As whole organism cloning becomes common around the world, we can’t help but think that someday, a human being will also be cloned. I personally believe that this is ethically incorrect as a human is given a life span for a reason and believe that once we die we should not be able to have another organism genetically identical come back into the world. Other problems such as reduced genetic biodiversity occur when cloning an organism. Reducing genetic biodiversity is a problem as it makes a species vulnerable to external changes in the environment. For example, if there were very sudden climatic conditions that were to change until the point where a species couldn’t survive in (e.g extreme temperatures), the population would decrease significantly and potentially be wiped out.
No. Let nature take its course. Many people say that bringing back extinct animals would drastically improve the ecosystem. However, the habitats of many of the animals that people are trying to bring back have mostly been changed or destroyed. This means the animals may have to relocate, which would result in it being an invasive species, and we all know the unwelcome effects of invasive species.
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated,” (Mahatma Gandhi). People should understand that animal extinction can be slowed, even climate change deniers. By looking at pollution, habitat degradation, global warming/climate change, and solution, animal extinction can be helped and decrease. Firstly, to mention that animals are being hurt with human products because people leave their trash in the environment. Under many circumstances, pollution has caused an immense problem in the world.
Not only sea animals, but animals all over the world might extinct or become endangered because of pollution. If our future generation has less food, people from all over the world will suffer from starvation. They will not only suffer from the lack of food, but also from the disease that pollution causes. Our world will become something so frightening and unsuitable for any living
Even when humans are taken into account first, some of these decisions can actually cause more harm than good. Destroying the Earth is simultaneously destroying humans, because they depend on the environment for survival. Eradicating one species of insects, for example, can have serious unintended effects. These pesticides can kill of pollinating insects as well, which in turn reduces crop outputs. All living things in the natural world depend on one another, just as people depend on one another in human environments.
In conclusion, water pollution can no longer be an issue if we change the materials in plastic, make a trash filter through an ocean, and if we make trash eating fish that will not be harmed. Those are all reasonable functions that can be done. If they are done, it will change the whole world for the better. It will make marine life healthier and in result causes less sickness from humans eating fish. Water pollution comes from humans and humans are the only ones that can fix
For example, rather than giving control to the fisheries in determining how they use the land, regulations should determine what practice can be used to protect the ecosystems around aquaculture facilities. The facilities should also not cause destruction of any key habitats, such as the mangrove swamps that commonly get destroyed. Aquaculture also results in increased pollution, which sometimes threatens the native wish in the area. To encourage cleaner fish farm production, the government could provide subsidies to companies that pollute less while fining those with high levels of pollution. These types of policies and regulation in conjunction with the Endangered Species Act would promote population stability or group in threatened fish
From an economic, political and social perspective, the destruction of the rainforests due to the greed of humans have detrimental effects to our earth and safety of the people living on it. Based on the scenarios presented, we can only conclude that the destruction of the rainforest due to human greed will only cause harm to our world. How do we stop
The oxygen depletion then eliminates submerged plants as well. Another study conducted by Landolt, E. and Kandeler, R. (1987) was an experiment done in order to measure the growth of duck weed. This is relevant as we expect that the knowledge acquired about the growth will assist us in obtaining the relevant information pertaining tour study. We believe our research is important because as we did more research on duck weed we discovered that for pond owners, duck weed is said to be a ‘nuisance’. These owners also strongly believe that this sort of plant should be eradicated.
furthermore, it produces pollution which is not good for human health. Mining is the major cause of deforestation, because for the mine to take place plantation should be removed which is bad for people because they need oxygen produce by plantation. Exploitation of resources is a challenge that needs to be minimised because it makes it harder to ensure social and environmental