If you were to support environmentalism to remove pollutants from our environment would you be doing a good ..

Question

... thing or disrupting the natural order of the world ( balance of nature )?

Answer 1

I would be restoring the natural balance. It's the pollutants that disrupt it.

Answer 2

I do remove pollutants for a living,and there is nothing natural or orderly about them. The natural order of the world is for our bodies to be surrounded by clean air, ingest clean water and eat nutritional, non-toxic food. When I am working in an environment that features hundreds of chemical compounds that cause human cells to mutate (mutagens), when I remove those toxins, it hardly seems like I am upsetting the "natural order".

I suspect you question is more related to a political philosophy,
a squaring off between "tree-huggers" and the pro-business element. That line is becoming quickly blurred as Republican stalwarts are being stricken with catastrophic environmental maladies, ranging from M.S. to asthma.

It is of great benefit to the business community to concentrate on a healthier work environment. It is expected that a true conservative would be interested in the intelligent usage of our planet's resources. It is unfortunate that certain political factions are manipulating legitimate environmental efforts in order to further a right or left-leaning political agenda.

The environment is highly personal, and involves just a few cubic feet around each of us as practical matter. I hope for the sake of you and your family that this is an important matter to you, one which you are striving to learn about and improve upon each day.

Answer 3

Throughout earth's history, the delicate balance of nature has been maintained by the physical and chemical drive for equilibrium. The problem is,as humans started develop technology at an exponential rate, the forces on earth that maintain equilibrium are actually starting to work against us. Global warming is a prime example of this- carbon dioxide emissions causing higher and higher temperatures, melting the ice more quickly than scientists had ever predicted, and eventually changing the ocean currents and wind patterns if it gets entirely out of hand. By supporting environmentalists' actions to stop the patterns that drive us further into suffocation (which is literally what global warming is- suffocation of the earth), we can slow and prevent some of this damange. The only way to help the earth maintain its balance is for each person to do everything in their power to stop global warming. Riding public transportation systems, curbing your use of power and air conditioning- unplug things when they are not being used, walk more, do not support environmentally unfriendly cooperations, or administrations (hinthint). I hope to be able to still walk outside without having my lungs burn from the heat of the air in 2040, thank you.

Answer 4

People have always disrupted the balance of nature - it's just that now there are so many of us who have adopted the high tech way of life (or are about to) that it's starting to get serious on a planetary scale.

Environmentalism - the return to a low tech way of life (that is, one that doesn't consume non-renewable resources, habitats, species, and that doesn't produce non-biodegradable pollutants) - cannot be based upon any good. This is because any good is only ever good from a point-of-view. From another point-of-view the very same thing can be a bad.

So, what we need to do is to base environmental oughts upon a value that is positive but is not a good. Is there any such value? Yes - it is the value of that which makes it possible for valuers (that's all of us) to have values. This value is positive from any conceivable point-of-view, because the attempt to reject it would be self-refuting.

In other words, we cannot say "I negatively value that which makes it possible for me to value (whether I value positively or negatively)" - because saying that requires making a value judgment, and to make a value judgment is always to positively value that which makes it possible for us to make a value judgment.

And to what does that always positive value belong? Most immediately, it belongs to our natural environment. Beyond that, it depends whether one is religious or not and hold that it is God to whom that value belongs. If so, we can admit that it belongs to God ultimately, but that immediately it belongs to the environment.

Answer 5

A large number of things need to aid in the removal
of pollutants to create the natural balance.
It is wonderful to see a large number of projects working
towards keeping our earth cleaner. Every age group
benefits from the goodness of protecting our
global environment.

Answer 6

If you advocate environmentalism, You are doing a good thing.
In the first place, arent humans the pollutant producers and pollution contributors? It is just right to clean our own garbage. Nature could exist without man. Nature needs nothing from man. It owes nothing from man. It could survive without man.

Answer 7

i am a environmenalist but i think that the question is about a more general view. The last form of life that existed in this planet were extincted so i guess that if we dont support the environmentalist it would be good for the erth beacuse humans would be extincted and the earth in some millions of years would recover but if we continue here we may destroy it for good and to survive we would go to other planets and destroy them as well but idon't want that the answer for the earth to live is to exterminate humans so i suport envionmentalism

Answer 8

I would be restoring the natural balance. Disposable diapers are not a natural occurrence.

Answer 9

This world is in bad shape. We owe it to the young people in this world to provide them a safe place to breath. Our younger people are our future as we become Seniors.

Answer 10

yes u will be doing the best to the world.