(Context in the description) We should accept Elon Musk's offer to colonize Mars.

Now, NASA is hoping to land the first humans on Mars by the 2030s. ... So far, only uncrewed spacecraft have made the trip to the red planet, but that could soon change. NASA is hoping to land the first humans on Mars by the 2030s—and several new missions are launching before then to push exploration forward.

The idea that wealth is morally perilous has an impressive philosophical and religious pedigree. Ancient Stoic philosophers railed against greed and luxury, and Roman historians such as Tacitus lay many of the empire’s struggles at the feet of imperial avarice. Confucius lived an austere life. The Buddha famously left his opulent palace behind. And Jesus didn’t exactly go easy on the rich, either — think camels and needles, for starters.

The point is not necessarily that wealth is intrinsically and everywhere evil, but that it is dangerous — that it should be eyed with caution and suspicion, and definitely not pursued as an end in itself; that great riches pose great risks to their owners; and that societies are right to stigmatize the storing up of untold wealth. That’s why Aristotle, for instance, argued that wealth should be sought only for the sake of living virtuously — to manage a household, say, or to participate in the life of the polis. Here wealth is useful but not inherently good; indeed, Aristotle specifically warned that the accumulation of wealth for its own sake corrupts virtue instead of enabling it. For Hindus, working hard to earn money is a duty (dharma), but only when done through honest means and used for good ends. The function of money is not to satiate greed but to support oneself and one’s family. The Koran, too, warns against hoarding money and enjoins Muslims to disperse it to the needy.

• Send people to the ISS.
  
• Launch 143 satellites
  
• Launch a reusable rocket
  
• Work with NASA and replace one-used engines with reusable engines
  
• Launch private crew into space
  

In 2016, Musk stated that there is no expectation of receiving NASA contracts for any of the Mars architecture system work, but affirmed that such contracts would be good.[74][better source needed] In 2020, NASA funded a SpaceX proposal to develop a crewed Moon landing system based on Starship, Starship HLS.[75]

• In the end, Nasa is probably on the side of Elon here. A proposal by Elon, backed by Nasa, should be worth it.
  
• SpaceX has already picked private crew in missions. It is plausible that SpaceX has experts on who should go on this mission.
  
• Elon's trusted experts can pick the right people for him to carry out the mission, or so it appears so.
  

For Hindus, working hard to earn money is a duty (dharma), but only when done through honest means and used for good ends. The function of money is not to satiate greed but to support oneself and one’s family. The Koran, too, warns against hoarding money and enjoins Muslims to disperse it to the needy.

• Elon's SpaceX is such a successful company that it would be expected that it could carry out the Mars mission.
  
• Elon has worked with NASA and even then, it is still Elon's proposal as he proposed it initially.
  
• Elon's men have picked private personnel for a successful space mission.
  
• Why is it not trusted for SpaceX to pick private astronauts for Mars?
  
• Elon's richness does not make him untrustworthy.
  
• SpaceX is an enough trustworthy company.
  
• Elon has the right to save money to make more successes in the future.
  
• Richness has no direct correlation with trustworthiness.
  
• Going into space is worth it.
  
• It may bring us more daily tools derived from the high-tech used in the project in the future.
  
• It may even spark improvement in the future.
  
• How do we know how long will it be before the next person stands out to go to Mars? If Elon did not propose, do we even know if we will go to mars ever?
  

In early 2012, approximately two-thirds of SpaceX stock was owned by Musk[35] and his 70 million shares were then estimated to be worth US$875 million on private markets,[36] valuing SpaceX at US$1.3 billion.[37] In May 2012, with the Dragon C2+ launch Dragon became the first commercial spacecraft to deliver cargo to the International Space Station.[38] After the flight, the company private equity valuation nearly doubled to US$2.4 billion or US$20/share.[39][40] By that time, SpaceX had operated on total funding of approximately $1 billion over its first decade of operation. Of this, private equity provided approximately $200 million, with Musk investing approximately $100 million and other investors having put in about $100 million.[41] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX#2010%E2%80%932012:_Falcon_9,_Dragon,_and_NASA_contracts

• It may bring us more daily tools derived from the high-tech used in the project in the future.
  
• It may even spark improvement in the future.
  
• How do we know how long will it be before the next person stands out to go to Mars? If Elon did not propose, do we even know if we will go to mars ever?
  

