As we have explored and discussed in
class, human behavior has negatively impacted our planet. Is it too late for the Earth to forgive us
for the ways we have treated it? In one paragraph:
●
share
textual evidence from an online article of your careful choice that proves how
human behavior has negatively impacted our planet,
●
discuss
how the damages caused by the human behavior you share can be reversed, or why
you think it's too late, and
● at the end, paste the url of the
website from which you gathered
evidence.
There are many theories and facts as to the correct way gas emissions are created but it is generally believed air pollution is caused when gas emissions don't breakdown and tear down at the catastrophic ozone layer(this basically is a sunscreen to earth) from particles that are harmful to health and atmosphere, gas emissions are caused when humans burn fossil fuels and factories need power(from fossil fuels). Or when the earth has too much moisture, overproduction of smoke and pollen. This would all stop if we stopped burning fossil fuels. We can prevent what happens to the ozone layer and different climates if we worked together to end this, we could prevent this by changing to solar and work on transportation that does not pump the air into and exploding gassy mess, or we could stop being greedy and actually care about that the world has given us. We should be grateful instead we don't even care, yes we can solve this problem will people do thi, we can only hope and do our best to contribute. All though it is expected to be back to normal by 2065 we can only hope this is true since no one can predict the future.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/pollution/
https://www.epa.gov/ozone-layer-protection
I think you are right about how we can reverse the problem. Because of the fossil fuels we are burning up the atmosphere and can protect the planet, but we can take it one step further. We can stop burning coals, oil,and more like them. we could convert everything to solar or nuclear powered machines and vehicles. We can stop air pollution and lower the amount of gases that we put into the air by 20% or more. We can save this world but only if everyone helps out. We can make the planet safe or all creatures.
DeleteI agree with your assessment of the problem, but for the solution, I think we should think a bit more realistically. To stop the burning of all fossil fuels abruptly would greatly disturb our lives and the economy. One possibility is to gradually make renewable energy sources, not only solar energy, but also hydro power and biomass and other things, our main sources of electricity and energy. We may not be able to predict the future, but our actions in present day will certainly influence it. Something I think needs to be stressed more is the importance of awareness. This is a worldwide problem, and can only be solved if the entire world comes together to solve it. The true dangers of this should be made more commonly known, and people need to care about pushing for change in order to make it happen. So first, we must change the hearts of the people.
DeletePollution has negative effects on the environment. When we burn fossil fuels and release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, it causes the Earth to become warmer. About 20 hazardous objects are thrown out per second, which leads us on how pollution could harm humans. The most impactive pollutions are the air and water pollutions. Air pollution could give people asthma and other respiratory diseases, respiratory inflammation, increased risk for cancer, and so many other things. Water pollution could give people amoebiasis, typhoid, hookworm, hormonal and reproductive problems, damage to nerves, liver, and kidney, and so much more. But there is still a chance that we can at least stop the pollution damage, and prevent all natural resources from being lost. Every positive action counts!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.theworldcounts.com/stories/How-Does-Pollution-Affect-Humans
Kevin, pollution is one negative impact that cannot be reversed. See, types of pollution like air pollution damage the atmospheric layer around the Earth that protects us from being horribly burnt and mutated by UV rays and Gama rays. This erosion of this layer is permanent and cannot be reversed. The best possible thing we can do is to decrease pollution. We could not end pollution because people will not give up their cars and other machines. The only thing will could possibly manage to do is decrease the pollution rate to give us a little extra time.
DeleteI agree that a lot of negative impacts can come out of pollution in our world. In my opinion a solution to this problem is finding alternative ways of transportation. This could help us eliminate air pollution from cars and oil spills from boats in the ocean.
DeleteKevin I agree that pollution has many negative impacts in our world. Pollution can be reversed by conserving energy. This would help so that there would not be as much air pollution.
DeleteThatDude: I kinda originally thought that. But I do agree with you, we can reduce pollution rate to give us extra time on Earth.
DeleteAbbie.Gregory: Yeah. We could maybe use bikes or maybe on foot.
Jocelyn J.: Yep. We could conserve energy by using bikes. Then there would be less smoke going into the air.
