with China. These appropriations acts grant funding to federal
programs and regulate the allowable uses for that funding.80 Through them, Congress has the
authority to delegate the annual budget for NASA (in addition to many other government
agencies and programs) and how it can— and cannot—be spent.
#debatelikeabear 41
Inherency: Attitudinal
Working with China in space has come up in the United States eyes but seems
too challenging
Kelly Dickerson, 10-19-2015, "Here's why NASA won't work with China to explore space," Tech Insider,
http://www.techinsider.io/nasa-china-collaboration-illegal-2015-10 (Kelly was a science reporter at Tech
Insider, covering space and physics. She graduated from the CUNY Graduate School of Journalism with an M.A. in science and
health reporting, previously written for Live Science, Space.com, and Psychology Today.)
One of the biggest collaborative projects in which NASA is involved is the International Space
Station (ISS). It's a space station built and maintained by the United States, Russia, Europe,
Japan, and Canada. China, however, is banned from involvement in the ISS, thanks to US
lawmakers. But CNSA seems to be doing just fine on its own. Since its founding in 1993, the
Chinese space agency has launched 10 people and a small space station into orbit, among
other missions. China's successes in space have impressed NASA enough to broach the topic of
collaboration several times at the White House. But according to space policy expert John
Logsdon, getting the US to work together with China on spaceward missions will take a long
policy battle.
There is a long policy battle ahead before cooperating with China.

Kelly Dickerson, 10-19-2015, "Here's why NASA won't work with China to explore space,"
Tech Insider,http://www.techinsider.io/nasa-china-collaboration-illegal-2015-10
Note: Spoilers ahead if you haven't seen or read "The Martian." In the "The Martian," a
hit sci-fi novel and recent blockbuster movie, there's a moment where NASA launches a
rocket full of supplies to Mark Watney, an astronaut stranded on Mars. Unfortunately for
Watney, the rocket blows up and NASA doesn't have a backup - and without new
supplies Watney will slowly starve to death on the red planet. China's space agency sees
the tragic news, however, and offers its Taiyang Shen space probe rocket to NASA. They
do this through a gentleman's agreement between scientists to bypasses lawmaker and
red tape. That way, the US space agency can get another shot at saving Watney's life.
This collaboration between supposedly bitter national rivals sounds great in theory, but
is it possible? As astrophysicist and StarTalk Radio host Neil deGrasse Tyson put it on Twitter:
Evidence that the @MartianMovie is fantasy: The US & China cooperate with one another in
space. Tyson is correct to think this strategy would never work, at least not today. The reason is
because, in 2011, Congress passed a spending bill that expressly forbids NASA from working with
China, citing a high risk of espionage. What's more, it doesn't sound like the attitudes of US
lawmakers toward the People's Republic of China are changing anytime soon. A 2015
report from the University of California called " China Dream, Space Dream" concludes that:
"China's efforts to use its space program to transform itself into a military, economic, and
technological power may come at the expense of U.S. leadership and has serious implications
for U.S. interests." It will take a big policy shift to change that sentiment and foster collaboration
between NASA and the China National Space Administration (CNSA). One of the biggest
collaborative projects in which NASA is involved is the International Space Station (ISS).
#debatelikeabear 42
It's a space station built and maintained by the United States, Russia, Europe, Japan,
and Canada. China, however, is banned from involvement in the ISS, thanks to US lawmakers.
But CNSA seems to be doing just fine on its own. Since its founding in 1993, the Chinese
space agency has launched 10 people and a small space station into orbit, among other
missions. China's successes in space have impressed NASA enough to broach the topic of
collaboration several times at the White House. But according to space policy expert John
Logsdon, getting the US to work together with China on spaceward missions will take a long
policy battle. "The first step is the White House working with congressional leadership to get
current, unwise restrictions on such cooperation revoked," Logsdon told Space.com. "Then, the
United States can invite China to work together with the United States and other spacefaring
countries on a wide variety of space activities and, most dramatically, human spaceflight." NASA
could have much to gain in the future in working with China. China became the third country
ever to successfully launch humans into space, behind Russia and the US, and it's made much
progress since. Two years ago, CNSA landed a small telescope on the moon, which is still
up there taking crystal-clear images of the cosmos (because Earth's dirty atmosphere
isn't in the way). The agency also operates its own space lab called Tiangong 1, is testing
powerful new rockets, and has ambitious plans to land more probes on the moon and
perhaps a colony there one day. If CNSA's progress in space exploration and tech
development isn't a compelling enough reason to work with China, then NASA's stunted
budget offers another. More international collaboration could only be positive for a space
agency that has faced budget cut after budget cut. President John F. Kennedy committed
to a moon landing by the end of the 1960s, then Nixon took the helm and slammed on
the brakes after a handful of crewed lunar missions. As Logsdon writes in an article for
NASA: "Nixon rejected NASA's ambitious post-Apollo plans, which included developing
a series of large space stations, continued missions to the moon, and an initial mission to
Mars in the 1980s," Logsdon writes. "By the time Nixon left the White House, the NASA
budget had fallen from its peak of almost 4% of the total federal budget to less than 1%." Some
argue that we would already have sent humans to Mars if NASA had kept its momentum.
More collaboration could help get NASA back on track. NASA administrator Charles
Bolden event wrote in a recent blog post that he thinks more collaboration will help get
us get boots on Mars: A Journey such as this is something that no one person, crew, or
Agency can undertake alone. [...] A mission of this magnitude is made stronger with
international partnership - the sort of spirit and cooperation that is demonstrated so
vividly by the tens of thousands of people across 15 countries who have been involved in
the development and operation of the International Space Station. In fact, NASA just
announced a partnership with the Israel Space Agency that will allow the two agencies to
conduct joint missions and share research facilities. I personally think it would be great
to see a similar agreement with China someday soon - especially since the nation
announced it's seeking international partners to help build another space station in the
2020s (and the station sounds really cool). But again, current US law forbids NASA from
helping out or getting involved at all. Russia will only support the $100 billion space station
until 2024, and that's a huge problem because, right now, NASA relies on Russia's rockets to get
its astronauts into space. It's unclear what NASA will do once Russia pulls out. Working with
China and other nations to build a bigger and better space station would be a great option.
Instead of two space stations, we could have one truly international station with the most
brilliant scientists around the world working together. That kind of collaboration would
#debatelikeabear 43
speed up tech development; instead of space stations just copying each other's rockets
and space probes, we could start working together to advance technology at a much
faster pace than we are right now. We'll need a new generation of space tech if we ever
hope to get to Mars. It already seems like the two agencies do want to collaborate, since
discussion of that possibility has reached the White House several times. US scientists have also
openly criticized policy makers in the past for preventing Chinese scientists from attending space
conferences. It seems like politics shouldn't get in the way of pure scientific pursuit, but
the reality is US lawmakers won't allow collaboration with China because they are
worried about national security and protecting state secrets. But who knows, if the two
space agencies started working together, it might open up enough lines of
communication between the US and China for the two nations to defrost their icy
relationship. In the meantime China will continue to expand its space exploration efforts.
Unless a big policy shift happens, NASA might have to sit on the sidelines while an
incredible new chapter of space exploration begins.
#debatelikeabear 44
A2: China is Authoritarian

The US already works with Authoritarian regimes when it serves their interests,
Russia and the Middle East prove
Listner and Johnson-Freese 2014. Michael J. Listner is an attorney and the founder and
principal of Space Law and Policy Solutions, a think tank and consultation firm that concentrates
on legal and policy matters relating to space security and development. Joan Johnson-Freese is a
professor of national security affairs at the Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island. “Two
Perspectives on U.S.-China Space Cooperation” July 14, 2014. SpaceNews Since 1989 dedicated
to covering the business and politics of the global space industry.
<http://spacenews.com/41256two-perspectives-on-us-china-space-cooperation/> Accessed
May 20, 2016
And finally, Wolf stated that the United States should not work with China based on moral
grounds. While clearly the United States would prefer not to work with authoritarian regimes, it
has done so in war and in peacetime when it has served American interests. That is the basis of
realism: Serve American interests first. While the United States would prefer not to work with
Stalin, we continue to work with Putin when it benefits us to do so. Were the U.S. not to work
with authoritarian regimes, it would have few to work with at all in the Middle East.
#debatelikeabear 45
A2: China Steals Tech/China Pulls ahead of US

China is still very far behind the US technologically and has seen enough success
that stealing US technology wouldn’t be necessary
David Volodzko 2015. National Editor for The Korea JoongAng Daily, the sister paper of The International New York Times in South
Korea “The US has a law to stop NASA from working with China, and scientists hate it” The Los Angeles Daily News November 16, 2015.
<http://www.dailynews.com/science/20151116/the-us-has-a-law-to-stop-nasa-from-working-with-china-and-scientists-hate-it> accessed May 17, 2016
According to Baoying Heixi, professor of aerospace engineering at Tsinghua University, these are
exaggerations. “China is a developing country,” he told GlobalPost. “Its industry and technology
base is still very weak. Passing [the] US space program needs many hundred years — or never.”
Still, China’s progress — without US help — has been mighty. There seems little reason to fear
the Chinese stealing US technology when they’re getting by so well without it. The potential
value of collaboration is in fact the same thing its critics cite: the protection of resources. “The
long-term goals are the same from country to country,” the former commander of the ISS, Chris
Hadfield, said during a trip to China last year. “The combined objective is trying to understand
the rest of the universe. The common enemy is complexity and cost.” Simply put, collaboration
saves time and money. “I hope personally NASA should open a door for Chinese citizens,” says
Baoyin. “I believe that many Chinese citizens can do something for NASA.”
The tech aboard the ISS isn’t what interests China, but the benefits of
cooperation are important
Jeffrey Klugar. Senior Writer, Time Magazine. “The Silly Reason the Chinese Aren’t Allowed on
the Space Station” Time. 06/01/2015. <http://time.com/3901419/space-station-no-chinese/>
After launching their first solo astronaut in 2003, they have followed in rapid succession with
two-person and then three-person crews, and have mastered both spacewalking and orbital
docking. They have orbited a core module for their own eventual space station, have sent
multiple spacecraft to the moon and are planning a Mars rover. They didn’t do all that by
filching American tech. The doubters are unappeased, however. Both these reports warn that all of China’s technological know- how, no
matter how they acquired it, has multiple uses, and can be put to either good or nefarious ends, a fact that is pretty much true of every, single
technological innovation from fire through the Apple Watch. Even
if all of the fears were well-founded—even if a
Chinese Death Star were under construction at this moment in a mountain lair in Xinjiang—
forbidding the kind of international handshaking and cooperating that is made possible by a
facility like the ISS is precisely the wrong way to to go about reducing the threat. The joint
Apollo-Soyuz mission in 1975 achieved little of technological significance, but it was part of a broader thaw
between Moscow and Washington. That mattered, in the same way ping pong diplomacy between the U.S. and China in 1971 was
about nothing more than a game—until it was suddenly about much more. Well before the ISS was built and occupied, the shuttle was already flying
American crews to Russia’s Mir space station. Russia later became America’s leading partner in operating and building the ISS—a shrewd American
move that both offloaded some of the cost of the station and provided work for Russian missile engineers who found themselves idle after the Berlin
Wall fell and could easily have sold their services to nuclear nasties like North Korea or Iran. The
technology aboard the ISS is not
the kind that a Chinese astronaut with ill will would want to or need to steal. And more to the
point, if there’s one thing the men and women who fly in space will tell you, it’s that once they
get there, terrestrial politics mean nothing at all—the sandbox silliness of politicians who are not
relying on the cooperation of a few close crewmates to keep them alive and safe as they race
#debatelikeabear 46
through low Earth orbit. From space, as astronauts like to say, you can’t see borders. It’s a perspective the lawmakers in Washington
could use.
Inviting China to ISS is in the interest of U.S. national security.

Leonard David, space journalist and co-author with Apollo 11’s Buzz Aldrin of Mission to Mars,
Space, 6-16-2015, "US-China Cooperation in Space: Is It Possible, and What's in Store?," Space,
http://www.space.com/29671-china-nasa-space-station-cooperation.html
"It is in the interest of U.S. national security to engage China in space," said Joan Johnson-
Freese, a professor of national security affairs at the Naval War College in Newport, Rhode
Island. Johnson-Freese noted that her views do not necessarily represent those of the Naval War
College, the Department of the Navy or the Department of Defense. "The United States has
unnecessarily created the perception of a space race between the U.S. and China, and that the
U.S. is losing, by its unwillingness to be inclusive in ISS space partnerships," Johnson-Freese said.
Refusing Chinese participation in the International Space Station, at least in part, has spurred
China to build its own station, Johnson-Freese said, "which could well be the de facto
international space station when the U.S.-led ISS is deorbited. " [China's Space Station Plans in
Photos]
#debatelikeabear 47
Space Mil Adv – Now Key

Now is the key time to stop space militarization before it cuts off access to
space for generations
Scientific American “A Risky Arms Race in Space” Editorial. Scientific American, the longest
continuously published magazine in the U.S. Nov 2015, Vol. 313 Issue 5, p12-12. Accessed June
6, 2016.
On January 11, 2007, with no warning, China's military fired a ballistic missile at one of the
country's weather satellites and blew it to bits. China's first test of an antisatellite weapon made
a mess: tens of thousands of metal shards now litter low-Earth orbit, where the International
Space Station, other crewed missions and about half of all operational satellites fly. Other
superpowers have been exploring space-based weaponry. In October 2014 the U.S. Air Force's
X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle-3 returned from a mission where some analysts believe it was testing
technologies for hypersonic missiles -- weapons capable of hitting any target on Earth within an
hour -- and, possibly, techniques for repairing or disabling satellites. Russia has tested three
satellites in recent years that may be able to intercept other orbiting spacecraft to eavesdrop on
or physically sabotage them. This militarization of space is a dangerous course. A small skirmish
above our planet could knock out global communications, and the orbiting hazards could lock off
access to space for generations. Worse, attacks on satellites could quickly escalate into war on
the ground. World powers need to act now to declare space a demilitarized zone.
#debatelikeabear 48
Yes Space Militarization

