Contention 1 is Inherency – The National Ocean Policy is a failure. Budget and coordination efforts hamstring holistic strategy for exploration

These diseases risk extinction.

In considering the importance of biological warfare as a subject for concern it is worthwhile to review the known existential threats. At this time this writer can identify at three major existential threats to humanity: (i) large-scale thermonuclear war followed by a nuclear winter, (ii) a planet killing asteroid impact and (iii) infectious disease. To this trio might be added climate change making the planet uninhabitable. Of the three existential threats the first is deduced from the inferred cataclysmic effects of nuclear war. For the second there is geological evidence for the association of asteroid impacts with massive extinction (Alvarez, 1987). As to an existential threat from microbes recent decades have provided unequivocal evidence for the ability of certain pathogens to cause the extinction of entire species. Although infectious disease has traditionally not been associated with extinction this view has changed by the finding that a single chytrid fungus was responsible for the extinction of numerous amphibian species (Daszak et al., 1999; Mendelson et al., 2006). Previously, the view that infectious diseases were not a cause of extinction was predicated on the notion that many pathogens required their hosts and that some proportion of the host population was naturally resistant. However, that calculation does not apply to microbes that are acquired directly from the environment and have no need for a host, such as the majority of fungal pathogens. For those types of host–microbe interactions it is possible for the pathogen to kill off every last member of a species without harm to itself, since it would return to its natural habitat upon killing its last host. Hence, from the viewpoint of existential threats environmental microbes could potentially pose a much greater threat to humanity than the known pathogenic microbes, which number somewhere near 1500 species (Cleaveland et al., 2001; Taylor et al., 2001), especially if some of these species acquired the capacity for pathogenicity as a consequence of natural evolution or bioengineering.

Contention 4 – STEM

US is falling behind in STEM

Department of Education 14 (United States Department of Education, “Science, Technology, Engineering and Math: Education for Global Leadership”, U.S. Department of Education, 2014. http://www.ed.gov/stem, nyy)

The United States has become a global leader, in large part, through the genius and hard work of its scientists, engineers and innovators. Yet today, that position is threatened as comparatively few American students pursue expertise in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM)—and by an inadequate pipeline of teachers skilled in those subjects. President Obama has set a priority of increasing the number of students and teachers who are proficient in these vital fields. Only 16 percent of American high school seniors are proficient in mathematics and interested in a STEM career. Even among those who do go on to pursue a college major in the STEM fields, only about half choose to work in a related career. The United States is falling behind internationally, ranking 25th in mathematics and 17th in science among industrialized nations. In our competitive global economy, this situation is unacceptable.

The plan is key to increasing STEM education – spurs programs and interest.

Beattie and Schubel, 13 (Ted A., President and C.E.O. of Shedd Aquarium, a nonprofit organization that works in conservation and research of the world’s ecosystems, Jerry R., President of C.E.O. of Aquarium of the Pacific, A non-profit organization who’s mission is to instill a sense of wonder, respect , and stewardship for the Pacfic Ocean , its inhabitants, and ecosystems, “On the Importance of a National Program of Ocean Exploration to Education”. NOAA. July 19-21, 2013. http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/oceanexploration2020/oe2020_report.pdf nyy)

In the current competitive global economy, the United States faces a distinct disadvantage. Only 16 percent of American high school seniors are proficient in mathematics and interested in STEM careers. And among those who do pursue college degrees in STEM fields, only half choose to work in a STEM-related career. The benefits of STEM education are clear. By 2018, the U.S. anticipates more than 1.2 million job openings in STEM-related occupations, including fields as diverse as science, medicine, software development, and engineering. STEM workers, on average, earn 26 percent more than their non-STEM counterparts, and experience lower unemployment rates than those in other fields. In addition, healthy STEM industries are critical to maintaining a quality of life in the United States. A national program of ocean and Great lakes exploration provides myriad ways to capture public imagination and curiosity to support sustained involvement and more intense exposure not only to STEM topics, but also the humanities and arts. New less expensive tools, such as small ROVs, remote sensing station, and underwater cameras, enable everyone to participate in ocean and freshwater exploration, such as through the NOAA kiosks stationed in Coastal Ecosystem Learning Centers, provide a glimpse into the true nature of science: not merely as a bundle of textbook facts, but a dynamic enterprise of investigation that is constantly changing as our understanding evolves. The effectiveness of STEM-focused programs are evident; studies have shown not only that young people enjoy inquiry-based STEM activities in and out of school settings, but also that sustained involvement and more intense exposure to STEM topics increase youth interest and confidence in their scientific abilities. By engaging the public with ocean and Great Lakes observation, we provide people of all ages with opportunities to explore their natural aquatic environments, and to fall in love with the magic and mystery of scientific exploration.