Forest fires are a natural and necessary part of the ecosystem. Even healthy forests contain dead trees and decaying plant matter. When a fire turns them to ashes, nutrients return to the soil instead of remaining captive in old vegetation. Unfortunately, these wildfires may also burn good trees in the process. At other times, though, forest officials start fires purposefully in areas that need to be cleared. They keep the fire in check, so that it does not burn the good trees. In this way, a controlled burn can prevent future wildfires.
ReplyDeletehttps://wonderopolis.org/wonder/are-all-forest-fires-bad
Deletehttps://science.howstuffworks.com/.../green.../how-forest-fire-benefit-living-things-2.ht
If forest fires get out of hand then it could cause more harm than good. If a tree or plant is healthy it will most likely have living species on it. If they get caught in the fire than they could end up hurt or could potentially die. These fires could damage the habitat for some living things and could affect the population of these kind of species. It can also put a heavy smog in the air that is harmful to living things. Fires can deplete a lot of natural resources like water.
DeleteRyan,forest fires are either caused purposely(as you mentioned), or unintentionally. But forest fires can cause harm to ecosystems living in that environment. If the fires are controlled, it can be beneficial. I think that the unintentional forests fires can be prevented if people are more responsible when creating them. If they put the fires out completely, it shouldn't spark.
DeleteIn this case, I feel like people are actually helping to resolve the problem. Forest fires can get out of hand, but controlled ones can help minimize the potential devastation. I don't really see what damage humans are causing in your post. I agree that forest fires are necessary to maintain a healthy forest environment.
DeleteMichaela, I think you are right. If all of these plants and resources of water get destroyed a lot of animals and other organisms will die also. I think that forest fires can do a lot more damage thank we think of it.
DeleteKaylynn, you are right sometimes controlled forest fires get out of hand and do more damage than usual.
DeleteThe number of fish are rapidly decreasing. People are over fishing. Since there are less fish some people who only eat fish there food supply is going down.Fishermen are able to find all the fish by a fish finder that sends out sound waves. It's like a radar. The sound waves bounce off the fish and tells them where they are. So they are able to find a lot more.I think that we could fix it just by not over fishing.So fishermen could not catch a lot at once.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.worldwildlife.org/threats/overfishing
http://mocomi.com/fishing-in-the-ocean/
I do think that this problem can be reversed. If we left the fish alone, that could give them a chance to replenish the population. Although, one problem to the solution you posed is that humans are overpopulated. This means that they will fish for more food for more people. A resolution to the problem with your solution is to waste less food. Literally tons of food pour into landfills every year, and if we could save just a small portion of that food somehow than I think we would be able to fish less and therefore the fish population would increase.
DeleteIreland, I also think that over fishing is a big problem. And I think that your solution not over fishing would work good. Another solution that might work is people should not eat as much fish so there will not be that big of a demand for fish.
DeleteThis is a big problem in our world but it is reversible. I think your solution to the problem could work, but I am not sure that the fishermen will want to give up the use the radars. I think another solution is to make people more aware of the problem. This could cause the demand of fish to decrease. This would help the problem and let the fish population recover.
DeleteOverfishing is truely a big problem. With less fish, there is less fish for humans and other animals to eat. I think that just stop fishing completely is a little drasstic. A solution that could work and not change people lives a ton, is to fish less. Also to put more strict limits on the amount of fish people can catch.
DeleteHorseRider48 I think you are correct that if we left the fish alone they could repopulate. Ryan I think if people didn't eat so much fish there would be more fish. Riley I think if there were limits on the amount of fish people could get there would be more fish. Abbie I think if people were more aware people might not fish so much,or not eat so much.
Delete“Since the state’s shale boom took off around 2006, 18m gallons of oil and toxic wastewater have been spilled between January 2006 to October 2016”
ReplyDeleteI think the Earth could forgive us for our wanton fracking if we let it rest once in a while from extracting natural gas from shale.I think we could accomplish decent regulation allowing the earth to regenerate. An example of legislation could be that they cut up the shale areas and let certain companies frack on them or they could set a limit of number of wells drilled each year. But it would take millions of years for the earth’s supply of natural gas to be restored, so in conclusion I believe we should lay off the heavy duty fracking and take it slow until the earth recovers from the amount of fracking done to it. If we do continue fracking be warned of some seismic activity ahead.
Vaughan, Adam. “Why Is Fracking Bad? You Asked Google – Here's the Answer.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 19 Aug. 2015, www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/19/why-is-fracking-bad-google-answer.
