When I picked my primary sources, I found 4, one of those being a debate website that holds as part of a counterargument. I decided that since I have a more science-y topic and Dr. Becker asked if counterarguments were available, I should go ahead and do a nugget on it.
Think of the long term.
In 1 billion years, the luminosity of the sun will have grown to the point as to make it hard to live on Earth. In 5 billion years, in its red giant stage, the Earth will probably (emphasis on probably, some speculate that the Sun won't go that far) be engulfed when the red giant stage is entered. If humanity comes to peace with itself (no war, major conflict, etc.), this is entirely possible. There are candidates in our Solar System (like Europa, one of Jupiter's moons) for colonization.
Posted by: Jo2599
For some reason studying space is the main counterargument. There are several that are helpful in making me a credible author, but I chose this post for my nugget, because Jo2599 expresses that we need to be thinking about what’s going to happen in the future. Which, don’t get me wrong I think that space exploration is a great and amazing study that we need to continue doing, but to think that it should be above studying the ocean and that funds should go to space study because we’re all going to die on Earth if we don’t find a sister planet. A billion years is a long time from now even if we think in large numbers. We need to focus on both, because we are on Earth now and not on or about to be living on a sister planet. For our well-being and simple ability to continue our space research, we need to study the ocean. Without the ocean, we don’t know what the heck is going to happen, especially since the ocean provides about 70% of the oxygen we breathe