Space will become a dominant way to win wars
Vasani 12(Harsh Vasani, Postgraduate Research Scholar at the Department of Geopolitics
and International Relations, Manipal University. , The Diplomat, 4-19-2012, "India's Anti-
Satellite Weapons," Diplomat, http://thediplomat.com/2016/06/indias-anti-satellite-
weapons/)
This was not the first time Beijing tested its ASAT program. A more prominent test occurred
in January 2007, when the Chinese military launched a KT-1 rocket that successfully
destroyed a redundant Chinese Feng Yun 1-C weather satellite in Low Earth Orbit (LEO),
approximately 800 kilometers above the Earth. The test left behind approximately 2,500 to
3,000 pieces of dangerous debris in LEO, where reconnaissance and weather satellites and
manned space missions are vulnerable to space debris. In May 2013, a Russian satellite was
struck and destroyed, reportedly by one such piece of debris. Hazardous space debris aside,
the test also confirmed China’s capability to attack and destroy enemy satellites in the event
of war, sabotaging the enemy’s military operations. Such developments have not gone
unnoticed in New Delhi’s defense establishment. Security experts and scholars have called
for a rethink of India’s space policy, augmenting India’s ASAT weapons capability. Following
China’s 2007 ASAT weapons test, the then-chief of army staff of the Indian Army, General
Deepak Kapoor, was quoted in a Times of India report saying that China’s space program
was expanding at an “exponentially rapid” pace in both offensive and defensive capabilities,
and that space was becoming the “ultimate military high ground” to dominate in the wars of
the future. Then-Integrated Defense Staff Chief Lt. General H S Lidder was also quoted as
saying, “with time, we will get sucked into the military race to protect space assets and
inevitably there will be a military contest in space. In a life-and-death scenario, space will
provide the advantage.”
#debatelikeabear 49
Space Mil Adv – Spills Over

Military build ups in space spillover into Earth conflicts
Cooperation in Space. 2014 Columbia University Press. p170. accessed June 12, 2016.
But military tensions in space may cloud this possibly bright and broadly beneficial future. As
more countries become active in space, the chances for conflict could increase, particularly if
resource conflicts on Earth become more intense. Under these conditions, space could become
yet another historical venue for resource rivalry, with military spillover effects. These points
raise issues concerning space governance and international relations. Many scientists make the
case that the unique challenges ahead can be addressed only through collaboration. As a recent
report of the international Committee on Space Research argues, “Building a new space
infrastructure, transport systems, and space probes and creating a sustainable long-term space
exploration program will require international cooperation.”1 Whether such international
mechanisms and associated means for conflict prevention can be developed as quickly as
problems emerge in space will be a critical test of existing space norms and treaties and of the
political abilities of current and future national leaders.
The buildup of space weapons will spillover into Earth-bound conflicts

David C. DeFrieze is an Attorney for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, Aberdeen Proving
Ground, Maryland. “Defining and Regulating the Weaponization of Space” Joint Force Quarterly
74 3rd Quarter 2014. Accessed June 6, 2016.
The peaceful side of military power is also reliant on space. Self-defense against military buildup,
invasion, or missile attack is enhanced by surveillance from space. Such visibility of aggressive
military actions can serve as a deterrent against aggression by providing targeted nations time
to react and verify their concerns in international discussions. Finally, orderly regulation of space
weaponization can help avoid a costly and potentially devastating arms race. Space, after all, is a
congested and contested domain. If we do not establish order there, the struggle for availability
of limited assets may render it a cause for Earth-bound conflicts. For these and other reasons,
the international community has been attempting to regulate the use of space, and specifically
to define and regulate the weaponization of space.
#debatelikeabear 50
Space Warfare Probability

Space warfare likely
Pollpeter et al—no date
China Dream, Space Dream China’s Progress in Space Technologies and Implications for the
United States U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission Kevin Pollpeter Eric
Anderson Jordan Wilson Fan Yang
%20Dream_Report.pdf (da-6/26/16)
The increasing reliance on space by the U.S. military has resulted in an increasing interest by
Chinese analysts in counterspace technologies to deny potential adversaries the use of space.
Counterspace technologies include kinetic- kill vehicles that destroy their targets by ramming
them at high speeds, directed energy weapons such as lasers that can degrade or disable
satellites, and co-orbital technologies that can orbit to a satellite and ram it or grab it for
nefarious purposes. The most recent well-known example of an anti-satellite test was the 2007
Chinese test of a direct ascent kinetic-kill vehicle that destroyed a y weather satellite. Because of
this, Chinese sources conclude that space warfare will follow the evolution of air warfare.
Initially air power was used for reconnaissance over the European trenches of World War I. To
deny access to this intelligence, airplanes were equipped with weapons to shoot down other
aircraft. Other aircraft were assigned to bomb and strafe ground forces. During World War II, air
power became more decisive and strategic, with air power playing a key role in naval operations
and in the invasion of northern Europe. In recent conflicts, air power has played a critical role in
achieving victory for the U.S. military. According to Chinese sources, space warfare is now at the
equivalent stage of the state of air power in World War I in which intelligence gathering was the
main mission of air forces.63 But just as with air power, space power will become so vital to
military operations that militaries will seek to control space, resulting in a contest over its
supremacy. As a result, Chinese analysts conclude that space war is inevitable and that the
Chinese military must not only develop space-based C4ISR assets, but also develop the means to
protect those assets and to deny an enemy access to its space-based C4ISR assets.64 In this
regard, Chinese writers on space advocate the PLA to prepare to achieve space supremacy,
defined as the ability to use space and to deny the use of space to its adversaries
#debatelikeabear 51
Need China on our side – A threat

China’s space technology could challenge the United States
Rosen 16 ( Ben Rosen, University of California in Los Angeles Graduate and Monitor
Journalist, Christian Science Monitor, 6-27-2016, "Successful rocket launch keeps China
on track for second space station,"
http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2016/0627/Successful-rocket-launch-keeps-
China-on-track-for-second-space-station)
“China’s rise as a space power has important national security implications for the United States,
which relies on its own space capabilities to assess and monitor current and emerging threats to
national security and project military power globally,” reads the 2015 Report to Congress of
the China-US Economic and Security Review Commission. “China’s aspirations are driven
by its assessment that space power enables the country’s military modernization and would
allow it to challenge US information superiority during a conflict.”
#debatelikeabear 52
China won’t attack

If China wishes to be a superpower they must become economically great and
not have conflict with the US
Pollpeter et al—no date
China Dream, Space Dream China’s Progress in Space Technologies and Implications for the
United States U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission Kevin Pollpeter Eric
Anderson Jordan Wilson Fan Yang
%20Dream_Report.pdf (da-6/26/16)
The basis for China’s rise to great power status is a strong economy. Chinese scholars point to
the Soviet Union as proof that merely having a strong army is not sufficient for maintaining a
country’s position in the world. Not only will a growing economy give China more influence in
the world, it will also enable it to afford the capabilities it needs to wield that power. The
ultimate goal of becoming a rich country with a strong army is to preserve China’s sovereignty,
independence, territorial integrity, and political system by integrating itself into the existing
international system, 15 while at the same time working to transform the system to better suit
China’s interests.16 But because the United States remains the world’s lone superpower, China
must not derail its economic modernization effort by coming into military or economic conflict
with the United States. As a result, even though China is becoming more assertive in defending
what it sees are its legitimate interests, it will try to do so in a way that does not fundamentally
harm its economic interests and lead it into a military conflict with the United States. Although
China does not seek conflict with the United States, it must at the same time act in ways to bring
about its goal of becoming a world power. 17 As Peking University’s Ye writes, “there is a close
connection between the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation and China’s becoming a world
power. If China does not become a world power, the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation will be
incomplete. Only when it becomes a world power can we say that the total rejuvenation of the
Chinese nation has been achieved.” 18 Although President Xi Jinping has stated that China
“must strive to make our neighbors more friendly in politics, economically more closely tied to
us, and we must have deeper security cooperation and closer people-to-people ties,” 19 he has
also stated that China “would never sacrifice its legitimate rights or basic interests” and that “no
foreign country should expect us to make a deal on our core interests and hope we will swallow
the bitter pill that will damage our sovereignty, security, and development interests.” 20 As
Bonnie Glaser, senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, concludes:
China appears to believe that growing Chinese economic and military clout will over time
persuade its neighbors that there is more to gain from accommodating Chinese interests than
from challenging them. In handling relations with its neighbors, China is employing both carrots
and sticks to deter countries from pursuing policies that inflict damage on Chinese interests.21
This strategy will require a careful balancing act. China must learn to minimize confrontation
with potential foes while at the same time strengthening its economic ties with them. As Peking
University’s Wang Jisi writes, “All this means that it is virtually impossible to distinguish China's
friends from its foes. The United States might pose political and military threats, and Japan, a
#debatelikeabear 53
staunch U.S. ally, could be a geopolitical competitor of China's, but these two countries also
happen to be two of China's greatest economic partners.”
#debatelikeabear 54
Space Mil Adv – 2AC Climate Change/Environment Add-On

Peaceful development of space is key to global communications, climate
change, environmental management, and commercial development both in
space and on Earth
David C. DeFrieze is an Attorney for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, Aberdeen Proving
Ground, Maryland. “Defining and Regulating the Weaponization of Space” Joint Force Quarterly
74 3rd Quarter 2014. Accessed June 6, 2016.
The international community has a great interest in maintaining space as a peaceful arena and a
secure place to conduct international activity. This has been recognized in treaties and policy
statements involving almost all countries with an interest in space. The Treaty on Principles
Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon
and Other Celestial Bodies (the Outer Space Treaty) sets forth as its opening statement, “The
exploration and use of outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, shall be
carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries, irrespective of their degree of
economic or scientific development, and shall be the province of all mankind.”2 Such interest in
peaceful uses of space is understandable; it is a fragile environment. Physics dictates that
satellite orbits and space launches are easy to observe and understand. Like sand castles,
spacecraft are difficult to build but easy to destroy. Yet much of the world increasingly relies on
space for such peaceful purposes as communications (cell phones, satellite television and radio,
banking transactions), transportation (GPS and air traffic control), environmental management,
observations relating to resources, weather analysis and predictions, climate change,
surveillance of natural disasters, and minimally invasive verification of international treaties.
Furthermore, commercial industry currently has a greater presence in space than state actors,
and global economic development is tied to the peaceful space capabilities identified.
Climate change threatens all life on Earth