I think this is a great idea for a temporary solution to this problem, but I don't think it's enough action to stop this problem completely. I think what we really need to do is switch our main power source from non renewables to renewables, such as solar power or wind power.
DeleteI agree that a solution is possible to fix this. However I don't think we can just "let the earth rest". At this point we need a complete shutdown of all fracking to fix this problem.
DeleteThis is not a problem that cannot be fixed, but the solution isn't to abandon fracking completely. After all, it is how we get most of our energy, and I think HorseRider48 has a point. We should switch our main power sources to use more renewable sources, rather than boycott a very important industry.
DeleteHorseRider48, I do agree with the idea that we should use renewable energy sources but I believe that we should transition slowly because if it's an immediate shutdown, tons of people will lose their jobs but if it is a gradual shift, we can minimize the damage. James D. Kelly IV, your idea is a good one but doing what you suggest would put unemployment through the roof. Mollybear514, I love the idea but see the beginning of my response.
DeleteLittering is a big problem in our world and it has not seemed to be getting solved. There are many people in this world that do care and try to help with this problem but there are to many people that dont. Studies show that littering kills wildlife. Also studies show that the most stuff littered is cigarette buds, toys, candy wrappers, broken glass, gum, etc. Having to clean up litter also costs a lot money and time. The causes of this problem and pretty easy to solve just don't be irresponsible and throw garbage away after you are done with it. I'm not the best with this problem either but I am always trying to help and clean up after myself and others.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.conserve-energy-future.com/
Throwing your garbage out in the trash is what people should be doing in the first place, but people are just to lazy to do it. I think another way to help prevent litter is make better laws against it and bigger fines for it. If some is littering they should have to pay for. Better laws and bigger fines will probably help because people don't want to have to pay money for just being lazy. I think that people stop littering and if people were to start picking up all the litter on the ground, then mayne the damage to the earth could be reversed.
DeleteI think this can reverse if we come together and make it happen, but that will most likely be hard to do because there is billions of people on our planet. I think that your solution will work if everyone helps out but it if not it will be challenging.
DeleteI agree that we are causing this and I am also not great at resycling but we can also could cut the plastic rings that cans come in to prevent animals choking by getting their head stuck in them. we could also cut or rip toilet paper rolls and paper towel rolls so that animals don't choke. I copied this from my comment for squidward witch is ballow yours.
DeleteI agree that littering can be reversed. I don't think that it will be as easy as your solution makes it sound, but that is a very strong start. I believe that more laws should be enforced and more cops should be looking out for this. Also fines should go up. Even just having people who litter have to clean up trash for hours would help. Nobody wanted to spend time picking up trash that isn't theirs, so they should take care of their own.
DeleteI agree with you Jada because I see signs all the time saying fines $50 and I always say that is not enough. I agree If the price does go up than people would walk to extra 5 steps and throw there garbage away. Also if they did make a law than again I think people would stop and throw there trash away.
DeleteWhen you throw trash in the water you don't think of what that is doing to the environment. Fish live in the water and many birds eat those fish. If the fish eat a plastic water bottle for example they could die because of that. Then a bird might eat that fish. So they would also be eating the plastic water bottle. Then they would die also. And it does not only harm animals it harms people too. We could fix this by just thinking about what we do before we do it. That could help a lot of other things too.
ReplyDeletehttps://oceanconservancy.org/blog/2016/09/03/the-impact-of-ocean-trash/
I agree with everything you said and that there might be more that we can do, for example we could cut the plastic rings that cans come in to prevent animals choking by getting their head stuck in them. we could also cut or rip toilet paper rolls and paper towel rolls so that animals don't choke.
DeleteThis solution would solve a lot of problems, but unfortunately most of the time people don't really listen to this advice. Also, trash in the oceans doesn't just come from people throwing their garbage directly into the ocean, but more so when landfills have no other place to put the trash. I think a solution to this problem could be creating a plastic that can decompose. The huge problem with not enough space for our trash could be solved in part by recycling and wasting less food.