If NASA is interested, and Elon provided a way to get there, surely then NASA has the authority and reasoning to ask for the information. Also potentially including legal oppression at a denial of information, and the government would have that information.

Research done at the ISS and on Mars helps researchers improve conditions here on Earth in many ways, including: The technology developed for NASA enters the civilian market. From memory foam and cordless vacuums to mammograms, we have space exploration to thank for many modern-day conveniences.

[1]

The potential benefits for us here on Earth lie in the technology which enables robots to be autonomous. As experts work on new and more sophisticated algorithms to make a robot operate on its own on Mars’ surface, the same technology can be deployed here. Sensing capabilities also need to improve, and this will lead to smarter and faster autonomation in self-driving cars, manufacturing robots, and many more areas.[2]

 

But how does growing food on Mars under these conditions benefit us on Earth? “The simulants we used—one comes from a Hawaiian volcano. The simulant for Martian soil comes from the Arizona desert,” explains Wamelink. “If we are successful in growing plants on Mars, we can help food production on Earth.” This would be particularly useful in areas where the land is not well-suited to growing crops, and where food scarcity becomes a killer.[2]

Imagine you have almost 300 Billion USD in your bank account. You are known and revered as one of the greatest space explorers to ever live. Political powers bow down to your mass influence. Now, you are being trusted to go to Mars and colonize it before any other human. 

Think about it.\

As well as this, we have been talking about Elon Musk solely, but what about the officials and workers in SpaceX. Might they not hold Elon Musk's integrity and go corrupt?

That process of picking personnel for the mission can easily backfire. Spies from enemies and rivals could get in through personnel and do who knows what in the inner circles of the arguably most important mission in the whole of humanity.

the fact that any useful object for experimenting will be broken down in the 7 month journey should render this useless. 

My opponent has clearly not read my first argument, in which I stated:

If NASA is interested, and Elon provided a way to get there, surely then NASA has the authority and reasoning to ask for the information. Also potentially including legal oppression at a denial of information, and the government would have that information.

• Going to Mars can help with our automatic and agricultural businesses and that is good.
  
• Elon is famous for carrying out missions on behalf of humanity and has worked with NASA. It is generally of no concern that he will suddenly turn its back. Same for his trusted men and women.
  
• Technological concerns should be no concern at all because the challenges are theoretically possible to solve and we won't go until we are ready.
  
• According to the description, a Private journey doesn't mean NASA can't fund it. It just has to be that Elon is the centre of the deal and he chooses who goes on Mars. Even if NASA funds the trip, Elon still is the one proposing it as he proposed it back in 2001.
  

The potential benefits for us here on Earth lie in the technology which enables robots to be autonomous. As experts work on new and more sophisticated algorithms to make a robot operate on its own on Mars’ surface, the same technology can be deployed here. Sensing capabilities also need to improve, and this will lead to smarter and faster autonomation in self-driving cars, manufacturing robots, and many more areas.[2] (Why not just test them here?)

 

But how does growing food on Mars under these conditions benefit us on Earth? “The simulants we used—one comes from a Hawaiian volcano. The simulant for Martian soil comes from the Arizona desert,” explains Wamelink. “If we are successful in growing plants on Mars, we can help food production on Earth.” This would be particularly useful in areas where the land is not well-suited to growing crops, and where food scarcity becomes a killer.[2] (Controlled environments easily replicate this, as well as cost less. )

Imagine you have almost 300 Billion USD in your bank account. You are known and revered as one of the greatest space explorers to ever live. Political powers bow down to your mass influence. Now, you are being trusted to go to Mars and colonize it before any other human. 

Think about it.\

Studies are piling up showing that adding more team members may actually hinder team productivity overall. In fact, there’s a growing consensus among business professionals that five to eight member teams maximize employees’ potential. This small number leads to more engagement, accountability, and productivity.

Not even NASA has done anything odd with space, what is Elon going to do? So far, Elon has worked all towards the side of humanity and not against. He has sent satellites and rockets up to help humanity, not to burn resources without a cause. Sources in R1. Elon has history of working with NASA and these projects turned out to be successful. Why is anyone still doubting them on this level?

The fact that they have carried out wonderous missions on behalf of humanity means that they could at least be trusted. Why would they suddenly turn against the entire humanity in such an important mission? Not even in the cold war, not even the Apollo-Soyuz mission, did astronauts do such evil things. Why is it a concern, and what could they do, killing the future of humans, including themselves by doing so?