Richard Schiffman 13, environmental writer @ The Atlantic citing the Fifth Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, “What Leading Scientists Want You to Know About Today's
Frightening Climate Report,” The Atlantic, 9/27,
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/09/leading-scientists-weigh-in-on-the-
mother-of-all-climate-reports/280045/
The polar icecaps are melting faster than we thought they would; seas are rising faster than we
thought they would; extreme weather events are increasing. Have a nice day! That’s a less than scientifically
rigorous summary of the findings of the Fifth Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report released this
morning in Stockholm.¶ Appearing exhausted after a nearly two sleepless days fine-tuning the language of the report, co-chair Thomas
Stocker called climate change “the greatest challenge of our time," adding that “each of the last
three decades has been successively warmer than the past,” and that this trend is likely to
continue into the foreseeable future.¶ Pledging further action to cut carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, U.S. Secretary of State John
Kerry said, "This isn’t a run of the mill report to be dumped in a filing cabinet. This isn’t a political document produced by
politicians... It’s science."¶ And that science needs to be communicated to the public, loudly and clearly. I canvassed leading climate
researchers for their take on the findings of the vastly influential IPCC report. What headline would they put on the news? What do they hope people
hear about this report?¶ When I asked him for his headline, Michael Mann, the Director of the Earth Systems Science
#debatelikeabear 55
Center at Penn State (a former IPCC author himself) suggested: "Jury In: Climate Change Real, Caused by
Us, and a Threat We Must Deal With."¶ Ted Scambos, a glaciologist and head scientist of the National Snow and Ice Data Center
(NSIDC) based in Boulder would lead with: "IPCC 2013, Similar Forecasts, Better Certainty." While the report, which is issued every six to seven
years, offers no radically new or alarming news, Scambos told me, it puts an exclamation point on what we already know,
and refines our evolving understanding of global warming. ¶ The IPCC, the indisputable rock star of UN
documents, serves as the basis for global climate negotiations, like the ones that took place in Kyoto, Rio, and, more recently, Copenhagen. (The next
big international climate meeting is scheduled for 2015 in Paris.) It is also arguably the
most elaborately vetted and
exhaustively researched scientific paper in existence. Founded in 1988 by the United Nations and the World
Meteorological Organization, the IPCC represents the distilled wisdom of over 600 climate researchers in 32
countries on changes in the Earth’s atmosphere, ice and seas. It endeavors to answer the late New York mayor Ed Koch’s famous question “How
am I doing?” for all of us. The answer, which won’t surprise anyone who has been following the climate change story, is not very well at all. ¶ It is
now 95 percent likely that human spewed heat-trapping gases — rather than natural variability
— are the main cause of climate change, according to today’s report. In 2007 the IPCC’s confidence level was 90 percent, and in
2001 it was 66 percent, and just over 50 percent in 1995. ¶ What’s more, things are getting worse more quickly than
almost anyone thought would happen a few years back.¶ “If you look at the early IPCC predictions back from 1990 and
what has taken place since, climate change is proceeding faster than we expected,” Mann told me by email. Mann helped develop the famous hockey-
stick graph, which Al Gore used in his film “An Inconvenient Truth” to dramatize the sharp rise in temperatures in recent times. ¶ Mann cites the
decline of Arctic sea ice to explain : “Given the current trajectory, we're on track for ice-free summer conditions in the Arctic in a matter of a decade or
two... There is a similar story with the continental ice sheets, which are losing ice — and contributing to sea level rise — at a faster rate than the [earlier
IPCC] models had predicted.”¶ But there is a lot that we still don’t understand. Reuters noted in a sneak preview of IPCC draft which was leaked in
August that, while the broad global trends are clear, climate scientists were “finding it harder than expected to predict the impact in specific regions in
coming decades.”¶ From year to year, the world’s hotspots are not consistent, but move erratically around the globe. The
same has been true of heat waves, mega-storms and catastrophic floods, like the recent ones that ravaged the Colorado Front Range. There is
broad agreement that climate change is increasing the severity of extreme weather events, but
we’re not yet able to predict where and when these will show up. ¶ “It is like watching a pot boil,” Danish astrophysicist and climate
scientist Peter Thejll told me. “We understand why it boils but cannot predict where the next bubble will be.” ¶ There is
also uncertainty about an apparent slowdown over the last decade in the rate of air temperature increase. While some critics claim
that global warming has “stalled,” others point out that, when rising ocean temperatures are factored in,
the Earth is actually gaining heat faster than previously anticipated.¶ “Temperatures measured
over the short term are just one parameter ,” said Dr Tim Barnett of the Scripps Institute of Oceanography in an interview. “ There are
far more critical things going on; the acidification of the ocean is happening a lot faster than
anybody thought that it would, it’s sucking up more CO2, plankton, the basic food chain of the
planet, are dying, it’s such a hugely important signal . Why aren’t people using that as a measure of what is going on?”¶
Barnett thinks that recent increases in volcanic activity , which spews smog-forming aerosols into the air that deflect solar radiation and
cool the atmosphere, might help account for the temporary slowing of global temperature rise. But he says we
shouldn’t let short term fluctuations cause us to lose sight of the big picture.¶ The dispute over temperatures underscores just how formidable the
IPCC’s task of modeling the complexity of climate change is. Issued in three parts (the next two installments are due out in the spring), the full version
of the IPCC will end up several times the length of Leo Tolstoy’s epic War and Peace. Yet every last word of the U.N. document needs to be signed off
on by all of the nations on earth. ¶ “I
do not know of any other area of any complexity and importance at all where there is
unanimous agreement... and the statements so strong,” Mike MacCracken, Chief Scientist for Climate Change Programs,
Climate Institute in Washington, D.C. told me in an email. “What IPCC has achieved is remarkable (and why it merited the Nobel Peace Prize granted in
2007).”¶ Not surprisingly, the IPCC’s conclusions tend to be “conservative by design,” Ken Caldeira, an atmospheric
scientist with the Carnegie Institution’s Department of Global Ecology told me: “The IPCC is not supposed to represent the
controversial forefront of climate science. It is supposed to represents what nearly all scientists
agree on, and it does that quite effectively.” ¶ Nevertheless, even these understated findings are inevitably controversial.
Roger Pielke Jr., the Director of the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado, Boulder suggested a headline that
focuses on the cat fight that today’s report is sure to revive: "Fresh Red Meat Offered Up in the Climate Debate, Activists and Skeptics Continue Fighting
Over It." Pielke should know. A critic of Al Gore, who has called his own detractors "climate McCarthyists," Pielke has been a lightning rod for the
political controversy which continues to swirl around the question of global warming, and what, if anything, we should do about it. ¶ The public’s
skepticism of climate change took a dive after Hurricane Sandy. Fifty-four percent of Americans are now saying that the effects of global warming have
#debatelikeabear 56
already begun. But 41 percent surveyed in the same Gallup poll believe news about global warming is generally exaggerated, and there is a smaller but
highly passionate minority that continues to believe the whole thing is a hoax. ¶ For most climate
experts, however, the battle is
long over — at least when it comes to the science . What remains in dispute is not whether climate change is happening,
but how fast things are going to get worse.¶ There are some possibilities that are deliberately left out of the IPCC projections, because we simply don’t
have enough data yet to model them. Jason Box, a visiting scholar at the Byrd Polar Research Center told me in an email interview that: “ The scary
elephant in the closet is terrestrial and oceanic methane release triggered by warming.” The IPCC projections don’t include
the possibility — some scientists say likelihood — that huge quantities of methane (a greenhouse gas thirty times as potent as CO2) will eventually be
released from thawing permafrost and undersea methane hydrate reserves. Box said that the threshhold “when humans lose
control of potential management of the problem, may be sooner than expected.” ¶ Box, whose work has
been instrumental in documenting the rapid deterioration of the Greenland ice sheet, also believes that the latest IPCC predictions (of a
maximum just under three foot ocean rise by the end of the century) may turn out to be wildly optimistic , if the Greenland ice
sheet breaks up. “We are heading into uncharted territory” he said. “We are creating a different climate
than the Earth has ever seen.” ¶ The head of the IPCC, Rajendra Pachauri, speaks for the scientific consensus when he says that
time is fast running out to avoid the catastrophic collapse of the natural systems on which
human life depends. What he recently told a group of climate scientist could be the most chilling headline of all for the U.N. report: ¶
"We have five minutes before midnight."
#debatelikeabear 57
Satellite monitoring key to coral reef & dead zones

C. Mark Eakin 2010 Ph.D. in Biological Oceanography from the University of Miami
http://www.marinespatialecologylab.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Eakin-et-al-2010.pdf
Monitoring coral reefs from Space, Oceanography | Vol.23, No.4130 p130
Although satellite remote sensing is already an essential tool for assisting global efforts to map
and monitor coral reefs, as described above, many opportunities and challenges remain. Will
future technological advances enable us to monitor the abundance and distribu- tion of coral
reef fish, near-real-time changes in benthic habitats, indices of coral reef biodiversity, or other
indicators of ecosystem health and ecological responses to climate change and ocean
acidification? Where else do we need to stretch the envelope of remote-sensing capabilities to
best address these challenges? Resource managers are asking when scientists will provide tools
to alert them when changes occur in the cover of seagrass on the ocean bottom. They would like
to see hypoxic or “black water” events that kill fish. These managers would also like to know
when changes in water quality cause harmful algal blooms or the spread of bacterial mats across
the seafloor. They would like to know when diseases are spreading through ecosystems. Some
of these capabilities are likely to be available over time scales of a few years while others will
likely take decades and require significant advances in the development of new sensors and
algorithms. Some of these needs will be answered by advancing the use of remotely sensed and
in situ data to initiate and support numerical models. These models estimate environmental
parameters (as was done for ocean acidification) or impacts, such as changes in community
composition. In many cases, these models inte- grate multiple data sets to provide new
estimates of unmeasured parameters. These estimates may serve as solutions to scientific
questions that inform management needs or may be a bridge until new sensors are available.
The development and launch of new satellite sensors is a slow process, and agencies involved
need to better incorporate the needs of resource managers into their instrument and satellite
development processes. At the same time, we need to identify key parameters that must be
collected with high quality and continuously to understand long-term changes to coral reefs
and the water quality and oceanographic conditions influencing them. Coral reefs are important
and valuable ecosystems. Satellite technologies have become essential tools for monitoring
coral reef health and the increasing threats coral reefs face around the globe. We need to
continue to advance the tools available and the science behind them in order to make these
tools as useful as possible. As the anthropogenic threats to coral reefs continue to mount, we
need to continue our diligent use of all tools at our disposal to keep these valuable resources
healthy.
#debatelikeabear 58
Coral reef collapse and dead zones cause extinction

Sean R. Tracy, Nov. 13 2013, an environmental educator and a PhD student in George
Mason University’s School of Environmental Science and Public Policy, The State of the Oceans
2013: Acidification, Overfishing Major Threats to Ecosystem Health,
http://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/the-state-the-oceans-2013-acidification-overfishing-major-
threats-to-ecosystem-health
Karen Sack complimented these efforts, saying we are in a race to safeguard the ocean and need
to continue to look for ways to mitigate immediate stressors to ocean ecology. She pointed to
not only increased acidity and temperature, but also decreased O2, more particulate plastics,
and the spread of so-called “dead zones,” areas where hazardous pollutants have been carried
downstream killing off or damaging aquatic communities in the process. Acidification, warming,
and deoxygenation all yield cascading consequences, such as inhibited productivity, altered food
chains, changes in nutrient supply, and secondary and tertiary changes to ocean chemistry .
These consequences will, in turn, be passed on to the billions of people that rely on the sea for
their food and livelihoods. Despite the overwhelming focus on changing ocean chemistry, the
number one issue impacting the health of the oceans is still overfishing, said Sack. There are
currently 1.3 million commercial fishing vessels worldwide that annually remove 87 million tons
of fish and invertebrates essential to functioning ecosystems, she continued; illegal and
unreported fishing may make up as much as 20 percent of that catch, with some vessels going as
far as to change names and home flags to hunt under different names. At current rates of take,
some predict the global commercial fishing industry could collapse by 2050 – a threat not only
to biodiversity but global food security. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
(UNCLOS) was adopted by most developed nations and can provide a framework for addressing
fishing quotas, but has not been accepted by all (including the United States), and enforcement
remains a major challenge, regardless.
#debatelikeabear 59
Space Mil Adv – Impact Framing

Probability of space war high because of the US’s unique dependence on space
assets compared to China
Omar Lamrani 2016. Senior Military Analyst, Stratfor. “Avoiding a War in Space” Stratfor
Geopolitical Weekly. May 17, 2016. <https://www.stratfor.com/weekly/avoiding-war-space>
accessed May 25, 2016.
The great advantages that space assets afford the United States have not gone unnoticed by its
potential rivals. Though China and Russia, for instance, also rely on space, they are less
dependent on their space assets than the United States is. First, neither nation has as much in
orbit. In addition, because both put greater focus on their immediate geographic regions, they
can use more conventional tools to achieve their objectives. For instance, Beijing, by virtue of
geographic proximity, could rely on its ground-based radars and sensors in a conflict in the
Taiwan Strait. The United States, on the other hand, would have to lean on its satellites to
support a response in the same area. Despite the United States' superior ability to strike at
enemy space constellations — groups of similar kinds of satellites — competitors may
determine that the resulting loss of space access would be worthwhile if they could severely
degrade U.S. space access. And while the United States is the most proficient nation in space-
based warfare, there are limits to its abilities. Satellites in orbit follow predictable movements,
have restricted maneuverability and are difficult to defend from an attack. There is little doubt
that a full kinetic strike on U.S. satellites, which would inflict physical damage, would invite a
devastating response. But tactics designed to degrade the satellites' abilities, rather than to
destroy their hardware, could be deemed less escalatory and therefore perhaps worth the risk.
These include jamming signals, hacking operational software and dazzling (temporarily blinding)
or permanently disabling sensors. Calculating the risk of nonkinetic strikes, which would create
little physical damage and could even be reversed, a potential foe would take into account the
United States' hesitance to escalate a conflict in space, given its heavy dependence on orbital
technology.
#debatelikeabear 60
Space Mil Adv – A2: Privatization CP/DA

Space militarization will end the commercial development of space
Cooperation in Space. 2014 Columbia University Press. p177-178. accessed June 12, 2016.
At present, no treaty forbids these technologies, and there are strong military-industrial lobbies
in a number of countries supporting space-based weapons, despite their possibly disruptive
effects on space commerce, science, and passive military operations in the same regions of
space. In all likelihood, the growing population in the lower reaches of space will force some sort
of decision regarding priorities: either to allow countries to test and deploy large-scale orbital
defenses or to strictly limit destructive weapons and emphasize commercial development of
low-Earth orbit, including expanded human spaceflight. Active defenses and commerce
probably will not be compatible in crowded orbits because of the linkage between space
weapons and harmful debris, particularly since such military tests and related on- orbit
deployments—once begun by one country for missile defense, ASAT, or space-to-ground attack
options—are likely to be met with countermeasures by other militaries. Under such conditions,
the development of commercial human spaceflight in low-Earth orbit will become too unsafe to
continue.
#debatelikeabear 61
Leadership Advantage – Solvency Extension

Bringing China into the ISS is key to preserve US leadership in space
Phil McKenna and Leroy Chiao 2013. Phil McKenna, Writer, New Scientist interviewing
Chinese-American Astronaut Leroy Chiao. “Embrace the Dragon” New Scientist Volume 220
Issue 2946 December 7, 2013. p.29 Accessed June 6, 2016.
What does the US have to gain - or lose - by cooperating with China on crewed missions? We
have everything to gain if we cooperate and everything to lose if we don't. Right now we can't
launch our own astronauts into space. We have experience and know-how, but we don't have
the budget. To stay in a leadership position, we should bring China into the ISS programme and
the Orion programme to go beyond low Earth orbit while we develop commercial launch
capability. China plans to open its space station in 2020 - the same year funding for the ISS is
due to end. What does this mean for the ISS? A year ago I would have said the ISS would safely
operate until 2028, but it is hard to say what will happen in this budget environment. The US is
likely to continue funding the ISS, but we have to get partners to do so. Talking informally with
people at the International Astronautical Congress in Beijing recently, many said their countries
are by no means guaranteeing they will commit to continue funding the ISS. Might they commit
to funding China's space station instead? That is the fear. And, who knows, maybe it would be
less costly to work with China.
#debatelikeabear 62
Leadership Advantage
Co-op in space is inevitable, but the question is whether the US will be the
leader
Beyond the Moon, NASA has a number of missions—many of them cooperative—already in

space for study of the Sun (Rosetta, with ESA), Mars (Curiosity rover, Mars Science Lab with ESA
and Russia, and Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution Mission), Jupiter (Juno), Saturn
(Cassini, with seventeen countries), Pluto (New Horizons) and two asteroids (Dawn). A major
forthcoming initiative is the U.S.-led James Webb Telescope, a joint effort among NASA, ESA,
and the Canadian Space Agency. This cryogenically cooled telescope will have seven times the
light-gathering capacity of the Hubble Space Telescope.17 It will be placed at a gravitationally
stable position behind Earth in relation to the Sun in order to shelter it from sunlight and
improve its view on the rest of the universe. NASA also has many ongoing and planned missions
conducting remote-sensing of Earth with various types of instruments for monitoring the
atmosphere, climate, and a vast array of agricultural, aquatic, and geophysical features. In long-
term international engagements, the Obama administration’s 2010 National Space Policy
extended the U.S. presence on the ISS through at least 2020 and pledged to carry out an
eventual human mission to Mars. The policy also called upon the U.S. government to: identify
potential areas for international cooperation that may include, but are not limited to: space
science; space exploration, including human space flight activities; . . . Earth science and
observation; environmental monitoring; satellite communications; . . . disaster mitigation and
relief; search and rescue; use of space for maritime domain awareness; and long-term
preservation of the space environment for human activity and use.18 All evidence, therefore,
points to greater civil space cooperation, particularly as the technical contributions of
international partners continue to grow. But questions still remain about whether or not NASA
—given its declining budget—will be the leader.
US space leadership has been in decline since the end of the constellation
program
As the world’s leading space agency, NASA is important not only for what it does in space but for
how its programs influence others. It is involved in a large variety of cooperative initiatives. But
the Obama administration’s decision to abandon the costly Constellation program that
envisioned an international human return to the Moon and NASA’s declining budget have
created uncertainties concerning future U.S. leadership. Still, NASA has a long legacy of
successful space science missions and remains the most desired partner for many nations.
#debatelikeabear 63
#debatelikeabear 64
China is quickly rising to become a major leader in space science missions

