APPENDICES

Ocean Dumping of Radioactive Waste

• Hazard from soviet nuclear dumps assessed. Science News, vol 143, pp. 310-11 May 15 '93.
• A cruise in the atomic sea, L. Millot, World Press Review, vol 40, p.20 Mar. '93.
• The ocean dumping debate, U.S. News and World Report, vol 114 p.9, May 10, 93.
• Nuclear burial at sea, P.J. Skerrett, Technology Review, vol 95, pp. 22-3 Feb./Mar. 92.

Endangered Species

• A clash over property rights, L. M. Litvan, Nation's Business, vol 82, pp. 57-59 April '94.
• Competing concerns J. Nielsen, Earth Journal, vol 6 pp. 28-31, Nov./Dec. 93.
• When a law goes haywire, R. Fitzgerald, Reader's Digest, vol 143 pp. 49-53 Sept. '93.
• No dream house for Mr. Burris, L. Spencer, Forbes, vol 154, pp. 78-91, July 18, 94.
• Perilous times for the Endangered Species Act. M. Hanback, Outdoor Life, vol 193, pp. 38-43 May '94.
• Species Argument, J. Taylor, Reason, vol 25, pp. 52-3, Jan '94.
• Will the Endangered Species Act Survive? The Wilson Quarterly, vol 18, pp. 138-139, Autumn '94.

Deforestation

• The continuing fight for the Amazon, P. Ghazi, World Press Review, vol 441, p. 46 Sept. '94.
• The logic of livestock and deforestation in Amazonia, S.B. Hecht, Bioscience, vol 43, pp. 687-95, Nov. '93.
• Physical and human dimensions of deforestation in Amazonia, D. Skole, Bioscience, vol 44, pp. 314-322 Mar. '94.
• Saving rainforests may be doomed, USA Today, vol 122, p. 15, April '94.
• The deforestation debate, R. Monastersky, Science News, vol 144, pp. 26-7, July 10 '93.

Activity 1 -- The Language and Sequence of Debate

Language:

Debate:

Process whereby two or more individuals take opposing viewpoints on a proposition in an attempt to persuade others to accept or reject a solution to a problem.

Resolution:

A statement which presents the idea or issue which is under examination. It should be clearly worded, deal with one subject, be timely, be free of emotional or prejudicial phrases, and be phrased from an affirmative position.

Affirmative:

This side tells the importance of adopting the proposition and why the change is needed.

Negative:

The negative side presents arguments as to why no changes should take place. They also argue against the affirimative points and present the disadvantages of the affirimative's plan.

Argument:

Argument is the systematic process of relating evidence for the purpose of establishing the case. Argument is your way of presenting evidence that helps to support your side.

Main Points:

Statements or points that are offered as being the basic truths upon which a case is built.

Refute:

Attack the case of the opposition. The debaters seek out the weaknesses of the opponents' arguments and present a counter argument.

Rebuttal:

This is the last opportunity to argue against the opposition and to highlight your main points.

Sequence:

1. First Affirmative Speaker (2-3 minutes)
2. First Negative Speaker (2-3 minutes)
3. Second Affirmative Speaker (2-3 minutes)
4. Second Negative Speaker (2-3 minutes)
5. Affirmative Rebuttal (1 minute)
6. Negative Rebuttal and/or Summary (1-2 minute)
7. Affirmative Summary (1 minute)

Detailed Description of Sequence

First Affirmative Speaker

• Begins with an interesting, attention-getting introduction.
• Gives a brief explanation/history of the problem.
• States the resolution.
• Presents the definition of terms in a clear and meaningful manner. (Make sure that everyone understands the vocabulary being used. Example: Global warming, chlorofluorocarbons, etc.)
• Announce the major affirmative contentions, specifically stating what the affirmative team intends to accomplish. The first affirmative speaker should tell the listeners which contention will be presented by the First Affirmative and the Second Affirmative Speakers.
• Present the first major contention. Contentions need to address the need, practicality, and advantages. It must be supported by evidence and reasoning.
• Presents a plan which would bring the change into effect.
• Summarize. Review the major points.

First Negative Speaker

• Analyze what the affirmative speaker has said. Point out where the Affirmative and Negative agree and where they disagree.
• Refute the Affirmative points. Present evidence, opinion, and reasoning to destroy the opponent's argument.
• Present arguments as to why no changes should take place.
• Summarize. Review the major points.

Second Affirmative Speaker

• Analyze the debate. Show clearly the relationship between the Affirmative proposal and the Negative stand, magnifying the importance of the Affirmative points.
• Rebuild your case. Restate points and offer further evidence and reasoning.
• Attack the Negative points.
• Summarize. Review the major points.

Second Negative Speaker

• Analyze the debate by comparing the two cases again.
• Rebuild your case. Restate your points and offer further evidence and reasoning.
• Attack the Affirmative points.
• Present the remaining Negative points.
• Summarize. Review the major points.

Affirmative Side Questions the Negative.

• Negative side gives a summary. This is the last time the negative side may address the audience.

Affirmative Side Concludes with its Summary.

Activity 1 -- Audience Debate Sheet

Activity 1 -- Debaters Flow Sheet