Increasing STEM cements the foundations for America’s economic growth and global competitiveness.

Engler 12 (John, President of Buisness Roundtable and former governor of Michigan, “STEM Education Is the Key to the U.S.'s Economic Future”, US News & World Report. June 15, 2012, http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2012/06/15/stem-education-is-the-key-to-the-uss-economic-future, nyy)

A close look at American unemployment statistics reveals a contradiction: Even with unemployment at historically high levels, large numbers of jobs are going unfilled. Many of these jobs have one thing in common–the need for an educational background in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Increasingly, one of our richest sources of employment and economic growth will be jobs that require skills in these areas, collectively known as STEM. The question is: Will we be able to educate enough young Americans to fill them? Yes, the unemployment numbers have been full of bad news for the past few years. But there has been good news too. While the overall unemployment rate has slowly come down to May's still-high 8.2 percent, for those in STEM occupations the story is very different. According to a recently released study from Change the Equation, an organization that supports STEM education, there are 3.6 unemployed workers for every job in the United States. That compares with only one unemployed STEM worker for two unfilled STEM jobs throughout the country. Many jobs are going unfilled simply for lack of people with the right skill sets. Even with more than 13 million Americans unemployed, the manufacturing sector cannot find people with the skills to take nearly 600,000 unfilled jobs, according to a study last fall by the Manufacturing Institute and Deloitte. The hardest jobs to fill were skilled positions, including well-compensated blue collar jobs like machinists, operators, and technicians, as well as engineering technologists and sciences. As Raytheon Chairman and CEO William Swanson said at a Massachusetts' STEM Summit last fall, "Too many students and adults are training for jobs in which labor surpluses exist and demand is low, while high-demand jobs, particularly those in STEM fields, go unfilled." STEM-related skills are not just a source of jobs, they are a source of jobs that pay very well. A report last October from the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce found that 65 percent of those with Bachelors' degrees in STEM fields earn more than Master's degrees in non-STEM occupations. In fact, 47 percent of Bachelor's degrees in STEM occupations earn more than PhDs in non-STEM occupations. But despite the lucrative potential, many young people are reluctant to enter into fields that require a background in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics. In a recent study by the Lemselson-MIT Invention Index, which gauges innovation aptitude among young adults, 60 percent of young adults (ages 16 to 25) named at least one factor that prevented them from pursuing further education or work in the STEM fields. Thirty-four percent said they don't know much about the fields, a third said they were too challenging, and 28 percent said they were not well-prepared at school to seek further education in these areas. This is a problem—for young people and for our country. We need STEM-related talent to compete globally, and we will need even more in the future. It is not a matter of choice: For the United States to remain the global innovation leader, we must make the most of all of the potential STEM talent this country has to offer. Government can play a critical part. President Barack Obama's goal of 100,000 additional science, technology, engineering, and math teachers is laudable. The president's STEM campaign leverages mostly private-sector funding. Called Educate to Innovate, it has spawned Change the Equation, whose study was cited above. A nongovernmental organization, Change the Equation was set up by more than 100 CEOs, with the cooperation of state governments and educational organizations and foundations to align corporate efforts in STEM education. Meanwhile, from June 27 to 29, U.S. News will draw together, for the first time, hundreds of business executives, educators, policymakers, government officials, technology experts, philanthropists, community leaders, and association chiefs to develop solutions to the jobs crisis in the STEM fields. This public-private cooperation is an example of business's recognition of the importance of STEM to our economic future. Business needs a talent pipeline providing the skilled employees who can routinely use scientific and technological skills in their jobs. Fortunately, more and more companies and their senior executives recognize this and are putting their money where their long-term interests are. For America, improving achievement in science, technology, engineering, and math will go a long way to ensuring that our country can compete globally, create jobs, and achieve the levels of economic growth that will buttress Americans' standard of living and social safety net. High-quality STEM education represents an opportunity that students, workers, educators, and business must seize if we are to keep the country strong.