Looking ahead, China shows no signs of slowing down, and indeed is increasing its infrastructure
for expanded human spaceflight and deep-space missions. It will soon open a new launch facility
on Hainan Island that will allow it to lift heavier payloads into orbit (although not yet equal to
the U.S. space shuttle or Saturn V), as well as to access more favorable orbital inclinations closer
to the equator. China’s Long March 5 booster, expected in 2015, will be able to lift 25 metric
tons into low-Earth orbit and 14 tons into geostationary orbit, while also possibly servicing deep-
space missions. In addition, communications matter also. For this purpose, China is building two
larger-diameter deep-space antennae, reportedly for future missions to Jupiter and the Sun.
With its robust and growing infrastructure for space, China is well positioned to expand both its
human spaceflight program and its space scientific and exploratory missions. As long as its
economy continues to grow, analysts expect to see these components—which have brought
China’s government considerable domestic and international respect—develop accordingly,
despite possible political obstacles and the challenges of U.S. reforming its state-controlled
industries.38 At some point in the not-too-distant future, China will likely join the ranks of the
leading spacefaring countries in not just copying previous feats by others but also leading major,
first-of-their-kind international scientific missions.
#debatelikeabear 65
Leadership Advantage – ISS Key to Soft Power

The ISS is key for projections of US soft power
Taylor Dinerman Author and journalist for The Space Review. “NASA and soft power, again”
June 15, 2009. < http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1396/1> accessed June 25, 2016.
Beyond this, soft power is often seen as a tool or instrument of foreign policy. Thinking of it this
way seriously handicaps any policymaker who wants to use it as a part of American strategy.
This simply will not work. One might as well try and tie up a package with silly string rather than
twine. Yet soft power can be created by involving other nations in challenging, difficult, and
rewarding programs like the International Space Station. Both Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton
saw in the ISS a useful too for sustaining and cementing important relationships. The US-Japan
alliance has been strengthened and improved thanks to the ISS. More importantly, the space
station program has kept lines of communications open between Washington and Moscow that
would otherwise not exist. Even in times of tension the US and Russia maintain a 24/7 combined
operational system of coordination that would be unthinkable in any other context. The ISS is
not a tool of US influence on Russia, but without it there would be less trust and understanding
on both sides. The other ISS partners have their own roles, but the US-Russia nexus is the
backbone of the project.
#debatelikeabear 66
Chinese Space Program Increases International Cooperation

Doug Messier, 5-10-2016, "Chinese Space Program Increases International Cooperation at Parabolic Arc,"
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2016/05/10/chinese-space-program-increases-international-cooperation/
China’s growing space program is deepening its cooperation with Russia and Europe while
partnerships with the United States remain severely limited due to Congressional restrictions. “It is
well understood that the United States is a global leader in space technology . But China is no less
ambitious in contributing to human development,” said Zhou Jianping, chief engineer of China’s human space
program. “Cooperation between major space players will be conducive to the development of
all mankind.” China’s Russia Connection Russia and China are pursuing a broad range of cooperative
programs. “Russia and China have good interaction mechanisms. We have a plan of cooperation in several dozens of projects that are successfully
implemented,” said Xu Dazhe, China’s Deputy Industry and Information Technology Minister. The two sides are cooperating “in the fields of engine technology,
Russia is trading its
electronics, joint research of the Universe, development of new technologies and optimized use of space resources,” he added.
expertise in liquid fuel engine technologies for Chinese expertise in radiation-resistant

electronic for use in satellites. The exchange will help China improve its launch vehicles while
Russia can evade Western sanctions imposed over its military intervention in Ukraine . As a sign of
the deepening cooperation, Roscosmos CEO Igor Komarov took part in China’s National Space Day on April 24 to commemorate the 46th anniversary of the
Meanwhile, ESA has been expanding its cooperation
launch of the first Chinese satellite. European Cooperation Expands
with China, with it has named one of its three strategic partners along with the United States and Russia. Last month, ESA Director General
Johann-Dietrich Woerner completed a visit to China where he met with top space officials. “Let’s open space. Space is
beyond all borders so let’s also have the cooperation beyond borders,” Woerner said during his visit.
“When you ask astronauts, and I’m sure also the Chinese astronauts will tell you the same: they cannot see any
border from space. So this is a very nice vision. We should use this and cooperate worldwide on different
schemes, and I think Moon Village has its value for that.” Woerner’s Moon Village plan involves selecting a location on the lunar surface where different
countries could place habitats and other elements for human exploration. The village would not be a single, integrated program like the International Space Station.
The Moon Village remains a concept that lacks any formal approval by ESA, NASA or any other space agency. For now, ESA and China are working together on a
space-weather observatory. A European experiment flew aboard the Shijan-10 experimental capsule, which flew in orbit for 12 days last month before parachuting
back to Earth. ESA has also sent personnel to visit Chinese human spaceflight training facilities. Several European astronauts have been learning Chinese as part
of a joint cooperation program. The long-term goal is for a European astronaut to fly aboard a Shenzhou spacecraft to a Chinese space station. China plans to
launch the core module of a permanent multi-module space station around 2018, with completion set for 2022. Chinese officials are looking to use the space
U.S. Cooperation Remains Difficult Chinese officials say

station to fly astronauts and experiments from multiple countries.
they would like to cooperate with United States in space. “China will not rule out cooperating
with any country, and that includes the United States,” said Yang Liwei, China’s first
astronaut.”The future of space exploration lies in international cooperation. It’s true for us, and for the United States, too.” Cooperation is
strictly limited, however. Under U.S. law prohibits NASA and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy
(OSTP) from spending any money on cooperating with China in space. The prohibiion does not apply to the State
Department. American and Chinese diplomats held discussions on civil space cooperation during the
seventh round of the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue last June. The three-day meeting led to the establishment
of a plan to hold regular talks on civil space cooperation in areas such as satellite-collision
avoidance, weather monitoring and climate research. Meanwhile, some cooperation is taking place. A commercial Chinese
experiment will be flown to the International Space Station later this year under a private agreement between NanoRacks and the Beijing Institute of Technology.
The experiment will test the effect of the space environment on DNA. An earlier experiment flew to China’s Tiangong-1 space station in 2011.
#debatelikeabear 67
Leadership Advantage – He3 key to Solve Climate Change

Current Energy Sources trigger global warming – He3 is sufficient to keep us
under the 550 ppm threshold for catastrophe
Christopher Barnatt 2012, Assoc. Prof. of Strategy and Future Studies in
Nottingham U. Business School. http://www.explainingthefuture.com/cjb.html ¶ Helium-3
Power Generation [ BrianTomerlin/MoState]
Most greenhouse gas emissions result from burning fossil fuels, making cement, clearing land,
and agricultural production. Most people understand that burning coil, oil, natural gas or wood
releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and if we want to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
that we need to consume less of these fuels. However, what is less well advertised is the impact
of deforrestation on greenhouse gas emissions. ¶ When trees are felled, and when land is burnt to
be cleared for agricultural purposes, the carbon dioxide held by the vegetation and peatland is
released into the atmosphere. Indeed, according to the Global Canopy Programme, deforestation
is currently responsible for around twenty-five per cent of all carbon dioxide emissions. One way
to control climate change would therefore be to put in place incentives for people to cut down
fewer trees and destroy less rain forest every year. ¶ Some level of continuing climate change is
now inevitable. As China, India and other rising economics rapidly industrialize, a level of
climate change with very siginifcant implications is also quite likely unless pretty drastic global
action is taken. For example, the Stern Review conducted for the United Kingdom Government in
2006 suggested that power generation will have to be decarbonized by between sixty and
seventy-five per cent by 2050 to stabilize greenhouse gas levels at or below 550ppm and so
prevent very serious levels of global warming. ¶ The most obvious way to prevent too great a
level of future climate change is to burn fewer fossil fuels, or at least to capture and store the
carbon dioxide released when such fuels are burnt. This could involve the exploitation of
alternative energy sources (including lunar helium-3, not to mention solar energy and wind and
wave power). However, rather than focusing on finding new ways to power our machines,
another alternative would be for most people to adopt more local living and to consume less
energy in the first place. As already noted, greenhouse gas levels could also be lessened by
reducing deforrestation. They would also be reduced if we built with less cement and ate less
meat (as all livestock emit the greenhouse gas methane from their digestive systems).
#debatelikeabear 68
Leadership Advantage – He3 Fusion Feasible

Fusion energy is possible and cost-competitive
Hartwig 12 – Zach, Ph.D. Candidate in Plasma Physics and Fusion Energy – MIT, BS in Physics –
Boston University,“Fusion Energy is a Critical Component of a Balanced Energy Research
Portfolio”, The Tech – Newspaper of MIT, 3-9, http://tech.mit.edu/V132/PDF/N10.pdf
Second, numerous peer-reviewed studies of fusion energy costs have been published, with
most studies finding a cost of electricity between 5 and 12 cents per kilowatt- hour (e.g. F. Najmabadi et
al. Fusion Engineering and Design, 80:3-23, 2006.; T. Hamacher and A. M. Bradshaw. “Fusion as a future power source.” “Proceedings of the 18th World
Energy Congress”, 2001.) highly competitive with present forms of electricity and grossly
at odds with Yost’s unsubstantiated
claim that fusion will never be economical. Furthermore, under the four factors that Yost himself believes will make nuclear
fission cost competitive at 8.4 cents per kilowatt-hour (reduced capital costs, reduced borrowing costs, a carbon tax, increased natural gas prices) ,
fusion energy would flourish, without even considering its advantages in nonproliferation and minimizing radioactive waste (K. Yost. “Did Fukushima kill
the nuclear renaissance? No, that renaissance died right here at home.” The Tech, Volume 131, Issue 50, 2011.). Historically,
tremendous
advances in fusion research have steadily reduced the size of fusion reactor designs (decreasing
capital and borrowing costs) while increasing fusion power density and thermal efficiency
(increasing revenue for fixed costs). Present research, such as high power density in steady-state scenarios being carried out at
MIT’s endangered Alcator C-Mod tokamak, is poised to achieve further crucial breakthroughs.
Fusion has been proven possible, research and development makes it

commercially viable
Bednyagin 10 (Dr. Dennis, Ph.D. and Research Assistant – Laboratory of Energy Systems,
“Socio-Economic Assessment of Fusion Energy Research, Development, Demonstration and
Deployment Programme”, http://biblion.epfl.ch/EPFL/theses/2010/4732/EPFL_TH4732.pdf)
Looking at the second half of the century we have to admit that controlled thermonuclear
Fusion is probably the most prominent technology that satisfies the criteria of a sustainable
energy supply option. The potential merits of Fusion are widely acknowledged in scientific
literature and policy reports (see e.g. IEA, 2003; Ongena & Van Oost, 2006). The typically cited
advantages include: worldwide availability of practically inexhaustible and cheap fuel
(deuterium and lithium), inherent safety, modest amount of relatively short-lived radioactive
wastes, absence of CO2 emissions or other atmospheric pollutants. The feasibility of this
technology has been successfully demonstrated in recent years with Joint European Torus (JET)
reactor producing 16 MW of Fusion power. In the meantime, several important scientific and
technological issues remain to be solved to make Fusion work reliably on the scale of a power
plant, including sustaining a large volume of hot plasma for long periods of time at pressures
that allow a large net energy gain from Fusion reaction (EC, 2007a). Such Fusion power plant
needs very special materials designed into complex components capable of resisting the
extreme conditions required for continuous high power outputs.
The ongoing international Fusion R&D programme is addressing these challenges, and the recent Fusion power plant conceptual studies, including full
lifetime and decommissioning costs, suggest that if the technological criteria are met, Fusion can be economically competitive with other low-carbon
electricity supply options (see Maisonnier et al., 2005). The agreement to build ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor), which should
demonstrate the feasibility of magnetic confinement Fusion on the scale of the power plant, could be considered as a major step forward to mastering
Fusion technology. The goal beyond ITER is to demonstrate the production of electricity in a demonstrator Fusion power plant (DEMO), which is
expected to be constructed by 2030-2035 and for which the conceptual design activities are already under way. Accordingly, the full-scale
deployment of commercial Fusion power plants could start by 2050 or even earlier if a more
ambitious Fusion R&D programme is undertaken.
#debatelikeabear 69
Leadership Advantage – Now key for Fusion

Now is the key time to develop fusion energy so it’s ready when needed
McCracken 12 (Garry, Ph.D. in Solid State Physics and Lecturer – Culham Plasma Physics
Summer School, and Peter Stott, European Coordinator – ITER and Ph.D. in Theoretical and
Experimental Plasma Physics – Manchester University, Fusion: The Energy of the Universe, p.
202)
When the different issues of fuel resources, costs, and damage to the environment are looked at
in perspective, it is clear we do not have very many options to supply future energy
requirements. Sometime in the future we will have to stop using fossil fuels, either when the
reserves run out or when governments agree that these fuels are too damaging to the
environment. Renewable energy sources like wind and solar energy will play an increasingly
important role, but they cannot satisfy all requirements, and big cities and centers of industry
will need sources of centralized energy. An independent evaluation in 1996 by the European
Commission concluded that, on the basis of the progress achieved so far, the objective of a
commercial fusion power plant appears to be “a demanding but reasonably achievable goal.” It
will probably take at least 30 years to reach this stage. If fusion is to be ready when needed, it is
important that we do not delay too long before starting to build the prototype
#debatelikeabear 70
Leadership Advantage – 2AC Colonization Internal Link

