Do you think that humans are killing or saving the earth? Please say why and explain.?

Question

Please use as much detail as possable.

Answer 1

There is no question in my mind and a lot of other people's mind that we are doing harm to Mother Earth. I don't know if people who are cutting into the rain forests realize that they are potentially suphocating all of us. Humans are oblivious to potential harm until it is too late. If they cut enough of these rain forests down the amount of oxygen we have to breathe will diminish. In order for us to preserve our existence we need to be more aware of potential problems to our atmosphere. Pollution isn't a way to preserve!!

Answer 2

We're not killing the earth, just making life a hell of a lot harder on ourselves as a species. In our quest for shiny plastic things and the other such useful detritus we are adding stuff to the atmosphere, ground water, and soil that is slowly going to make it impossible for our species to continue at the current population level. Other lifeforms that are more hardy are going to happily go on living long after we have finished ourselves off.

It is a fact that the global climate patterns are rapidly changing, and that this is going to reduce the amount of arable land, as well as significantly raise the sea levels. It is a fact that the global wild fisheries are rapidly becoming extinct, and will most likely be commerically nonexistent within 50 years, with the exception of a precious few well-protected fisheries. It is a fact that fresh water supplies are already strained to the limit in every nation on earth, and we will have to rely on energy intensive desalination for future growth in water demand. It is a fact that over half of all oxygen production comes from tropical rainforests, and that these forests will largely cease to exist in about 40 years. It is a fact that coral reefs all over the world are dying rapidly, and will be a mere curiousity in about 40 years, for the first time in 60,000,000 years. Bottom line is that we are destroying the very intricate life support system that is our earth, or at least making it unable to support anything close to the population that now exists.

You can try and throw words about and make elaborate arguments that reality isn't what it appears to be. That's fine, nature doesn't care whether we want to get it or not. We can ignore it and cease to exist. If we are so stupidly stubborn, that is exactly what will happen, our race will simply dwindle and most likey become extinct.

The sad thing is that we can maintain a high quality of life AND keep our ecosystem in good shape, but we are too selfish, cheap, stubborn, and stupid to do so. Oh well. Take a look around and enjoy it while you can, there will only be another say 3-5 generations of humans before a massive die-off occurs.

Answer 3

Humans are incapable of 'saving' the Earth from anything, other than if a large meteorite was going to collide with it and man could launch a missile at it to change the trajectory and thus, avoid the collision. But man doesn't have the technology to be able to do that yet.

We are killing the earth, as we are killing off natural species of animals, changing climates and kinda like bacteria/viruses we multiply & drain areas of all available resources, rather than conserve and ONLY use what you *need*, like other animals.

Answer 4

Yes, if you haven't seen An Inconvenient Truth you should. It talks all about how humans are creating global warming by putting green house gasses (Carbon Dioxide & water vapor) into the air. If we keep going the way we're going there is going to be twenty more feet of water in the oceans, flooding Manhatten, Most of Florida & Louisianna, And California. Right now we are fighting a war on terrorism because of the world trade center being flown into, but if we don't stop global warming the tribute to the world trade center will be under water.

Plus the warming oceans mean more low pressure systems over the oceans which causes a greater number of, and more powerful, tropical storms (like hurricane Katrina).

Answer 5

The "stranded polar bear" photo continues to grab headlines, even after yet another thorough debunking. In what has become the furry, cuddly symbol of all that is wrong with the climate change debate, the now ubiquitous photo was splashed across news pages worldwide, with captions such as this from the Daily Mail (click for article and image):

They cling precariously to the top of what is left of the ice floe, their fragile grip the perfect symbol of the tragedy of global warming.

See more articles with the same specious claims here, here, and the NYTimes version with photo caption correction appended here.

There was just one problem: the photograph was taken not of polar bears "stranded" on ice - far from it.

Rather, the bears were wandering around their natural environment as they do every day. Read the first-round debunking here and here.

But now there is more. Spiked.com has investigated further by going straight to the source to get the full story from the original photographer. As explained in Rob Lyons' The bear necessities of climate change politics on Friday (emphasis mine):

The student who took the photograph, however, gives a slightly different account: ‘They were on the ice when we found them and on the ice when we left. They were healthy, fat and seemed comfortable on their iceberg.’

Amanda Byrd, an Australian graduate student at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF), says she took the picture around three years ago - in the summer. The photograph was not ‘taken by environmentalists’ but as part of a field trip with the university.

Furthermore, the photographer wasn't even asked permission:

Byrd is clearly a little miffed that ‘the image you have seen around the world was distributed without my consent, and [with] the wrong byline’.

And logic and reason (aka science) is all but lost when cuddly polar bears are brought into this debate:

For all the polar bear stories, it is far from clear that these bears are an endangered species. Even if a warming world did make things more difficult for them, Arctic temperatures have been considerably warmer in the past – and polar bears survived those periods. It’s not even clear that polar bear numbers are in decline.

How many of the mainstream media outlets that used this photograph in stories on the new IPCC report or other climate change stories will publish a correction? How many will reveal that the photograph was not only incorrectly captioned, but also incorrectly attributed as portraying yet another direct impact of man-made global warming? I'm not holding my breath.

So why is this important? After all, it is just a photo, right? Not quite. It just so happens that it is a photo that has been viewed by thousands of people worldwide who now (incorrectly) associate it with global warming. It is part of a larger picture of alarmism that is continually supported by the mainstream media.

Even with this most recent thorough debunking, the myth carries on. The polar bear is now the mascot of yet another global warming alarmist website. Al Gore couldn't find any struggling polar bears, so he had to animate them. The US government is now researching their status as an endangered species. But they are not doing so based on the usual protocol set by the endangered species legislation, but instead in response to a lawsuit by environmentalists such as Greenpeace alleging as much.

Answer 6

Peace be unto you. certainly this might desire to referencing the Jewish Scripture yet this is something Muslims might desire to stay with as nicely, because of fact the scripture is all one, from a similar God merely given by using distinctive human beings at distinctive cases. we would desire to consistently be following each and every thing it is got here upon to be reliable interior the Torah and the Bible because it says interior the Qur'an: [2:136] Say (O Muslims): We have faith in Allah and that it is revealed unto us and that which became revealed unto Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the tribes, and that which Moses and Jesus won, and that which the Prophets won from their Lord. We make no huge distinction between any of them, and unto Him we've surrendered. -     -   [5:40 six] And We brought about Jesus, son of Mary, to stay with of their footsteps, confirming that which became (revealed) formerly him, and We bestowed on him the Gospel wherein is coaching and a mild, confirming that which became (revealed) formerly it interior the Torah a coaching and an admonition unto people who evade (evil). each and each e book confirms what became real of the books formerly it. The verse you quote not in basic terms reminds us of what exceeded off to the babies of Israel whom those instructions have been given yet additionally reminds us of that regulation that became exceeded down. Peace be unto you.

Answer 7

As much as people want to save the earth ,we are destroying it every day...so much pollution and war times look at the changes ...not very good weather is crazy all over the world not to much is being done to save the earth i feel ever country should to their part to save our world, every one should do some good were they live,if we want to save earth.

Answer 8

Human beings have no effect on the earth. When nature is done with us it will destroy us just like the dinosaurs and such.....If you look at the history of planet earth, we are infants. We are also more fragile and vulnerable to nature , then nature is to us.

Answer 9

Killing by using its recources.
Check out my blog.
www.shiseidocity.blogspot.com

Answer 10

killn nobody gives a dame about anything anymore and people are killing people more...drugs too...