US growth and competitiveness preserves leadership and stops world war.

Khalilzad, 11 (Zalmay, Counselor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, served as the United States ambassador to Afghanistan, Iraq, and the United Nations during the presidency of George W. Bush, served as the director of policy planning at the Defense Department during the Presidency of George H.W. Bush, holds a Ph.D. from the University of Chicago, “The Economy and National Security,” National Review, February 8^th, http://www.nationalreview.com/node/259024/print)

Today, economic and fiscal trends pose the most severe long-term threat to the United States’ position as global leader. While the United States suffers from fiscal imbalances and low economic growth, the economies of rival powers are developing rapidly. The continuation of these two trends could lead to a shift from American primacy toward a multi-polar global system, leading in turn to increased geopolitical rivalry and even war among the great powers. The current recession is the result of a deep financial crisis, not a mere fluctuation in the business cycle. Recovery is likely to be protracted. The crisis was preceded by the buildup over two decades of enormous amounts of debt throughout the U.S. economy — ultimately totaling almost 350 percent of GDP — and the development of credit-fueled asset bubbles, particularly in the housing sector. When the bubbles burst, huge amounts of wealth were destroyed, and unemployment rose to over 10 percent. The decline of tax revenues and massive countercyclical spending put the U.S. government on an unsustainable fiscal path. Publicly held national debt rose from 38 to over 60 percent of GDP in three years. Without faster economic growth and actions to reduce deficits, publicly held national debt is projected to reach dangerous proportions. If interest rates were to rise significantly, annual interest payments — which already are larger than the defense budget — would crowd out other spending or require substantial tax increases that would undercut economic growth. Even worse, if unanticipated events trigger what economists call a “sudden stop” in credit markets for U.S. debt, the United States would be unable to roll over its outstanding obligations, precipitating a sovereign-debt crisis that would almost certainly compel a radical retrenchment of the United States internationally. Such scenarios would reshape the international order. It was the economic devastation of Britain and France during World War II, as well as the rise of other powers, that led both countries to relinquish their empires. In the late 1960s, British leaders concluded that they lacked the economic capacity to maintain a presence “east of Suez.” Soviet economic weakness, which crystallized under Gorbachev, contributed to their decisions to withdraw from Afghanistan, abandon Communist regimes in Eastern Europe, and allow the Soviet Union to fragment. If the U.S. debt problem goes critical, the United States would be compelled to retrench, reducing its military spending and shedding international commitments. We face this domestic challenge while other major powers are experiencing rapid economic growth. Even though countries such as China, India, and Brazil have profound political, social, demographic, and economic problems, their economies are growing faster than ours, and this could alter the global distribution of power. These trends could in the long term produce a multi-polar world. If U.S. policymakers fail to act and other powers continue to grow, it is not a question of whether but when a new international order will emerge. The closing of the gap between the United States and its rivals could intensify geopolitical competition among major powers, increase incentives for local powers to play major powers against one another, and undercut our will to preclude or respond to international crises because of the higher risk of escalation. The stakes are high. In modern history, the longest period of peace among the great powers has been the era of U.S. leadership. By contrast, multi-polar systems have been unstable, with their competitive dynamics resulting in frequent crises and major wars among the great powers. Failures of multi-polar international systems produced both world wars. American retrenchment could have devastating consequences. Without an American security blanket, regional powers could rearm in an attempt to balance against emerging threats. Under this scenario, there would be a heightened possibility of arms races, miscalculation, or other crises spiraling into all-out conflict. Alternatively, in seeking to accommodate the stronger powers, weaker powers may shift their geopolitical posture away from