China will be key to funding a future mission to Mars; slowly integrating China
allows the US to influence China’s entrance into being a major space power
without compromising military or technological secrets
Aviation Week & Space Technology 2015. “Putting Space Above Politics” Editorial .
4/13/2015, Vol. 177 Issue 14, p1-1. Accessed June 10, 2016. Via Ebscohost.
Russia's revanchist annexation of Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula and its role in fomenting a
Ukrainian civil war are abhorrent. Nonetheless, it is encouraging that important work in civil
space has not become a casualty of the poisoned political climate. If NASA is to achieve its goal
of leading a costly human mission to Mars in the 2030s, it will require more cooperation with
the rest of the world, not less. Which brings us to China. China has arrived as an economic
powerhouse and spacefaring nation. Yet NASA is the only federal agency prohibited by the U.S.
Congress from undertaking any bilateral activities with the Chinese. As this magazine has
opined, the ban is shortsighted and should be lifted in a careful way that allows Beijing into the
club of top-tier spacefaring nations without compromising sensitive military technologies. China
is going to be a major player in space, with or without NASA. It is better for the U.S. to have
some influence on how it enters the club. Space is an arena in which we must look beyond near-
term political disputes and focus on the benefits that could be achieved over the long haul.
Washington and Moscow have done that, and space exploration and use are better for it. It is
time to bring Beijing in from the cold, too.
#debatelikeabear 71
Colonization Advantage
Adding China to the ISS is key to a future lunar mission
Despite the competitive motivations of many of the world’s leading civil space programs, it is
not a foregone conclusion that their respective activities will result in future conflicts. The
international scientific community cooperates more closely than ever before because of the
influence of the Internet and the relative ease of sharing data (and, indeed, the difficulty of
controlling it). There is also pressure on all space programs to participate in missions that are
going to succeed, which provides incentives to share both costs and technology, at least in terms
of putting experiments and equipment on shared “buses.” For the country building the main
spacecraft, there is an incentive to reduce construction and launch costs by reaching out to
others. The ISS is a good example. The spacecraft has cost much more than anyone anticipated,
approximately $150 billion in total contributions pledged up to 2015 for what was once
estimated to be a $30 billion project.46 The initiator of the project, the United States, has
shouldered about $126 billion (or 84 percent) of the total expense, although it has received
valuable technology for the station from its partners. Of course, operating the station after 2015
will cost money too. For this reason, a number of ISS partner nations are considering opening
the station to new members. In December 2011, ESA’s director of human spaceflight and
operations proposed that China become a partner in the ISS, saying that Chinese participation
“offers great potential.”47 The United States has mentioned India as a possible member as well.
But adjusting the existing membership structure and access agreements would be complicated.
Still, with adequate political will, such an expansion of the station’s membership is conceivable
and might promote future lunar cooperation as well.
Collaboration in space is critical to future exploration missions, US action is

necessary
Charlie Gillis. Writer, MacLean’s Magazine. “UP THERE, PEACE. DOWN HERE? MEH.” Maclean’s
Magazine September 7, 2015. p.62-65. Accessed June 6, 2016
What’s more, ambitious new exploration missions involve myriad elements requiring
development and construction, from rocketry to communication to add-on components, which
make them suitable for global partnerships. For that reason, Logsdon believes collaboration will
make sense for the foreseeable future, even if it involves asymmetrical alliances—that is, a
limited sharing of technology and equipment between rival countries such as the U.S. and
Russia, rather than fully merged operations. Maintaining such co-operation may help to head off
the militarization of space, he notes, because the basis of any such partnership would be an all-
party commitment to use space only for civil purposes. A partial map for such a way forward is
already being drawn. In 2007, 14 national space agencies hammered out a vision for peaceful
robotic and human space ventures, resulting in the creation of the International Space
Exploration Coordination Group. It’s a mechanism through which member countries can share
their goals, interests and plans for exploration, reducing duplication and strengthening each
#debatelikeabear 72
other’s projects. Its starting point is peace, civility and collaboration, and its work has been
limited only by the absence of a long-term program of exploration on the part of the U.S.
#debatelikeabear 73
Colonization Advantage: Its cheap

Lunar colonization cheaping and coming soon.
Howell, Journalist on Space exploration, 2015
Elizabeth Howell, Space, 7-27-2015, "Moon Base Would Be Cheap with Help from Private
Industry: Report," Space, http://www.space.com/30008-moon-colony-cost-commercial-space-
report.html, DA 6/30/2016
The dream of sending humans back to the moon could become a reality for the relatively low price of $10
billion — only about 10 percent of one previous cost estimate — as long as NASA is willing to buy from
private spaceflight companies, a new report shows. In 2005, NASA estimated that returning humans to the moon would cost $100 billion
(approximately $122 billion in today's dollars). But if the success of private spaceflight companies like SpaceX and
Orbital Sciences continues, NASA could send humans back to the lunar surface in as little as five to
seven years, at a highly reduced cost, the new report shows. That's not all: 10 to 12 years after that first commercial moon
trip, NASA could develop a permanent base on the moon for about $40 billion in today's
dollars, the report said. The proposed permanent moon base would be used to convert lunar ice into hydrogen propellant that could be sold for use by other spacecraft,
including missions headed to Mars. Launch costs included in the report were based on prices quoted for SpaceX's Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy rockets. (Only the former is
currently operational.) The command/service module for astronauts was based on the human-rated Dragon spacecraft that SpaceX is developing for International Space Station
missions.
#debatelikeabear 74
Colonization Advantage – A2: No procreation
The 2Suit enables procreation in space- overcomes Newton’s laws, used for
heat
Giorgia Scaturro, journalist at Wired, 4/30/2009 [ A two-seater suit for space-lovers”, April 20th, 2009,
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2009-04/30/a-two-seater-suit-for-space-lovers.aspx]
The third law of motion may not be the most romantic starting point for sex in space. It is,
however, crucial. The law states that "every action has an equal and opposite reaction, " and on
Earth that's fine. Two people moving away from each other can rely on gravity to stop them
flying across the room, but in a weightless environment that would be a problem. As a way to
overcome it, Vanna Bonta – writer, actress, sci-fi poetess and space enthusiast – developed
2suit, a two-seater space suit that will zip two astronaut lovers inside. Vanna came up with the
idea in 2006, on a zero-gravity flight arranged by the National Space Society, but didn't test the
suit until September 13, 2008. Its inaugural outing was on board the G-Force One, the so-called
Vomit Comet that simulates zero-gravity by swooping up and down through the atmosphere.
During trials, the History Channel filmed the first weightless kiss for its documentary. Vanna
spoke of the suit, rather disconcertingly, in both romantic and practical terms. “The feeling of no
attraction between two masses impressed me," she said. "Once you attached the suit two
people can be inside of it, like a large bag, and have some privacy. Also it can be useful in
emergency situations as it can store body heat. “At first we found it impossible to kiss, but the
2suit stabilised us,” she added. “In two years’ time people could go on their honeymoon in
space, but this needs to be done responsibly as there is an issue of pregnancy.”
Reproduction on mars will be possible
Joseph ’10 Rhawn Joseph, Ph.D.
Journal of Cosmology, 2010, Vol 12, 4034-4050.; “Sex On Mars: Pregnancy, Fetal Development, and Sex In
Outer Space” October-November 2010; http://journalofcosmology.com/Mars144.html [Schaaf]
Ultimately, successful reproduction is the production of viable progeny after the female becomes
impregnated. It has been demonstrated that rats can successfully mate in hypogravity, although no
viable progeny were produced (Serova and Denisova 1982). However, space-faring mammals can
become pregnant after they return to Earth. Several studies have reported no detrimental effects
of short-duration space flight on pregnancy, reproductive hormones, fetal development, parturition,
or lactation in female rats after they return to Earth (reviewed by Tao, et al., 2002). This suggests that
once on Mars, males and females may be able to successfully have children. However, the same is
not true of pregnancy in space (Jennings and Baker 2008).
#debatelikeabear 75
Colonization Advantage – A2: Radiation
Radiation doesn’t pose significant risks to Mars cosmonauts, shelter sufficient

Zubrin ’10 Robert Zubrin: masters degree in Aeronautics and Astronautics, a masters degree in Nuclear
Engineering, and a Ph.D. in Nuclear Engineering (University of Washington)
Journal of Cosmology, 2010, Vol 12, 3549-3557. “Human Mars Exploration: The Time Is Now” October-
November, 2010; http://journalofcosmology.com/Mars111.html [Schaaf]
It is alleged by some that the radiation doses involved in a Mars mission present insuperable
risks, or are not well understood. This is untrue. Solar flare radiation, consisting of protons with
energies of about 1 MeV, can be shielded by 12 cm of water or provisions, and there will be
enough of such materials on board the ship to build an adequate pantry storm shelter for use in
such an event. The residual cosmic ray dose, about 50 Rem for the 2.5 year mission, represents a
statistical cancer risk of about 1%, roughly the same as that which would be induced by an average
smoking habit over the same period.
Effects of radiation on the moon can be prevented by using shields and
different structures
Benaroya, Haym (Ph.D., Structures, Mechanics, Probabilistic Methods, University of Pennsylvania) ’10
Taylor and Francis Group publications “Lunar Settlements”
Because structures in Phase 1 will not be designed to shelter humans, biological radiation effects are not a
concern; however, radiation also has a negative impact on equipment. The state of electronic equipment
can be altered by an ion-induced charge from radiation particles, and radiation can create extra noise for
sensors; it also breaks down materials and reduces power output from solar panels (Parnell et al., 1998).
For some of these problems, radiation shielding can be used, and the vulnerable parts can be
sheltered by the structure or by regolith, which would reduce the effects of the radiation, as is
suggested for the Lunar Liquid Mirror Telescope (Angel, 2005). Most shielding in this phase will be part
of the structure, and included in the construction on Earth, rather than added during set up or
deployment. Few structures are likely be buried or covered in regolith. Other approaches, where
shielding is not possible, include redundant circuits for electronics and larger than required solar
panels (Parnell et al., 1998). Structures in this phase must use materials that are relatively resistant to
radiation, or radiation-hardened materials (Parnell et al., 1998).
Research solves health risks
White and Averner ’01 Ronald J. White: National Space Biomedical Research Institute and Baylor
College of Medicine, Houston, Texas; Maurice Averner: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field,
California
Nature “Humans in Space” February 22, 2001; http://www.medicine.mcgill.ca/mnmsmi/White%20and
%20Averner%202001.pdf [Schaaf]
Voyages of exploration will subject space travellers to three serious and related challenges: (1)
changes in the physical forces on and within the body brought about by a reduction in weight of the
body’s components; (2) psychosocial changes induced by the long-term confinement of such a
voyage without the possibility of escape; and (3) changes in the levels and types of radiation in the
environment. These changes, which act simultaneously, precipitate a cascade of time related events in
the human body about which we have been learning slowly for the past 40 years 4 . The integrated and
unmitigated responses of the body to these challenges present real risks to the health of the humans
undertaking such missions and to the satisfactory completion of the missions themselves. Some of the
risks pose a greater threat than others do, and the level of understanding of the physiological responses to
space flight varies depending on the body system in question. Fortunately, it seems that most of these
risks may be reduced to an acceptable level through a vigorous research programme.
#debatelikeabear 76
Colonization Advantage – A2:No Gravity
New plans in place for developing artificial gravity.

Hsu 10 (Jeremy, Senior writer at Space.com,
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37120546/ns/technology_and_science-space/t/artificial-gravity-could-
solve-space-problems/) OP
New plans for artificial gravity tests in space using centrifuges may hold the key to helping
future astronauts ward off the debilitating loss of muscle and bone due to weightlessness on
long missions to asteroids or the moon under NASA's revised space exploration plan. The new
NASA budget proposed by President Barack Obama not only sets sights on long-duration
missions, but also extends the lifetime of the International Space Station. Upgrades for the space
station "could include a centrifuge to support research into human physiology," according to a
summary by the Office of Management and Budget. Space station residents currently rely upon
different exercises to keep themselves fit for the eventual return to Earth. But a spinning
centrifuge device could create artificial gravity, which simulates the gravitational tug that a
planet such as Earth has. The giant spinning device will give astronauts a healthy break from
the weightlessness of space.
#debatelikeabear 77
Colonization Advantage – A2: No Place to go
Mars has the ideal geological and elemental composition for colonization
David writer for space.com 05 (Leonard, Space.com, “Space Colonization: The Quiet Revolution”,
February 23 2005, http://www.space.com/813-space-colonization-quiet-revolution.html) [KEZIOS]
Why put Mars in the colonization crosshairs? "Mars is a planet that has many unusual and
spectacular features that will draw people to it," McCullough told the STAIF gathering. "Being a
planet rather than a moon, it has undergone many of the geological processes which have
caused the formation of minerals on Earth," he said. That being the case, Mars is a user-friendly
world, rife with many industrially useful minerals for construction and manufacturing
purposes. It has a suite of "ates", "ites" and "ides" of common metals with common non metals,
McCullough pointed out. The red planet is also wrapped in abundant carbon dioxide which will
be fairly easy to condense, he said. Water availability on Mars is another huge plus. There is
abundant evidence of past water activity on Mars. It should be present in permafrost at higher
latitudes on the planet. It may also be present in hydrated minerals, McCullough stated. "The
availability of water on Mars in significant quantities would once again simplify our projected
industrial activities. This makes extensive bases leading to colonies more likely," McCullough
concluded.
#debatelikeabear 78
Colonization Advantage – A2: Xeno Disease Turn

