2AC Response: 1) Lit checks abuse - the Negative has sufficient evidence to argue against Science. 2) Ground - the Negative interpretation destroys Aff ground and unfairly limits the scope of the topic to a small subset of the resolution. 3) Predictability - The Negative knows that the Aff will argue in favor of science. Logically, the Negative should be prepared to respond given the limited number of Aff positions. 4) Voters A) Fairness - The Negative interpretation would make any Affirmative on science immediately non-topical. This places the Affirmative at a patently unfair disadvantage in debate, destroys all Affirmative ground, and is abusive. Signal via an Aff ballot that you will not accept such an unbalanced outcome. B) Education - The Negative would have you live in ignorance of events beyond this room. This destroys the core purpose of scholastic debate, and must be rejected. 5) T is a time suck - if the Negative kicks out of the T by the 2NR, it acknowledges the emptiness of the T debate and places another voting issue in favor of the Aff.
I'm waiting for the Yet Another Damn Array.
I did not notice the headline properly until I was about to leave the next post.
Therefore: BOB WILKINS LIBEL!!!!!
2AC Response: 1) Lit checks abuse - the Negative has sufficient evidence to argue against Science. 2) Ground - the Negative interpretation destroys Aff ground and unfairly limits the scope of the topic to a small subset of the resolution. 3) Predictability - The Negative knows that the Aff will argue in favor of science. Logically, the Negative should be prepared to respond given the limited number of Aff positions. 4) Voters A) Fairness - The Negative interpretation would make any Affirmative on science immediately non-topical. This places the Affirmative at a patently unfair disadvantage in debate, destroys all Affirmative ground, and is abusive. Signal via an Aff ballot that you will not accept such an unbalanced outcome. B) Education - The Negative would have you live in ignorance of events beyond this room. This destroys the core purpose of scholastic debate, and must be rejected. 5) T is a time suck - if the Negative kicks out of the T by the 2NR, it acknowledges the emptiness of the T debate and places another voting issue in favor of the Aff.
I'm going to assume you found that on teh Googlez, and not among your browser bookmarks.
<a href="http:\/\/i8.photobucket.com\/albums\/a44\/moxievision\/DianaRigg-Auntie2-crop.jpg" target="_blank">Yup</a>.
Whatever happened to Dr. Science?
You know, it&#039;s possible to read Lovecraft without necessarily memorizing it?
Pubicist?
In 30 billion years, you just know that the Apocalyptards are gonna be all &quot;WE TOLD YOU SO!!!&quot;
oops.
It&#039;s mostly technology, with just a bit of help from polymer science.
Sorry, it was a hanging changeup over the middle. I <em>had</em> to swing.
Toasted, with a glass of <a href="https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch\?v=wFpeM3fxJoQ" target="_blank">milk</a>
I&#039;ll set them up...
Noe, only Dan Quayle gets to do that.
Will there be a test? I don&#039;t test well.