the United States. Either way, hostile states would be emboldened to make aggressive moves in their regions. As rival powers rise, Asia in particular is likely to emerge as a zone of great-power competition. Beijing’s economic rise has enabled a dramatic military buildup focused on acquisitions of naval, cruise, and ballistic missiles, long-range stealth aircraft, and anti-satellite capabilities. China’s strategic modernization is aimed, ultimately, at denying the United States access to the seas around China. Even as cooperative economic ties in the region have grown, China’s expansive territorial claims — and provocative statements and actions following crises in Korea and incidents at sea — have roiled its relations with South Korea, Japan, India, and Southeast Asian states. Still, the United States is the most significant barrier facing Chinese hegemony and aggression. Given the risks, the United States must focus on restoring its economic and fiscal condition while checking and managing the rise of potential adversarial regional powers such as China. While we face significant challenges, the U.S. economy still accounts for over 20 percent of the world’s GDP. American institutions — particularly those providing enforceable rule of law — set it apart from all the rising powers. Social cohesion underwrites political stability. U.S. demographic trends are healthier than those of any other developed country. A culture of innovation, excellent institutions of higher education, and a vital sector of small and medium-sized enterprises propel the U.S. economy in ways difficult to quantify. Historically, Americans have responded pragmatically, and sometimes through trial and error, to work our way through the kind of crisis that we face today. The policy question is how to enhance economic growth and employment while cutting discretionary spending in the near term and curbing the growth of entitlement spending in the out years. Republican members of Congress have outlined a plan. Several think tanks and commissions, including President Obama’s debt commission, have done so as well. Some consensus exists on measures to pare back the recent increases in domestic spending, restrain future growth in defense spending, and reform the tax code (by reducing tax expenditures while lowering individual and corporate rates). These are promising options. The key remaining question is whether the president and leaders of both parties on Capitol Hill have the will to act and the skill to fashion bipartisan solutions. Whether we take the needed actions is a choice, however difficult it might be. It is clearly within our capacity to put our economy on a better trajectory. In garnering political support for cutbacks, the president and members of Congress should point not only to the domestic consequences of inaction — but also to the geopolitical implications. As the United States gets its economic and fiscal house in order, it should take steps to prevent a flare-up in Asia. The United States can do so by signaling that its domestic challenges will not impede its intentions to check Chinese expansionism. This can be done in cost-efficient ways. While China’s economic rise enables its military modernization and international assertiveness, it also frightens rival powers. The Obama administration has wisely moved to strengthen relations with allies and potential partners in the region but more can be done. Some Chinese policies encourage other parties to join with the United States, and the U.S. should not let these opportunities pass. China’s military assertiveness should enable security cooperation with countries on China’s periphery — particularly Japan, India, and Vietnam — in ways that complicate Beijing’s strategic calculus. China’s mercantilist policies and currency manipulation — which harm developing states both in East Asia and elsewhere — should be used to fashion a coalition in favor of a more balanced trade system. Since Beijing’s over-the-top reaction to the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to a Chinese democracy activist alienated European leaders, highlighting human-rights questions would not only draw supporters from nearby countries but also embolden reformers within China. Since the end of the Cold War, a stable economic and financial condition at home has enabled America to have an expansive role in the world. Today we can no longer take this for granted. Unless we get our economic house in order, there is a risk that domestic stagnation in combination with the rise of rival powers will undermine our ability to deal with growing international problems. Regional hegemons in Asia could seize the moment, leading the world toward a new, dangerous era of multi-polarity.