Mars viruses present no risk to Earth, the planets already receives Martian
meteorites and Martian viruses can’t adapt to Earth
Engineering, and a Ph.D. in Nuclear Engineering (University of Washington Journal of Cosmology, 2010, Vol
12, 3549-3557. “Human Mars Exploration: The Time Is Now” October-November, 2010;
http://journalofcosmology.com/Mars111.html [Schaaf]
Recently some people have raised the issue of possible back-contamination as a reason to
shun human (or robotic sample return) missions to Mars. Such fears have no basis in science.
The surface of Mars is too cold for liquid water, is exposed to near vacuum, ultra violet, and
cosmic radiation, and contains an antiseptic mixture of peroxides that have eliminated any trace
of organic material. It is thus as sterile an environment as one could ask for. Furthermore,
pathogens are specifically adapted to their hosts. Thus, while there may be life on Mars deep
underground, it is quite unlikely that these could be pathogenic to terrestrial plants or animals,
as there are no similar macrofauna or macroflora to support a pathogenic life cycle in Martian
subsurface groundwater. In any case, the Earth currently receives about 500 kg of Martian
meteoritic ejecta per year. The trauma that this material has gone through during its ejection
from Mars, interplanetary cruise, and re-entry at Earth is insufficient to have sterilized it, as has
been demonstrated experimentally and in space studies on the viability of microorganisms
following ejection and reentry (Burchell et al. 2004; Burchella et al. 2001; Horneck et al. 1994,
1995, 2001, Horneck et al. 1993; Mastrapaa et al. 2001; Nicholson et al. 2000). So if there is the
Red Death on Mars, we’ve already got it. Those concerned with public health would do much
better to address their attentions to Africa.
We can get to Mars within 8 years

Engineering, and a Ph.D. in Nuclear Engineering (University of Washington)
Science Direct; “The moon–mars initiative: Making the vision real” Available online May 4, 2009;
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016328709000706 [Schaaf]
Exploring Mars requires no miraculous new technologies, no orbiting spaceports, and no gigantic
interplanetary space cruisers We do not need to spend the next 30 years with a space program mired in
impotence, spending large sums of money and taking occasional casualties while the same missions to
nowhere are flown over and over again and professional technologists dawdle endlessly in their sand
boxes without producing any new flight hardware. We simply need to choose our destination, and
with the same combination of vision, practical thinking, and passionate resolve that served us so
well during Apollo, do what is required to get there. We can establish our first small outpost on
Mars within a decade. We and not some future generation can have the eternal honor of being the first
pioneers of this new world for humanity. All that's needed is present day technology, some 19th
century industrial chemistry, a solid dose of common sense, and a little bit of moxie.
#debatelikeabear 79
Colonization Advantage: Solves war

Space colonization is a peaceful alternative to expand humanity without war.
Al Globus, Employed at NASA Ames Research Center since 2006, on the board
of directors of the National Space Society, has had more than 60 publications
about space settlement and evolvable systems. June 1, 2016 "Space Colonization
Basics," NASA, http://settlement.arc.nasa.gov/Basics/wwwwh.html
Why build space settlements? Why do weeds grow through cracks in sidewalks? Why did life crawl out of the oceans and colonize land? Because
living things want to grow and expand. We have the ability to live in space (see the bibliography),
therefore we will -- but not this fiscal year. The key advantage of space settlements is the ability to build
new land, rather than take it from someone else. This allows a huge expansion of humanity
without war or destruction of Earth's biosphere. The asteroids alone provide enough material to make new orbital land
hundreds of times greater than the surface of the Earth, divided into millions of colonies. This land can easily support trillions of
people.
#debatelikeabear 80
Colonization Advantage: Space Solves Resources

The potential amount of resources found in asteroids would be monumentally
greater than the amount found on Earth
Dr. Benjamin Weiss, et al. (50 MIT freshmen), 2016, "Asteroid Mining,"
http://web.mit.edu/12.000/www/m2016/finalwebsite/solutions/asteroids.html
Asteroid composition varies widely, from volatile-rich bodies to metallic bodies with high
concentrations of rare metals such as gold, silver, and platinum in addition to more common elements such as
iron and nickel. Platinum-rich asteroids may contain grades of up to 100 grams per ton, 10-20 times
higher than open pit platinum mines in South Africa (Sonter, 2006). These ore grades mean that one
500-meter-wide platinum-rich asteroid could contain nearly 175 times the annual global
platinum output, or 1.5 times the known world reserves of platinum group metals ("Asteroid
composition", 2012).
Space Colonization Allows for Getting Resources

Gregg Maryniak, 1-2-1992, "How Space Colonies Could Benefit Earth ," http://www.csmonitor.com/1992/0102/02161.html Gregg
is executive vice president of Space Studies Institute at Princeton
The initial economic reason for the colonization of space would be to use the resources of space
to provide for the needs of our home planet. O'Neill proposed that the space colonists use low-
cost space resources to construct large solar platforms to collect the sun's energy and convert it
into electricity. This electrical power would be transmitted to Earth's surface in the form of a
high-frequency radio beam. The beam would be received by a special antenna and rectifier
array, which would convert it back into electricity with an efficiency of about 90 percent.
#debatelikeabear 81
Colonization Advantage: Solves Disease

