United as one, earth protect us so that we can
protect her.
The views and opinions expressed in this post are strictly those of the author. The contents of this post have not been reviewed or approved by anyone.
I’ll say that I do not agree about the article based on one aspect – Compromising. The article mention about making the choices of man over caribou and preserving livelihood for 30,000 logging families over the spotted owl. I mean have he considered what would happen if we choose man over nature. This would create an imbalance eco system that would bite back at man someday. Just like excessive industry fishing, it has being reported that the marine life is unable to reproduce faster than it is losing. I strongly believe that humans are kind but because of differences that we become selfish and arrogant. In fact I think that if the world were to become a country fighting global warming maybe easier because the current problem for global warming is that developing countries wants to get better but developed countries wants to slow down their development be it economical reasons. Only if we are united as a world (nature and man) then we can compromise if not everyone would think like the article’s writer. Just because nature does talk back like humans does mean that they are any different.
I’ll say that I do not agree about the article based on one aspect – Compromising. The article mention about making the choices of man over caribou and preserving livelihood for 30,000 logging families over the spotted owl. I mean have he considered what would happen if we choose man over nature. This would create an imbalance eco system that would bite back at man someday. Just like excessive industry fishing, it has being reported that the marine life is unable to reproduce faster than it is losing. I strongly believe that humans are kind but because of differences that we become selfish and arrogant. In fact I think that if the world were to become a country fighting global warming maybe easier because the current problem for global warming is that developing countries wants to get better but developed countries wants to slow down their development be it economical reasons. Only if we are united as a world (nature and man) then we can compromise if not everyone would think like the article’s writer. Just because nature does talk back like humans does mean that they are any different.
4 comments:
Hmm...I am not really agree with what you said.What you said is just the 'surface' of this problem.When you look through this problem,it is hard to say that the nature can really preserve without consider the aspect of economy.So Ken,wake up!!!
Thanks, Ken, for your comment.
I agree with you in that if the choice is between man and nature, I wonder if nature has to be sacrificed every time. Will there be any nature left with such an attitude? (And yes, the problem of overfishing the seas is a perfect example.) Certainly in the past human societies have tended to be egocentric, ignoring the plight of nature.
However, I also understand your handsome commentator's point of view. The issue is very complex. Every "environmental" situation probably needs to be accessed individually.
Thank you, Ken, for contributing to this discussion.
why can't human just be part of nature? Maybe the reason is that they have been over protect as they evolve through the time.
Without a nature (in this case our planet) there would not be an economy to run... If you consider that economy is important, it is the existance of nature that is substaining the economy... In short, if there is no country, there would not be a home. And if there is no home what is there to protect? That is why in many countries a large part of the GDP is contributed to the defence of the country... And in the words of Al Gore "Which is more important on our scale? The Stacks of GOLD bar (economy) on one side or just our planet on the other? Now, you wake up!!! and tell me which is more important.
Post a Comment