space exploration is waste of money and time...

Second, since my opponent has not defined his key terms, allow me to provide definitions for what I am fairly confident he means in regards to this debate; Space: 'The expanse in which the solar system, stars, and galaxies exist; the universe. The region of this expanse beyond earth's atmosphere' - . http://www.thefreedictionary.com... Waste: 'To use, consume, spend, or expend thoughtlessly or carelessly' - . http://www.thefreedictionary.com... With that out the way, lets debate! -- My opponents case -- 'we need to explore the space because everyone probably understands that the world supplies are getting less and less every single day and population is growing as well. .. We need to explore the space and find more land, food, and more things that we need to survive' -- Response -- It is true that certain finite resources on the earth will eventually run out- for instance, fossil fuels which power a large portion of our industry. However, much of their uses are being taken over by renewable sources, such as wind and solar power. Admittedly these do not yet have the capability to take over from more easily accessible sources, but with enough time and money (the very two things my opponent suggests we devote to space exploration), they certainly have the potential to do so. My opponent also claims that we need to explore space in order to find three things; land, food and more things we need to survive. However, my opponent has failed to provide any evidence that any of these things do in fact exist in space, or that it is within our capabilities to find and use them for our own benefit. As my opponent has the burden of proof here, I will leave it to him to respond. Finally, his point that the worlds population is growing. I agree that this could potentially pose a threat to the quality of human life in the future. However, this could be solved in a number of ways without resorting to the impractical method he is, I think implying (shipping a large proportion of the earth's population over to some other planet). For instance, we could provoke China and India, two nations with the highest populations on earth, into engaging nuclear war on each other. This would drastically cut the overall population of earth, and solve the problem of both country's high reproductive rates (by flooding them with sterilising radiation). Note that this debate has nothing to do with ethics- As long as this remains a possibility, there is no need to resort to my opponent's unsupported speculations about finding some place to live in outer space. -- My case, in short -- Billions of pounds, dollars and euros are spent each year on supporting space programs which have no real practical benefits. This waste of money and time could be far better spent, for instance, on the mediocre or downright insufficient health care systems of many countries. It could be spent on innovating renewable resources to help build a sustainable future for this planet. It should be spent, in short, on something that is likely to have real world benefits for the people of earth. It should not be spent on star trek fantasies. I await my opponents response.