Plan

Thus the plan: The United States federal government should establish the Ocean Science and Exploration Agency.

Contention 5 – Solvency

OSEA creation is essential to innovative ocean exploration – it solves the advantages. Current government and private sector models will fail.

McClain, 12 (Craig, Assistant Director of Science for the National Evolutionary Synthesis Center and editor @ Deep Sea News, “We Need an Ocean NASA Now Pt. 3,” 10/16/12, http://deepseanews.com/2012/10/we-need-an-ocean-nasa-now-pt-3/)

We are at a time for renewed commitment to ocean exploration and science. As stated by the Joint Ocean Commission, “Ocean programs continue to be chronically underfunded, highlighting the need for a dedicated ocean investment fund.” Captain Don Walsh, one of three men to visit the deepest part of the ocean, recently stated it best: “What we need is an Ocean NASA.” We borrow and modify John F. Kennedy’s famous speech at Rice University on the decision to go to the moon: In short, our leadership in science and in industry, our hopes for peace and security, our obligations to ourselves as well as others, all require us to make this effort, to solve these mysteries, to solve them for the good of all men, and to become the world’s leading ocean-faring nation…We set sail because there is new knowledge to be gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for the progress of all people. There is much to be gained from creating NASA-style Ocean Science and Exploration Agency (OSEA). Every dollar we commit to science returns $2.21 in goods and services. Meeting the scientific, technological, logistical, and administrative demands of scientific exploration creates jobs and requires substantial personnel beyond just scientists and engineers. The materials purchased for this cause support even further employment. As with NASA, meeting these scientific and engineering challenges will disseminate ideas, knowledge, applications, and technology to rest of society. This knowledge gained from basic research will form the backbone for applied research and economic gain later. And much like NASA has, OSEA will inspire the next generation of scientist and engineers, instilling in the young a renewed appreciation for the oceans of which we are all stewards: our oceans. It will provide a positive focus for society in a time where hope is often lacking and faith in science is low. OSEA will be the positive message that renews interest in our oceans and their conservation.What Does an OSEA look like? At the core OSEA would need a mission dedicated to basic research and exploration of the >;90% of the world’s oceans that remain unexplored. High risk with the potential for high impact would be the norm. Pioneering knows no other way to achieve those truly novel and impactful gains. To achieve these goals, OSEA would need substantial infrastructure and fleet including international and regional class research vessels, a submersible, remotely operated vehicles, and autonomous underwater vehicles. Funding would need to be secure on decadal cycles to insure both the longevity and permanence of this mission but allow for oversight to ensure OSEA was meeting its mission and financial responsibilities. An ocean exploration center would be staffed with a vibrant community of researchers, engineers, and administrators, postdoctoral fellows, graduate students, and visiting experts with a strong interacting and supportive community working toward uncovering the mysteries of the oceans. Research would be funded internally from a broad OSEA budget, not externally, freeing scientists and engineers to actually do science and engineering as opposed to the only current option, which is writing grants to other agencies with a less than 10% chance of funding. OSEA would also be a resource both for the research community and the public by being dedicated to open science, i.e. making scientific research, data and dissemination accessible to all levels of an inquiring society, amateur or professional. Publications, data, software, and engineering would be freely available and open to all. All internal processes would be transparent. The mission of OSEA in the spirit of open science would be equally dedicated to public outreach. For too long have science and society been disconnected. OSEA would involve the public as the ultimate funders of our work. A novel and cutting edge education and outreach group would develop a strategic plan to involve children and adults in the mission. There would be multiple opportunities for anyone to be involved including the public. Citizen scientists would be essential components, allowing adults to take a residence and contribute to OSEA and become life long ambassadors long after their residence. Although parts of OSEA are realized in other government and private organizations, they do not meet the full mission nor can such a distributed structure be expected to meet the challenges of this pivotal moment. For example, NOAA fills a much-needed role but its mission is largely applied. NOAA’s mission statement is “Science, Service, and Stewardship. To understand and predict changes in climate, weather, oceans, and coasts, To share that knowledge and information with others, and To conserve and manage coastal and marine ecosystems and resource”. Contrast that to NASA’s simple mission, “to pioneer the future in space exploration, scientific discovery and aeronautics research.” In an agency with a chiefly applied mission, those programs that are purely exploratory must eventually invent an applied focus or face the axe. For example, even under NURP, exploration often focused on corals and fish of considerable economic and conservation importance rather than those species of greatest novelty or knowledge deficit. The current situation at NOAA also highlights how less applied scientific programs are likely to be lost. Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute also provides another model that comes close to OSEA but is heavily reliant on private funding that can often be significantly reduced during recessions as endowments shrink. Moreover, a private foundation is unlikely to meet the full financial burden to support the full mission of an OSEA or provide a resource to the ocean science community as whole. This is not meant to criticize either NOAA or MBARI, indeed both supported our own research and have made immense contributions to ocean science and exploration, but neither do they fully realize our vision for OSEA. As John F. Kennedy stated, “We must be bold.” It is time for a great national effort of the United States of America, time for us to renew our commitment to uncovering the mysteries of the blue planet we live on. We need a NASA-style Ocean Science and Exploration Agency (OSEA). to explore and research the greatest depths of oceans with a community of scientists, engineers, and citizens.

The agency needs to be independent to avoid bureaucratic tradeoffs.