DeleteI think the problem of people throwing trash and other plastic in the water, isn't entirely reversible. No matter how much we try to stop doing it, or try to extract it, many species are already endangered, and there is just far too much trash in our waters. However, we can still try to do our best to prevent the problem from getting worse. I agree with your solution of informing people, and make sure they try to think about our environment first, but unfortunately I don't think many people will care enough to make a big difference. Some other things we could do are make bigger fines for littering, and have more garbage cans around the area so people dont throw things into the environment as much. Another thing that we can use is our technology. We can develop devices to extract trash out of our waters, to create a better environment.
DeleteI don't think that we can clean the entire ocean and every body of water of trash, so I don't think that the problem is irreversible. Taking away all of the damage might be impossible, but further damage is preventable. I think that you solution is a good one. I have another idea; decomposable plastic. If plastic was environmentally friendly, then littering would not be a problem in the first place.
DeleteI was never saying that it is irreversible. I know that we can't do that. I was just saying that we should stop doing it. on the other hand I like the idea of decomposable plastic.
DeleteToday we have lots of ways that our Earth is negatively impacted by the people. One big thing impacting the Earth every day is littering . Littering does lots of thing to the environment. Littering makes our planet look gross and disgusting which is something we obviously don't want. Littering can also cause our Earth to be very smelly. The U.S spends a ridiculous 11.5 billion dollars a year on cleaning up litter. Littering is such a easy fix all we have to do is just throw away our trash and recycle properly and the would be so beautiful and isn't that what we want instead of a smelly ugly environment.
ReplyDeletehttps://scienceleadership.org/blog/Littering_and_its_Effect_on_the_Environment
Will, I think that littering is a big problem in our world to. And a I also think how crazy it is that the US spends $11.5 billion an a problem that could easily be fixed. I think just throwing are trash away would be a good solution to the problem to. But it would also be hard to convince everyone to trow there trash away and not just throw it on the ground.
DeleteWill, Littering is a huge problem that many do without even thinking twice. I think, like you said that there is a very easy way to fix this problem. Yes I do think it would be hard to convince everyone; that's why we need to give them options that's why I think there should be more public trash cans to stop littering. This will make it so people have the option to not just throw the trash on the ground.
DeleteWill I total agree that littering is a gigantic problem. Your solution is a little to hard to do on a large scale though. It is hard because evryone has to do it to it to realy work. A solution that could work is to hire people to pick up trash. That would give more people jobs and clean the community.
DeleteRyan, I totally agree with you. Not everyone really cares about trash and litters because they just simply just don't care. I think we could get lots of people to just throw away easy it is a very easy and doable solution.
DeleteRiley, I really like your solution of just paying people to pick up trash. I kinda disagree though. That would be taking that $11.5 billion dollars and just be sending it through the roof. We could also just have foundation and groups volunteering to do that work without paying them. It is a solution that needs a little work but can be done well.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteEthan my man, while I don't like to say this, I sadly believe that this problem is not fixable.
ReplyDeleteLike you said, when one species of animals becomes extinct, the ones that rely on that animal become extinct too. And animals once there gone, don't come back later, so because we have done this so often, there is no way that we can go back to where we once were.
Because you didn't pose any kind of solution to this, I will pose one. I believe one thing us humans can do is just stop hunting so much. Get the government or congress to pass some sort of hunting law on how much people can hunt and fish, so there will be a limit of the death of animals in the future.
ReplyDeleteI think that there should be signs for where people are fishing. For certain fish that are decreasing you should have to release them if you catch it. If caught with fish that you were supposed to release you should get you fishing licenses suspended or taken away or maybe have to pay a fine. That way people wont want to loose their fishing license and will hopefully follows the rules.
I think this problem can be fixed, by having more factory grown fish, not harvesting fish out of the ocean, which play a role in our ecosystem.
ReplyDeleteAs for your idea, I think you do have a good point that the over fishing may never be fixed. Mainly it's up to the choices of the consumers for what they buy more of.
I think the problem could be solved to an extent but the fish will never recover all the way. One possible idea to improve the problem would be increasing the amount of no-fishing zones in areas where endangered fish are known to live. A no-fishing zone could have surveillance or a patrol officer watching the area and if the rules are violated the fisherman's license could be revoked. This would allow the endangered fish to thrive and reproduce until they are stable and can continue moving with the flow of the ecosystem.
ReplyDeleteEthan I agree that many fish are becoming extinct. Also the extinction of fish not only affects the fish population but it also affects other animals. Overfishing can be reversed by fisherman not fishing for fish that are in decline.
ReplyDelete