Obviously No. We are still experimenting on Mars, via things that land in more than 6 months after their launch. If they break down, it means that it is an accident.

Even if NASA agrees to fund such an objective, it is still Elon's proposal. No matter how many agencies have the information, as long as Elon chooses who makes the rocket and who goes on it, it remains private according to Con's descriptive comments. The fact that NASA holds no stocks doesn't deny the fact that SpaceX and NASA has worked together successfully already. No matter how much NASA funds, it is still Elon proposing it and it stands. Con has proven nothing in the end on this issue. I ask again.

belonging to or for the use of one particular person or group of people only.

Previous trips to Mars were successful and NASA was willing to fund them because they were ROBOTS. Human risk is much different. We are risking the lives of people with families and friends to send them on a expedition that we don't know all the variables for. No one would agree to that, and forcing someone to do so would be inhumane.

But my example focused on Elon Musk, an individual. The USA is a nation composed of 300 million people, and, according to Why Small Team Collaboration Usually Beats Larger Groups (doist.com)

"A privately held company or private company is a company which does not offer or trade its company stock to the general public on the stock market exchanges, but rather the company's stock is offered, owned and traded or exchanged privately or over-the-counter."

• Going to Mars in this way has huge amounts of scientific and technological potential and such an act would do more things whereas on Planet Earth cannot be achieved.
  
• There is no evidence on that going to Mars like this is useless.
  
• There is no evidence on that extra food and astronauts are too much weight.
  
• There is no evidence on that people will refuse this mission because it may fail.
  
• My opponent has presented only weak evidence comparing NASA and SpaceX.
  
• NASA can have a private deal with SpaceX and that is still fits the definition of "Private".
  
• There is no evidence on that spies will be present to sabotage the mission, and that it would be a huge concern.
  
• Overall, the benefits outweigh the harms, so please vote Pro.
  

This is essentially "If you think the exam is hard, then just don't take the exam, instead just take practice exams!" Well, for one, mars exploration is definitely useful, as it deepens our understanding of the universe. We have yet to send anyone on Mars, so such a trip would also have valuable results regarding how human bodies react to Mars conditions. These would require huge funds to replicate on Earth and it would probably be a waste of space anyways, recreating a chunk of a less habitable planet for experiment instead of reshaping it to be more habitable. Also, testing robots on Mars is definitely of more technological value, considering rockets would be launched, and while you could theoretically slow down the delay to simulate Mars conditions, testing on Earth wouldn't mean as much as in Mars, the same way that taking a mock exam isn't worth as much as the real deal. You can't apply to a college with a mock SAT exam you took on a holiday at your home, and you can't say you went to mars with wasted material simulating Mars on Earth deserts.

Plus, testing them on Earth would yield close to no discovery, considering we are eventually testing them on a location we already know about. Our Mars robots are to contribute to better understanding of the condition on Mars, instead of just solely existing(We have already gone past the stage of the space race where just putting a vehicle on Mars is a W already). Mars robots(and potential human astronauts) could analyze, for example, how humans react to the ground on Mars, or how the high CO2 on Mars affect them. Since Moon Dust can infiltrate space suits, it would be very interesting to see if Mars does the same, and overcoming such challenges, with robots or without robots, would land oneself technologically reputable. The fact that one would survive such a trip would also mean that they are true heroes (of America?). And no, you can't say you went to mars by going to a simulation site on Earth.

Again, the fact that humans can plant on Mars would be a reputable achievement in of itself, and achievements on Earth cannot replicate it. If plant growth is possible and so is human sustainability on Mars, then such technological advance would definitely boost our confidence in humanity as well as our understanding of space, perhaps even better technology to be used in the future.

With the rovers we have sent on Mars, we could easily take all factors into place and create an environment exactly like Mars, without the cost of building a rocket to transport.

• I have proven that we should test robots here.
  
• No new information could be earned from humans because of the existence of rovers.
  
• We should not accept his offer NOW, which is what the topic says.
  
• I concede that risk is a illogical factor
  
• I concede a spaceship could hold the amount necessary for food. 
  

• We send humans onto mars
  
• Elon Musk and SpaceX is the centre of the project
  
• The project is Private
  

We have sent robots up into space, with scanners able to scan temperature, pressure and any other important factors. There is no point in going to Mars, seeing as we can detect the factors which will be important to calculate how our bodies will react.

With the rovers we have sent on Mars, we could easily take all factors into place and create an environment exactly like Mars, without the cost of building a rocket to transport.