CES, 3 (Committee on Exploration of the Seas, National Research Council, Exploration of the Seas: Interim Report, National Academies Press, p. 14-15)

In proposing a strategy for international ocean exploration, it is prudent to start with a model for a U.S. national program that may encourage the development of similar national programs elsewhere. Once a number of national programs are established, nations can then collaborate in specific areas or along themes of mutual interest. The Committee recommends the creation of a national program for ocean exploration, which will be the principal implementing entity for carrying out the ocean exploration initiative in the United States. The Committee believes that an organization charged with implementing an effective international ocean exploration program should not be part of a government agency where it may be subject to internal budgetary and mission pressures, lack of transparency in budgeting and expenditures, as well as influences on program review not based on merit. The government would provide funding to the national program, offer assistance with respect to public affairs, platforms, and data management, engage in budgetary oversight, and administer a competitive process for the selection of an external national program for ocean exploration project office. The oceanographic community has had successful experiences contracting with not-for-profit corporations to perform similar functions (e.g., the Joint Oceanographic Institutions, Inc. which manages ODP). Although an existing institution or for-profit company could also operate the national program office, these arrangements are less likely to achieve broad community support.

Ocean exploration is only a matter of political will – the plan solves the harms.

Cousteau, 12 (Philippe, co-founder of EarthEcho International, “Why exploring the ocean is mankind’s next giant leap,” 3/13/12, http://lightyears.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/13/why-exploring-the-ocean-is-mankinds-next-giant-leap/)

Today a possible answer to that question has been announced. And it does not entail straining our necks to look skyward. Finally, there is a growing recognition that some of the most important discoveries and opportunities for innovation may lie beneath what covers more than 70 percent of our planet – the ocean. You may think I’m doing my grandfather Jacques Yves-Cousteau and my father Philippe a disservice when I say we’ve only dipped our toes in the water when it comes to ocean exploration. After all, my grandfather co-invented the modern SCUBA system and "The Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau" introduced generations to the wonders of the ocean. In the decades since, we’ve only explored about 10 percent of the ocean - an essential resource and complex environment that literally supports life as we know it, life on earth. We now have a golden opportunity and a pressing need to recapture that pioneering spirit. A new era of ocean exploration can yield discoveries that will help inform everything from critical medical advances to sustainable forms of energy. Consider that AZT, an early treatment for HIV, is derived from a Caribbean reef sponge, or that a great deal of energy - from offshore wind, to OTEC (ocean thermal energy conservation), to wind and wave energy - is yet untapped in our oceans. Like unopened presents under the tree, the ocean is a treasure trove of knowledge. In addition, such discoveries will have a tremendous impact on economic growth by creating jobs as well as technologies and goods. In addition to new discoveries, we also have the opportunity to course correct when it comes to stewardship of our oceans. Research and exploration can go hand in glove with resource management and conservation. Over the last several decades, as the United States has been exploring space, we’ve exploited and polluted our oceans at an alarming rate without dedicating the needed time or resources to truly understand the critical role they play in the future of the planet. It is not trite to say that the oceans are the life support system of this planet, providing us with up to 70 percent of our oxygen, as well as a primary source of protein for billions of people, not to mention the regulation of our climate. Despite this life-giving role, the world has fished, mined and trafficked the ocean's resources to a point where we are actually seeing dramatic changes that is seriously impacting today's generations. And that impact will continue as the world's population approaches 7 billion people, adding strain to the world’s resources unlike any humanity has ever had to face before. In the long term, destroying our ocean resources is bad business with devastating consequences for the global economy, and the health and sustainability of all creatures - including humans. Marine spatial planning, marine sanctuaries, species conservation, sustainable fishing strategies, and more must be a part of any ocean exploration and conservation program to provide hope of restoring health to our oceans. While there is still much to learn and discover through space exploration, we also need to pay attention to our unexplored world here on earth. Our next big leap into the unknown can be every bit as exciting and bold as our pioneering work in space. It possesses the same "wow" factor: alien worlds, dazzling technological feats and the mystery of the unknown. The United States has the scientific muscle, the diplomatic know-how and the entrepreneurial spirit to lead the world in exploring and protecting our ocean frontier. Now we need the public demand and political will and bravery to take the plunge in order to ensure that the oceans can continue to provide life to future generations.

Directory: file -> view
view -> Western Europe after wwii
view -> Author study: paul fleischman
view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide
view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg
view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh
view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce
view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy
view -> Table of Contents Lesson #
view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad

Download 0.6 Mb.

Share with your friends: