Gps affirmative

A2: Solar Flares

GPS satellites can resist interference from solar flares – they are built to withstand the Van Allen radiation belts

Satnews Daily 12

, March 15, 2012, “GPS.GOV... A Softer, Solar Storm... Thank Heavens!” Satnews. http://www.satnews.com/cgi-bin/story.cgi?number=2114395267

The solar storm that occurred in early March 2012 disrupted satellite communications and forced airlines to reroute some flights. However, so far, no major GPS problems have been reported as a result of the event. The U.S. network of Continuously Operating Reference Stations (CORS), which monitors GPS daily from more than 1,800 locations, observed only slight changes to GPS reception in some parts of Alaska on March 7 and 9. Solar activity can distort the GPS signals as they pass through the Earth's ionosphere, causing accuracy errors. In addition, intense radio bursts from the Sun can overwhelm or jam GPS devices. This occurred after a solar flare in December 2006, causing widespread outages of GPS equipment. Solar events may also impact GPS satellite operations, although that did not occur this time. All 31 operational satellites in the GPS constellation remained fully functional throughout the solar storm. GPS spacecraft are built to withstand high levels of radiation, since they fly in a fairly intense region of the Earth's Van Allen radiation belts. More solar storms are likely to occur through 2013-2014 as the Sun reaches its "solar max" period. GPS users should keep this in mind and always have a secondary means of navigation or timing. As reported in GPS.GOV, the official U.S. government information site regarding GPS and related topics.

A2: SQO Solves Spoofing

Your evidence based on overweening optimism about the threat of spoofing

Humphreys ’09 (Todd E. Humphreys, Ph.D. in Orbital Mechanics and Assistant Professor at the University of Texas at Austin, Assessing the Spoofing Threat, http://www.gpsworld.com/defense/security-surveillance/assessing-spoofing-threat-3171?page_id=1)
The Homeland Security Institute, a research arm of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, has also considered the threat of civil GPS spoofing. On its website it has posted a report listing seven spoofing countermeasures. The proposed countermeasures include the first three techniques from the list here. Some of the remaining four countermeasures would be trivial to spoof. None of the seven would adequately defend against a sophisticated attack. Nonetheless, the posting claims that its proposed techniques "should allow suspicious GPS signal activity to be detected." We worry that such optimistic language in such a prominent posting will mislead many readers into believing that the spoofing threat has been adequately addressed.

A2: Telemetry unethical

Processes are reviewed by external organizations to ensure benefits to the larger population are significant enough to warrant action

Cooke ‘08

[Steven J., Dept. of Biology and Institute of Environmental Science @ Carleton University (Ontario), Endgangered Species Research, Vol. 4, January, p. 170]

The ethical considerations of tagging endangered animals is a complex issue, as one of the assumptions of telemetry is that the tagging and presence of the device do not deleteriously affect the individual (Wilson & McMahon 2006). However, sample sizes are relatively low (relative to other methods) and animals can be studied in their natural environment. Several explanations have been proposed to account for a perceived lack of public ethical discourse among field scientists (reviewed in Farnsworth & Rosovsky 1993). Of particular relevance to telemetry studies is the assumption that the relative benefits of the research technique outweigh potential short-term costs to the study organism or population (i.e. increased knowledge may inform and promote its long-term conservation; Farnsworth & Rosovsky 1993). Institutional animal care committees usually require researchers to consider the impacts of their tagging activities on populations, and this is coupled with the development and testing of tagging techniques. There has been an explosion of studies that compare and contrast different tagging techniques with the purpose of trying to identify techniques that minimize the impact on the animal. Indeed, data derived from telemetry and logging studies would not be useful if the observations generated were not genuine. A number of authors have proposed that ethical considerations must be considered when conducting research on all animal species (particularly those that are endangered) and when developing conservation measures (Farnsworth & Rosovsky 1993, Putman 1995, Wilson & McMahon 2006). In many cases, the burden still lies on the telemetry practitioner (Minteer & Collins 2005), as not all countries (or institutions) regulate or require ethical approval to conduct research on wild animals (Peck & Simmonds 1995). In such cases, it would be worthwhile to obtain external peer review from experts in the field (including a veterinarian) prior to embarking on research on endangered species. Typically, if animal care approvals are needed by a researcher’s home country/jurisdiction, the permit must be obtained there, even if the research is to be conducted elsewhere. In some cases, this means obtaining approvals from 2 jurisdictions (home institution and study site).

