As part of our Topical Sciences topic, we held a class debate.  The question was,

‘Should we spend £4.5 billion on going to Mars?’

Before we started, we had to research the following points:

• What is a debate?
• How is a debate formed?
• Who takes part in a debate?

To get a better understanding, and to answer these questions, we watched a series of clips from BBC Question Time.  We identified that there are two teams with opposing viewpoints, a Chairperson and an audience.

The Chairperson is the person who is responsible for keeping overall control, they make sure the questions are answered correctly and they keep order, especially if opposing teams begin to talk over each other and deviate from the question.  The Chairperson also summarises the main points to the audience which helps them to understand what is happening and allows them to formulate their own questions which they can ask the panel.

We had two opposing teams; a ‘Pro’ team who thought we should spend this money on a Mars mission and a ‘Con’ team who thought it should be spend on better things here on Earth.

Some of the major issues raised and commented upon were:

‘Surely it is better to solve our own problems on Earth, such as hunger, poverty and disease, than spending it on a Mars mission which might never make it to Mars in the first place?’

‘Our Earth is over populated, it has almost reached saturation point.  We need to act now!   Colonising Mars is our only solution.  It will be a long process, but we need to create more space for humans to live and work’

‘We’re killing our own planet.  Just look at global warming, greenhouse gases.  With this money, we can reverse this.  Why do we want to go to Mars and destroy another planet?’

‘Human are explorers by nature.  If we go to Mars, this can be a stepping stone for future missions, for future exploration of other planets and Solar Systems’

At times, the debate became rather heated and the Chairperson had to make sure everyone was in order.    The audience also asked the panel questions – many in-depth – which had the panel grasping for answers.

In the end a final vote took place.  The ‘Pro team won with 54% of the vote, whilst the ‘Con’ team amassed 46% of the vote.  It was a close run debate and everyone should be congratulated for their questions, answers and participation.

Even one panel member was persuaded to swap sides after the debate – such is the power of persuasion!