Space exploration has contributed greatly ease of living and medical/safety
technology
NASA Spinoff, 2008, "NASA Technologies Benefit Our Lives," No Publication,
https://spinoff.nasa.gov/Spinoff2008/tech_benefits.html
Space exploration has created new markets and new technologies that have spurred our
economy and changed our lives in many ways. This year, NASA unveiled two new complementary interactive Web features,
NASA City and NASA @ Home, available at www.nasa.gov/city. The new features highlight how space pervades our lives, invisible yet critical to so many
aspects of our daily activities and well-being. Health and Medicine Light-Emitting
Diodes (LEDs) Light-emitting diodes Red light-
emitting diodes are growing plants in space and healing humans on Earth. The
LED technology used in NASA space shuttle
plant growth experiments has contributed to the development of medical devices such as
award-winning WARP 10, a hand-held, high-intensity, LED unit developed by Quantum Devices Inc. The WARP 10 is intended for the
temporary relief of minor muscle and joint pain, arthritis, stiffness, and muscle spasms, and also promotes muscle relaxation and increases local blood
circulation. The WARP 10 is being used by the U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. Navy as a noninvasive “soldier self-care” device that aids front-line
forces with first aid for minor injuries and pain, thereby improving endurance in combat .
The next-generation WARP 75 has
been used to relieve pain in bone marrow transplant patients, and will be used to combat the
symptoms of bone atrophy, multiple sclerosis, diabetic complications, Parkinson’s disease,
and in a variety of ocular applications. (Spinoff 2005, 2008) Infrared Ear Thermometers Infrared ear thermometers Diatek
Corporation and NASA developed an aural thermometer, which weighs only 8 ounces and uses infrared astronomy technology to measure the amount
of energy emitted by the eardrum, the same way the temperature of stars and planets is measured. This method avoids contact with mucous
membranes, virtually eliminating the possibility of cross infection, and permits rapid temperature measurement of newborn, critically-ill, or
incapacitated patients. NASA supported the Diatek Corporation, a world leader in electronic thermometry, through the Technology Affiliates Program.
(Spinoff 1991) Artificial Limbs Artificial limbs NASA’s continued funding, coupled with its collective innovations in robotics and shock-
absorption/comfort materials are inspiring and enabling the private sector to create new and better solutions for animal and human prostheses.
Advancements such as Environmental Robots Inc.’s development of artificial muscle systems with robotic sensing and actuation capabilities for use in
NASA space robotic and extravehicular activities are being adapted to create more functionally dynamic artificial limbs (Spinoff 2004). Additionally,
other private-sector adaptations of NASA’s temper foam technology have brought about custom-moldable materials offering the natural look and feel
of flesh, as well as preventing friction between the skin and the prosthesis, and heat/moisture buildup. (Spinoff 2005) Ventricular Assist
Device Ventricular assist device Collaboration between NASA, Dr. Michael DeBakey, Dr. George Noon, and MicroMed Technology Inc. resulted in a
lifesaving heart pump for patients awaiting heart transplants. The MicroMed DeBakey ventricular assist device (VAD) functions as a “bridge to heart
transplant” by pumping blood throughout the body to keep critically ill patients alive until a donor heart is available. Weighing less than 4 ounces and
measuring 1 by 3 inches, the pump is approximately one-tenth the size of other currently marketed pulsatile VADs. This makes it less invasive and ideal
for smaller adults and children. Because of the pump’s small size, less than 5 percent of the patients implanted developed device-related infections. It
can operate up to 8 hours on batteries, giving patients the mobility to do normal, everyday activities. (Spinoff 2002) Transportation Anti-Icing Systems
Airplane anti-icing systems NASA funding under the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program and work with NASA scientists
advanced the development of the certification and integration of a thermoelectric deicing system called Thermawing, a DC-powered air conditioner for
single-engine aircraft called Thermacool, and high-output alternators to run them both. Thermawing, a reliable anti-icing and deicing system, allows
pilots to safely fly through ice encounters and provides pilots of single-engine aircraft the heated wing technology usually reserved for larger, jet-
powered craft. Thermacool, an innovative electric air conditioning system, uses a new compressor whose rotary pump design runs off an energy-
efficient, brushless DC motor and allows pilots to use the air conditioner before the engine even starts. (Spinoff 2007) Highway Safety
Grooves in concrete Safety grooving, the cutting of grooves in concrete to increase traction and prevent injury, was first developed to reduce aircraft
accidents on wet runways. Represented by the International Grooving and Grinding Association, the industry expanded into highway and pedestrian
applications. The technique originated at Langley Research Center, which assisted in testing the grooving at airports and on highways. Skidding was
reduced, stopping distance decreased, and a vehicle’s cornering ability on curves was increased. The process has been extended to animal holding
pens, steps, parking lots, and other potentially slippery surfaces. (Spinoff 1985) Improved Radial Tires Radial tires Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company
developed a fibrous material, five times stronger than steel, for NASA to use in parachute shrouds to soft-land the Vikings on the Martian surface. The
fiber’s chain-like molecular structure gave it incredible strength in proportion to its weight. Recognizing the increased strength and durability of the
material, Goodyear expanded the technology and went on to produce a new radial tire with a tread life expected to be 10,000 miles greater than
conventional radials. (Spinoff 1976) Chemical Detection Chemical detection NASA contracted with Intelligent Optical Systems (IOS) to
develop moisture- and pH-sensitive sensors to warn of potentially dangerous corrosive conditions in aircraft before significant structural damage
occurs. This new type of sensor, using a specially manufactured optical fiber whose entire length is chemically sensitive, changes color in response to
contact with its target. After completing the work with NASA, IOS was tasked by the U.S. Department of Defense to further develop the sensors for
detecting chemical warfare agents and potential threats, such as toxic industrial compounds and nerve agents, for which they proved just as successful.
IOS has additionally sold the chemically sensitive fiber optic cables to major automotive and aerospace companies, who are finding a variety of uses for
the devices such as aiding experimentation with nontraditional power sources, and as an economical “alarm system” for detecting chemical release in
large facilities. (Spinoff 2007) Public Safety Video Enhancing and Analysis Systems Video enhancing and analysis systems Intergraph Government
#debatelikeabear 82
Solutions developed its Video Analyst System (VAS) by building on Video Image Stabilization and Registration (VISAR) technology created by NASA to
help FBI agents analyze video footage. Originally used for enhancing video images from nighttime videotapes made with hand-held camcorders, VAS is
a state-of-the-art, simple, effective, and affordable tool for video enhancement and analysis offering benefits such as support of full-resolution digital
video, stabilization, frame-by-frame analysis, conversion of analog video to digital storage formats, and increased visibility of filmed subjects without
altering underlying footage. Aside from law enforcement and security applications, VAS has also been adapted to serve the military for reconnaissance,
weapons deployment, damage assessment, training, and mission debriefing. (Spinoff 2001) Land Mine Removal Land mine removal device
Due to arrangements such as the one between Thiokol Propulsion and NASA that permits Thiokol to use NASA’s surplus rocket fuel to produce a flare
that can safely destroy land mines, NASA is able to reduce propellant waste without negatively impacting the environment, and Thiokol is able to access
the materials needed to develop the Demining Device flare. The Demining Device flare uses a battery-triggered electric match to ignite and neutralize
land mines in the field without detonation. The flare uses solid rocket fuel to burn a hole in the mine’s case and burn away the explosive contents so
the mine can be disarmed without hazard. (Spinoff 2000) Fire-Resistant Reinforcement Insulation over steel Built and designed by Avco Corporation,
the Apollo heat shield was coated with a material whose purpose was to burn and thus dissipate energy during reentry while charring, to form a
protective coating to block heat penetration. NASA subsequently funded Avco’s development of other applications of the heat shield, such as fire-
retardant paints and foams for aircraft, which led to the world’s first intumescent epoxy material, which expands in volume when exposed to heat or
flames, acting as an insulating barrier and dissipating heat through burn-off. Further innovations based on this product include steel coatings devised to
make high-rise buildings and public structures safer by swelling to provide a tough and stable insulating layer over the steel for up to 4 hours of fire
protection, ultimately to slow building collapse and provide more time for escape. (Spinoff 2006) Firefighter Gear Firefighter gear Firefighting
equipment widely used throughout the United States is based on a NASA development that coupled Agency design expertise with lightweight materials
developed for the U.S. Space Program. A project that linked NASA and the National Bureau of Standards resulted in a lightweight breathing system
including face mask, frame, harness, and air bottle, using an aluminum composite material developed by NASA for use on rocket casings. Aerospace
technology has been beneficially transferred to civil-use applications for years, but perhaps the broadest fire-related technology transfer is the
breathing apparatus worn by firefighters for protection from smoke inhalation injury. Additionally, radio communications are essential during a fire to
coordinate hose lines, rescue victims, and otherwise increase efficiency and safety. NASA’s inductorless electronic circuit technology contributed to the
development of a lower-cost, more rugged, short-range two-way radio now used by firefighters. NASA also helped develop a specialized mask weighing
less than 3 ounces to protect the physically impaired from injuries to the face and head, as well as flexible, heat-resistant materials—developed to
protect the space shuttle on reentry—which are being used both by the military and commercially in suits for municipal and aircraft-rescue firefighters.
(Spinoff 1976) Consumer, Home, and Recreation Temper Foam Temper foam As the result of a program designed to develop a padding concept to
improve crash protection for airplane passengers, Ames Research Center developed a foam material with unusual properties. The material is widely
used and commonly known as temper foam or “memory foam.” The material has been incorporated into a host of widely used and recognized products
including mattresses, pillows, military and civilian aircraft, automobiles and motorcycles, sports safety equipment, amusement park rides and arenas,
horseback saddles, archery targets, furniture, and human and animal prostheses. Its high-energy absorption and soft characteristics not only offer
superior protection in the event of an accident or impact, but enhanced comfort and support for passengers on long flights or those seeking restful
sleep. Today, temper foam is being employed by NASCAR to provide added safety in racecars. (Spinoff 1976, 1977, 1979, 1988, 1995, 2002, 2005)
Enriched Baby Food Baby bottle Commercially available infant formulas now contain a nutritional enrichment ingredient that traces
its existence to NASA-sponsored research that explored the potential of algae as a recycling agent for long-duration space travel. The substance,
formulated into the products life’sDHA and life’sARA, can be found in over 90 percent of the infant formulas sold in the United States, and are added to
the infant formulas sold in over 65 additional countries. The products were developed and are manufactured by Martek Biosciences Corporation, which
has pioneered the commercial development of products based on microalgae; the company’s founders and principal scientists acquired their expertise
in this area while working on the NASA program. (Spinoff 1996, 2008) Portable Cordless Vacuums Cordless vacuum Apollo and Gemini space mission
technologies created by Black & Decker have helped change the way we clean around the house. For the Apollo space mission, NASA required a
portable, self-contained drill capable of extracting core samples from below the lunar surface. Black & Decker was tasked with the job, and developed a
computer program to optimize the design of the drill’s motor and insure minimal power consumption. That computer program led to the development
of a cordless miniature vacuum cleaner called the Dustbuster. (Spinoff 1981) Freeze Drying Technology Freeze dried food container In planning for the
long-duration Apollo missions, NASA conducted extensive research into space food. One of the techniques developed was freeze drying—Action
Products commercialized this technique, concentrating on snack food. The foods are cooked, quickly frozen, and then slowly heated in a vacuum
chamber to remove the ice crystals formed by the freezing process. The final product retains 98 percent of its nutrition and weighs only 20 percent of
its original weight. Today, one of the benefits of this advancement in food preparation includes simple nutritious meals available to handicapped and
otherwise homebound senior adults unable to take advantage of existing meal programs sponsored by government and private organizations. (Spinoff
1976, 1994) Environmental and Agricultural Resources Harnessing Solar Energy Silicon solar power cells Homes across the country are
now being outfitted with modern, high-performance, low-cost, single crystal silicon solar power cells that allow them to reduce their traditional energy
expenditures and contribute to pollution reduction. The advanced technology behind these solar devices—which are competitively-priced and provide
up to 50 percent more power than conventional solar cells—originated with the efforts of a NASA-sponsored 28-member coalition of companies,
government groups, universities, and nonprofits forming the Environmental Research Aircraft and Sensor Technology (ERAST) Alliance. ERAST’s goal
was to foster the development of remotely piloted aircraft intended to fly unmanned at high altitudes for days at a time, requiring advanced solar
power sources that did not add weight. As a result, SunPower Corporation created the most advanced silicon-based cells available for terrestrial or
airborne applications. (Spinoff 2005) Pollution Remediation Pollution Remediation A product using NASA’s microencapsulating technology is available
to consumers and industry enabling them to safely and permanently clean petroleum-based pollutants from water. The microencapsulated wonder,
Petroleum Remediation Product or “PRP,” has revolutionized the way oil spills are cleaned. The basic technology behind PRP is thousands of
microcapsules—tiny balls of beeswax with hollow centers. Water cannot penetrate the microcapsule’s cell, but oil is absorbed right into the beeswax
spheres as they float on the water’s surface. Contaminating chemical compounds that originally come from crude oil (such as fuels, motor oils, or
petroleum hydrocarbons) are caught before they settle, limiting damage to ocean beds. (Spinoff 1994, 2006) Water Purification Water
purification NASA engineers are collaborating with qualified companies to develop a complex system of devices intended to sustain the
astronauts living on the International Space Station and, in the future, those who go on to explore the Moon. This system, tentatively scheduled for
launch in 2008, will make use of available resources by turning wastewater from respiration, sweat, and urine into drinkable water. Commercially, this
system is benefiting people all over the world who need affordable, clean water. By combining the benefits of chemical adsorption, ion exchange, and
ultra-filtration processes, products using this technology yield safe, drinkable water from the most challenging sources, such as in underdeveloped
#debatelikeabear 83
regions where well water may be heavily contaminated. (Spinoff 1995, 2006) Computer Technology Better Software Photo/video image
station From real-time weather visualization and forecasting, high-resolution 3-D maps of the Moon and Mars, to real-time tracking of the International
Space Station and the space shuttle, NASA is collaborating with Google Inc. to solve a variety of challenging technical problems ranging from large-scale
data management and massively distributed computing, to human-computer interfaces—with the ultimate goal of making the vast, scattered ocean of
data more accessible and usable. With companies like InterSense, NASA continues to fund and collaborate on other software advancement initiatives
benefiting such areas as photo/video image enhancement, virtual-reality/design, simulation training, and medical applications. (Spinoff 2005) Structural
Analysis Computer-generated car model NASA software engineers have created thousands of computer programs over the decades equipped to design,
test, and analyze stress, vibration, and acoustical properties of a broad assortment of aerospace parts and structures (before prototyping even begins).
The NASA Structural Analysis Program, or NASTRAN, is considered one of the most successful and widely-used NASA software programs. It has been
used to design everything from Cadillacs to roller coaster rides. Originally created for spacecraft design, NASTRAN has been employed in a host of non-
aerospace applications and is available to industry through NASA’s Computer Software Management and Information Center (COSMIC). COSMIC
maintains a library of computer programs from NASA and other government agencies and offers them for sale at a fraction of the cost of developing a
new program, benefiting companies around the world seeking to solve the largest, most difficult engineering problems. (Spinoff 1976, 1977, 1978,
1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1986, 1988, 1990, 1991, 1998) Refrigerated Internet-Connected Wall Ovens Internet-connected wall ovens Embedded Web
Technology (EWT) software—originally developed by NASA for use by astronauts operating experiments on available laptops from anywhere on the
International Space Station—lets a user monitor and/or control a device remotely over the Internet. NASA supplied this technology and guidance to
TMIO LLC, who went on to develop a low-cost, real-time remote control and monitoring of a new intelligent oven product named “ConnectIo.” With
combined cooling and heating capabilities, ConnectIo provides the convenience of being able to store cold food where it will remain properly
refrigerated until a customized pre-programmable cooking cycle begins. The menu allows the user to simply enter the dinner time, and the oven
automatically switches from refrigeration to the cooking cycle, so that the meal will be ready as the family arrives home for dinner. (Spinoff 2005)
Industrial Productivity Powdered Lubricants Tube of powdered lubricant NASA’s scientists developed a solid lubricant coating material
that is saving the manufacturing industry millions of dollars. Developed as a shaft coating to be deposited by thermal spraying to protect foil air
bearings used in oil-free turbomachinery, like gas turbines, this advanced coating, PS300, was meant to be part of a larger project: an oil-free aircraft
engine capable of operating at high temperatures with increased reliability, lowered weight, reduced maintenance, and increased power. PS300
improves efficiency, lowers friction, reduces emissions, and has been used by NASA in advanced aeropropulsion engines, refrigeration compressors,
turbochargers, and hybrid electrical turbogenerators. ADMA Products has found widespread industrial applications for the material. (Spinoff 2005)
Improved Mine Safety Tension and high-pressure monitor An ultrasonic bolt elongation monitor developed by a NASA scientist for testing tension and
high-pressure loads on bolts and fasteners has continued to evolve over the past three decades. Today, the same scientist and Luna Innovations are
using a digital adaptation of this same device for a plethora of different applications, including non-destructive evaluation of railroad ties, groundwater
analysis, radiation dosimetry, and as a medical testing device to assess levels of internal swelling and pressure for patients suffering from intracranial
pressure and compartment syndrome, a painful condition that results when pressure within muscles builds to dangerous levels. The applications for
this device continue to expand. (Spinoff 1978, 2005, 2008) Food Safety Systems Food safety systems Faced with the problem of how and
what to feed an astronaut in a sealed capsule under weightless conditions while planning for human space flight, NASA enlisted the aid of The Pillsbury
Company to address two principal concerns: eliminating crumbs of food that might contaminate the spacecraft’s atmosphere and sensitive
instruments, and assuring absolute freedom from potentially catastrophic disease-producing bacteria and toxins. Pillsbury developed the Hazard
Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) concept, potentially one of the most far-reaching space spinoffs, to address NASA’s second concern. HACCP
is designed to prevent food safety problems rather than to catch them after they have occurred. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has applied
HACCP guidelines for the handling of seafood, juice, and dairy products. (Spinoff 1991)
#debatelikeabear 84
Colonization Advantage – Impact Framing

Each delay in space colonization outweighs the aff
Nick Bostrum 03 Oxford University http://www.nickbostrom.com/astronomical/waste.html
Astronomical Waste: The Opportunity Cost of Delayed Technological Development, Utilitas Vol.
15, No. 3 (2003): pp. 308-314
As I write these words, suns are illuminating and heating empty rooms, unused energy is being
flushed down black holes, and our great common endowment of negentropy is being
irreversibly degraded into entropy on a cosmic scale. These are resources that an advanced
civilization could have used to create value-structures, such as sentient beings living worthwhile
lives.¶ The rate of this loss boggles the mind. One recent paper speculates, using loose
theoretical considerations based on the rate of increase of entropy, that the loss of potential
human lives in our own galactic supercluster is at least ~10^46 per century of delayed
colonization.[1] This estimate assumes that all the lost entropy could have been used for
productive purposes, although no currently known technological mechanisms are even remotely
capable of doing that. Since the estimate is meant to be a lower bound, this radically
unconservative assumption is undesirable.¶ We can, however, get a lower bound more
straightforwardly by simply counting the number or stars in our galactic supercluster and
multiplying this number with the amount of computing power that the resources of each star
could be used to generate using technologies for whose feasibility a strong case has already
been made. We can then divide this total with the estimated amount of computing power
needed to simulate one human life.¶ As a rough approximation, let us say the Virgo Supercluster
contains 10^13 stars. One estimate of the computing power extractable from a star and with an
associated planet-sized computational structure, using advanced molecular nanotechnology[2],
is 10^42 operations per second.[3] A typical estimate of the human brain’s processing power is
roughly 10^17 operations per second or less.[4] Not much more seems to be needed to simulate
the relevant parts of the environment in sufficient detail to enable the simulated minds to have
experiences indistinguishable from typical current human experiences.[5] Given these
estimates, it follows that the potential for approximately 10^38 human lives is lost every century
that colonization of our local supercluster is delayed; or equivalently, about 10^29 potential
human lives per second.¶ While this estimate is conservative in that it assumes only
computational mechanisms whose implementation has been at least outlined in the literature, it
is useful to have an even more conservative estimate that does not assume a non-biological
instantiation of the potential persons. Suppose that about 10^10 biological humans could be
sustained around an average star. Then the Virgo Supercluster could contain 10^23 biological
humans. This corresponds to a loss of potential equal to about 10^14 potential human lives per
second of delayed colonization.¶ What matters for present purposes is not the exact numbers
but the fact that they are huge. Even with the most conservative estimate, assuming a biological
implementation of all persons, the potential for one hundred trillion potential human beings is
lost for every second of postponement of colonization of our supercluster.[6]
#debatelikeabear 85
Topicality – Diplomacy
Barriers to US-China space cooperation are diplomatic
Jeff Foust 2014. Senior Staff Writer, SpaceNews. Ph.D. in planetary sciences from the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “The Role of International Cooperation in China’s Space
Station Plans” SpaceNews Since 1989 dedicated to covering the business and politics of the
global space industry. October 14, 2014. <http://spacenews.com/42183sn-blog-the-role-of-
international-cooperation-in-chinas-space-station-plans/> Accessed May 20, 2016
Whether Dragon, or any other American vehicle, could dock with or otherwise support a
Chinese space station likely faces greater political rather than technical barriers. A liberalization
of export control policy in the United States for spacecraft and their components still explicitly
prohibits the export of such items to China, which would, at the very least, hinder the technical
interchanges needed to support such efforts. In addition, while Zhou noted that China has
“started dialogues and exchanges” with the United States in the area of human spaceflight,
those efforts have been on hold in the US for the last few years: provisions in appropriations
bills that fund NASA have prohibited bilateral cooperation between the agency and its Chinese
counterparts. “We do have to deal with the realities of politics and diplomacy,” said NASA
administrator Charles Bolden during a “heads of agencies” press conference at the IAC on
September 29. “The prohibition is aimed mostly at human spaceflight, so we don’t collaborate
or cooperate with them there.”
#debatelikeabear 86
Diplomacy is a key tool to address counterspace threats