A2: High Consumer Cost/No Adoption

Advancements in GPS technology will include the introduction of low-cost instruments for consumers

Jin ‘11

[Shuanggen; Shanghai Astronomical Observatory, Chinese Academy of Sciences, et al; “Remote Sensing Using GNSS Signals: Current Status and Future Directions,” Advances in Space Research, Vol. 47, p. 1652]

With more and more space-borne GPS reflectometry and refractometry missions in the near future (e.g., follow-on FORMOSAT-7/COSMIC-2 mission, CICERO and TechDemoSat-1), these missions will monitor more detailed Earth’s surface characteristics and atmospheric and ionospheric information with high temporal-spatial resolutions. Furthermore, some advanced GNSS receivers are being developed with improved algorithms for the various possible applications and quasi real-time data processing capabilities to satisfy the future space-based high-performance missions (e.g., next generation TriG (Tri-GNSS) receiver with the ability to generate multi-GNSS refraction and reflection). It is also possible in the next few years a low cost instrument will be made public capable of operating on limited resource satellites, such as those being developed by Universities. New remote sensing applications using GNSS signals are expected to continue expanding over a global scale in the coming years.

A2: Russia

Empirics prove, U.S. Russia Relations fail

Oberg, 05’

James Oberg, July 18, 2005 “The real lessons of international cooperation in space”

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/413/1James Oberg spent 22 years as a space engineer at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, TX where he specialized in NASA space shuttle operations for orbital rendezvous. In honor of his pioneering work, on developing and documenting these space shuttle rendezvous techniques, he was named by the NASA-Area "Association of Technical Societies" as their 1984 "Technical Person of the Year". In 1997 he received the "Sustained Superior Performance" award for designing the complex first Space Station assembly mission. In support of NASA's spaceflight operations he has written books on Rendezvous Flight Procedures, on Mission Control Center console operations, and on the history of orbital rendezvous. He provides expert assessment and forecasts of Russian space industrial and technological elements for corporate and government clients.SmwDI/WaruAHY

It was the very heights of the Cold War,” Stafford recalled, “with thousands of nuclear weapons aimed at each country.” Then from outer space a streak of sanity appeared: “Yet both superpowers had great accomplishments in space, so we decided to work together.” On the dais, his opposite number on the Soviet side, Leonov, nodded amiably. However, history paints a far different picture, and Leonov, especially, knew it. The Soviet space program was in shambles, its drive to land men on the Moon literally in ruins and rubble (Leonov was to have been the commander of that mission). Its backup plan to regain the lead in the “Space Race” was to build a small orbiting space station, but linkups failed and one space crew died (Leonov was supposed to have gone on that flight but a medical problem led to the dispatch of his backup crew). Two subsequent space stations were launched but crashed to Earth, and Leonov had trained to command them both. His subsequent assignment to the space linkup was a consolation prize. Only with the Soviet program at a standstill did Moscow agree to fly a joint orbital mission. Its fallback position was that if it couldn’t be Number One in space, it could at least pose as the equal partner of the new Number One, the United States. It was better than letting on how far behind its space program had fallen.But for the biggest promises often touted for the “grand alliance” of the US and Russia, the scorecard is much less clear-cut. Having the Russians along was supposed to make the project cheaper, but it cost more to build the proper international interfaces. Launching all components into a northerly orbit accessible from Russia increased the space transportation cost by billions of dollars.As far as “not speaking about politics”, that may be an acceptable rule in the narrow theater of spacecraft operations, but it is not a technique that can be generalized to apply to international partnerships as a whole. There, national policy requires a relationship with moral law as well as amoral “realpolitik”. There are plenty of regimes that the US simply would not partner with in the 1980s and 1990s, and for similar reasons, will not partner with today.

A2: China Cooperation

China has recently become more realist and less interested in cooperating.

Shambaugh, 11’David Shambaugh, Director, China Policy Program, GWU, Winter, 2011

[Washington Quarterly, volume 34. number 1, Winter 2011 p. 24]Waru:ahy/Smw:di

What the world has seen from China since 2009 is an increasingly realist, narrowly self-interested nation, seeking to maximize its own comprehensive power. China’s rapid recovery from the global financial crisis, growing energy consumption needs, rising nationalism, a looming leadership transition, and distrust of the Obama administration following President Obama’s 2010 decisions to receive the Dalai Lama in the White House and to sell a $6 billion arms package to Taiwan have all fueled this tendency. This external behavior is mirrored in the country’s domestic discourse.

Cooperation with China could undermine US tech leadership

Cheng, 09’

Dean Cheng, research fellow Asian Studies Center, Heritage Foundation, 10.30.09 [http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2009/10/US-China-SpaceCooperation-More-Costs-Than-Benefits]Waru:AHY/Smw:DI

Beyond the technical issues, however, there are more fundamental political concerns that must be addressed. The U.S. military depends on space as a strategic high ground. Space technology is also dual-use in nature: Almost any technology or information that is exchanged in a cooperative venture is likely to have military utility. Sharing such information with China, therefore, would undercut American tactical and technological military advantages.