Frank A. Rose 2015 U.S. assistant secretary of state for arms control, verification and
compliance. “Using Diplomacy to Advance the Long-Term Sustainability and Security of the
Outer Space Environment” March 3, 2016. <http://www.state.gov/t/avc/rls/253947.htm >
Accessed May 19, 2016
My remarks today will focus on two broad areas: first, multilateral space cooperation; and
second, U.S.-Japan space cooperation in the context of the alliance. But before I dive into these
areas, I would like to step back for a moment to briefly examine the overarching strategic
context of today’s space environment which is driving our diplomatic efforts. Space’s Strategic
Context Today’s space environment is evolving rapidly. This evolution is being driven by
numerous factors, including: lower barriers to entry, and the acquisition of space capabilities for
the first time by a host of new actors, including the private sector; advances in technology,
including computing and analytics, that enable new concepts of operations and architectures;
international space cooperation on a multitude of initiatives; the growth in orbital debris and
the accompanying hazard such debris presents; and deepening reliance upon space capabilities
across a range of activities.. The United States in particular is deeply reliant upon space. While
such reliance enables the United States and our allies and partners to undertake a range of
operations in support of peace and security, this reliance has increasingly been viewed by
potential adversaries as a vulnerability to be exploited through the development of
counterspace capabilities. To quote from the U.S. Director of National Intelligence’s recent
Worldwide Threat Assessment, “Foreign military leaders understand the unique advantages that
space-based systems provide to the United States. Russia senior leadership probably views
countering the US space advantage as a critical component of warfighting…Russia and China are
also employing more sophisticated satellite operations and are probably testing dual-use
technologies in space that could be applied to counterspace missions. …We already face a global
threat from electronic warfare systems capable of jamming satellite communications systems
and global navigation space systems…Russian defense officials acknowledge that they have
deployed radar-imagery jammers and are developing laser weapons designed to blind US
intelligence and ballistic missile defense satellites...Russia and China continue to pursue
weapons systems capable of destroying satellites on orbit, placing US satellites at greater risk in
the next few years… China has probably made progress on the antisatellite missile system that it
tested in July 2014.” In order to address such counterspace threats, we are pursuing a strategy
that leverages all elements of national policy, including diplomatic tools, in order to prevent
conflict from extending into space. We are carrying out such diplomacy at multiple levels
simultaneously, including in multilateral fora and with our allies and partners, including
JapanAddressing immediate concerns in space necessitates diplomacy
Michael Krepon 2009. Co-Founder of the Stimson Center. He worked previously at the
Carnegie Endowment, the State Department, and on Capitol Hill. “A Rare Opportunity for Space
Diplomacy” SpaceNews Since 1989 dedicated to covering the business and politics of the global
space industry October 9, 2009. <http://spacenews.com/rare-opportunity-space-diplomacy/>
Accessed May 25, 2016
#debatelikeabear 87
Another important criterion is that the focus of space diplomacy be placed squarely on
immediate problems that have the potential of becoming far worse. The huge debris-causing
incidents in recent years could, if replicated, pose far greater constraints on the activities of all
spacefaring nations. Another criterion, tied to the last, is that agreements be negotiated in a
timely manner. Since negotiators need to play catch-up ball to the debris and space traffic
management problems, the longer talks are extended, the farther behind the curve we might
find ourselves.
#debatelikeabear 88
Topicality – Space Diplomacy

US-China relations are one of the fundamental questions of space diplomacy
Cooperation in Space. 2014 Columbia University Press. p.8. accessed June 12, 2016.
Space diplomacy is a field that has received comparatively little attention since the 1970s,
despite the recent rise of multilateral space tensions. The UN body responsible for the
negotiation of new security- related treaties is the Conference on Disarmament (CD), in Geneva.
Unfortunately, action by this organization has been frozen for more than fifteen years. From the
late 1990s to 2009, a U.S.-Chinese dispute over nuclear versus space arms control priorities
blocked agreement on an official agenda. Successful U.S.-Chinese compromises finally promised
new action, only to see hopes stymied by Pakistani intransigence on a fissile material production
ban, which has prevented any formal negotiations once again. During the Cold War, U.S.-Soviet
preeminence in space made it possible for bilateral arms control treaties to resolve the most
pressing concerns. Today, the realm of relevant actors is larger and more complex, and less-
developed countries are highly reluctant to see new treaties lock in advantages for more-
advanced militaries. In addition, political disagreements and mistrust between the United
States and China, exacerbated by conservative actors in both countries’ domestic politics,
have prevented bilateral actions that might help kick- start a broader process. These
conditions caused European countries to offer a proposal for a voluntary space code of conduct,
which is now under consideration internationally. But some experts believe more substantial
agreements will be needed: formal treaties with international monitoring. The questions of who
will lead these efforts, provide the necessary space systems to support them, and fund the
verification organizations needed to enforce them remain to be answered.
#debatelikeabear 89
A2: Shunning K
The US shunning China on space has no effect on China’s human hights abuses,
especially when they cooperate with every other space-faring nation
David Volodzko 2015. National Editor for The Korea JoongAng Daily, the sister paper of The
International New York Times in South Korea “The US has a law to stop NASA from working with
China, and scientists hate it” The Los Angeles Daily News November 16, 2015.
<http://www.dailynews.com/science/20151116/the-us-has-a-law-to-stop-nasa-from-working-
with-china-and-scientists-hate-it> accessed May 17, 2016
China has since collaborated with Brazil, Germany, France, Italy, Russia, Sweden, the European
Space Agency — but, conspicuously, not the US. What explains the United States’ singular
stance? “The answer,” writes Joan Johnson-Freese, professor of national security affairs at the
US Naval War College, “might well be realism versus political theater.” Taking a stand against
Chinese human rights abuses, it was former Republican Representative Frank Wolf of Virginia —
who once compared China to Nazi Germany — who inserted the 2011 federal budget clause
banning NASA and the OSTP from bilateral cooperation with China. As a result, Chinese
scientists cannot board the International Space Station (ISS), and in 2013 Chinese participants
were banned from attending a conference on NASA’s space telescope program because it took
place at one of the agency’s facilities (the ban was eventually reversed after Wolf called it a
misunderstanding of the law). Johnson-Freese notes: “There was a joke that if a NASA employee
was on a DC Metro car with an Asian, he or she better switch cars.” And things may only get
worse. Wolf retired as chair of the House subcommittee that funds NASA this year but was
replaced by Republican Representative John Culbertson of Texas, who has said he will continue
to “keep the Red Chinese out of our space program.” One argument for doing so is to hold China
accountable for its record on human rights — although defending the freedoms of Chinese
artists and journalists by throwing roadblocks in the way of Chinese scientists hardly seems
like progress. There’s also nothing to suggest that position will have any impact on Beijing’s
policies, especially when the US is alone in shunning China’s space program.
#debatelikeabear 90
A2: Elections DA
Space policy has literally 0 effect on the electorate, economic and political
concerns far outweigh what happens in space
John B. Sheldon Senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. “2016 Election Insight: Space Just Doesn’t Matter in this
Election” May 9, 2016. SpaceNews Magazine. <http://www.spacenewsmag.com/commentary/2016-election-
insight-space-just-doesnt-matter-in-this-election/> Accessed June 19, 2016.
Similarly, and perhaps more importantly, outside of the relatively small community of
passionate and committed space advocates, the vast majority of the electorate does not care
what a candidate thinks about space policy. If they did, they would have told the candidates by
now. They haven’t, and they are not likely to do so. Why is this? First, this election cycle has
seen the culmination, on both the left and right, of voter frustration with the political and
economic establishments in Washington and on Wall Street. This election is not about whose
policies are the most plausible on this or that issue; it is a referendum on those whom we have
usually entrusted to make policy. Some might argue that mainstream candidates such as Clinton
and John Kasich are typical, status quo candidates for their respective political parties. But, in
this election, these mainstream candidates are being forced to tack hard left and right in
attempts to mollify and accommodate the formerly fringe movements now led by Sanders and
Trump. In order to either accommodate or stave off the far reaches of both parties, more
mainstream candidates have greater, more fundamental issues to contend with than space
policy. In light of this referendum on political and economic elites, space policy is viewed as a
quixotic distraction. While the very establishment that has ruled this country for decades is
under the microscope of detailed public scrutiny, space really does not matter. Furthermore,
and possibly frustratingly for mainstream politicians, space policy cannot be used as a means to
deflect the palpable anger and cynicism of the electorate.
#debatelikeabear 91
1AR: Election DA/2AC Politics DA

Don’t believe their hype, space doesn’t matter in the current political climate
John B. Sheldon Senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. “2016 Election Insight: Space Just Doesn’t Matter in this
Election” May 9, 2016. SpaceNews Magazine. <http://www.spacenewsmag.com/commentary/2016-election-
insight-space-just-doesnt-matter-in-this-election/> Accessed June 19, 2016.
I also believe, though, that the space advocacy community does itself, politicians, and the wider
public a disservice when it posits space as an end in itself, rather than as a plausible means to
ends that serve the greater good, and when it seeks to privilege space issues above — and,
frankly, out of proportion to — more important policy issues or more urgent political
imperatives. This is a criticism that I have long leveled at the space advocacy community, even
under normal political circumstances. In this current political cycle, however, this fundamental
flaw seems all the more problematic. Politicians seem to understand what space advocates do
not get, space just doesn’t matter in this political climate.
#debatelikeabear 92
A2: Spending DA
Even if Space is expensive, taxpayers get a great return on investment by
boosting the economy, enhancing national security and increasing relations
outside of space
Mary Lynne Dittmar 2016. Executive director of the Coalition for Deep Space Exploration.
“Stay the Course: Continue America’s Progress in Space” April 19, 2016. SpaceNews. <
http://spacenews.com/op-ed-stay-the-course-continue-americas-progress-in-space/> accessed
June 25, 2016.
Leadership in space pays dividends to a broad array of stakeholders, not the least of which is the
American taxpayer. The benefits of a national space program are well known and include gains
in human knowledge, scientific discovery, technical innovation, and national aspiration and
pride. In the case of human spaceflight, some of the most valuable benefits are strategic. The
geopolitical benefits of U.S. leadership in space include global commerce, peaceful technical
exchange among nations, and the enhancement of national security now and in the future.
Here, too, participation is growing, with more than 80 nations engaged through the
International Space Station program. International collaboration in human space exploration
reinforces mutual interests and also facilitates government-to-government activities outside of
the space arena.
#debatelikeabear 93
TEXT of Law Banning Cooperation

Section 531 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016. Signed into law
12/18/2015. <www.congress.gov/bill114th-congress/house-bill/2029/text> Accessed June 10,
2016
SEC. 531. (a) None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) or the Office of Science and Technology Policy
(OSTP) to develop, design, plan, promulgate, implement, or execute a bilateral policy, program,
order, or contract of any kind to participate, collaborate, or coordinate bilaterally in any way
with China or any Chinese-owned company unless such activities are specifically authorized by a
law enacted after the date of enactment of this Act.
(b) None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to effectuate the hosting of official
Chinese visitors at facilities belonging to or utilized by NASA.
(c) The limitations described in subsections (a) and (b) shall not apply to activities which NASA or
OSTP has certified— (1) pose no risk of resulting in the transfer of technology, data, or other
information with national security or economic security implications to China or a Chinese-
owned company; and (2) will not involve knowing interactions with officials who have been
determined by the United States to have direct involvement with violations of human rights.
(d) Any certification made under subsection (c) shall be sub- mitted to the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Rep- resentatives and the Senate, and the Federal Bureau of
Investiga- tion, no later than 30 days prior to the activity in question and shall include a
description of the purpose of the activity, its agenda, its major participants, and its location and
timing.

ISS Affirmative - MSDI 2016

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

ISS Affirmative - MSDI 2016

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

MSDI 2016 ISS Cooperation Aff

ISS Co-op Affirmative

Leadership Advantage – ISS Key to Soft Power.....................................................................57

Thus we present the following plan.

The United States federal government should substantially increase its

Advantage 1: Space Militarization

A war in space will devastate the global economy, break down

Global economic crisis causes war---strong statistical support—also causes great

Nuclear war causes extinction – nuclear winter, food, ozone collapse

Abandoning leadership of space to China means the US loses access to key

He3 from the moon solves climate change

Explainingthefuture.com is written and maintained by Christopher Barnatt -- a futurist, author,

Human extinction is inevitable absent lunar colonization

Attitudes are changing on international space cooperation, only Congressional

China Should be Invited to be a part of the ISS

Solvency – Conflict Resolution

US must cooperate with China in space or will be left behind

Cooperation and communication on space can reduce any potential tensions

Solvency – China Says Yes

China is willing to work with the US on space missions

China is open to space collaboration

China will cooperate

Solvency - Russia Says Yes

Russia wants to open the ISS to China

Solvency – ESA says Yes

Solvency – A2: China is a bad partner

Sino-American Space cooperation is net beneficial to both countries

Solvency – A2: Law bans cooperation

The law only bans bilateral cooperation

Many reasons to cooperate on ISS and Chinese Space Station.

There will be Innumerable Scientific Benefits to China Joining the ISS

Inherency: illegal Now

The Wolf Amendment prohibits any bilateral cooperation with China.

If American-made communications satellites could not even be launched by a Chinese rocket in

There is a long policy battle ahead before cooperating with China.

A2: China is Authoritarian

A2: China Steals Tech/China Pulls ahead of US

Inviting China to ISS is in the interest of U.S. national security.

Space Mil Adv – Now Key

Yes Space Militarization

Space Mil Adv – Spills Over

The buildup of space weapons will spillover into Earth-bound conflicts

Space Warfare Probability

Need China on our side – A threat

China won’t attack

Space Mil Adv – 2AC Climate Change/Environment Add-On

Climate change threatens all life on Earth

Satellite monitoring key to coral reef & dead zones

Coral reef collapse and dead zones cause extinction

Space Mil Adv – Impact Framing

Space Mil Adv – A2: Privatization CP/DA

Leadership Advantage – Solvency Extension

Beyond the Moon, NASA has a number of missions—many of them cooperative—already in

China is quickly rising to become a major leader in space science missions

Leadership Advantage – ISS Key to Soft Power

Chinese Space Program Increases International Cooperation

expertise in liquid fuel engine technologies for Chinese expertise in radiation-resistant

U.S. Cooperation Remains Difficult Chinese officials say

Leadership Advantage – He3 key to Solve Climate Change

Leadership Advantage – He3 Fusion Feasible

Fusion has been proven possible, research and development makes it

Leadership Advantage – Now key for Fusion

Leadership Advantage – 2AC Colonization Internal Link

Collaboration in space is critical to future exploration missions, US action is