ISSUE 31，望狠批

kcc9394

超时很多，而且感觉思路有点矛盾~~~~第二篇ISSUE，望狠批
31.Society should make efforts to save endangered species only if the potential extinction of those species is the result of human activities.
With the explosive development of technology and science, people pay more attention to relation between ecology and society. The speaker claims that human should solely prevent other species from extinction only when such extinction is ascribed to human activities. Although I agree that we should donate out best effort to compensate our damage to other species, the statement fails express that every single creature has its value of existence and contribution to maintain the variety of the ecosystem, and we should save as many species as possible.
Obviously, many species are becoming extinct every year. While some are the result of natural selection, others are entirely attributed to human process. To start with, we have to consider Darwin's argument, the so-called " natural selection" . Natural selection indicates: a species could find that it does not have traits within its gene pool to survive changes in the environment. In this case, in the face of disruptive selection, and a sudden shift in the environment such as a loss of habitat, a species may not been able to live long enough to reproduce. If this happens, then the species will become extinct, will die and be loss from Earth's future forever. Consider that such extinctions are caused natural forces, supporters of the issue thus conclude that there exist no necessary to save endangered species. On the other hand, we have to consider the potential cost of saving every species endangered.  As most funding of the salvation comes from government budget, any efforts trying to preserve all endangered species may bring serious financial pressure to a government, especially those developing countries. By exaggerating the difficulties we face, a lot people are attracted to back up the idea that society should only protect species whose potential extinction is caused by human activities.
However, ignoring the benefits and merely focusing on the costs is obviously not an scientifically analytical method. For several reasons we should and do out best to protect every species of world. First, the extinction of the majority of species in geological past did not violate the balance of our nature, this suggests that there would be little harm human could to the ecosystem by maintaining the variety of species. Secondly, many species, including those approaching their extinction, have considerable value in researches of many different fields, such as historical study, chemical study, biology and so on. Take Komodo dragon as a paradigmatic example. Today, Komodo dragon is one of the most valuable species that is endangered, of no more than 2000 still walking on earth. Living on earth for near 100 million years, Komodo dragon is the unique existing species that is related to dinosaur, making it an extremely rare source for us to study that extinct species.
Moreover, to ourselves as mankind, saving other species is a ethical behaviour rather than a matter of compensating. Consider that the "natural selection" is with no exception of human race, the human process could also be regarded as one of the selections of natural. Whereas, why are so many people dedicating to protect animals? The answer is, compare to other species, we are emotional, humanistic, and most importantly, we are the only species in the world that have the power to protect other animals from vanishing. This kind of moral behaviours is happening everywhere and every second in the world. For example, a man who witness a child struggling in a river is liable to save the child, despite that he may have nothing to do with that child. In the same way, we are liable to protect every species of the world, even when we are not the one to blame for their extinctions.
In sum, we are certainly attributable to most cases that many species are becoming endangered. However, throwing off such discrimination, we are amenable to prevent every species from extinction. With appropriate efforts and means, a win-win success can be made.

kcc9394

顶~~~~

kcc9394

求批，求各路大神~~~

竹林中人

fails express？
be loss from Earth's future？ｌｏｓｔ
麻烦LZ附上提纲，感觉你的第二段表达了多个意思，这点不太好

kcc9394

多谢版主~~~~
提纲：支持观点：阐述什么是自然选择，得出一些物种的灭绝是自然因素，人类没有去挽救他们的必要性；拯救物种的资金大多来自政府支出，增加政府财政压力，影响经济发展或就业
反对观点：1、这些物种原则上并没有影响生态平衡，而大多数物种都有它们的独特的价值，例如研究价值
2、人类保护动物并非出于补偿，是出于道德和同情心，因而不应该只去保护因人类活动而濒危的物种

把第二段从On the other hand那里拆开两段会好点吗？
还有，这样的文章值不值3.5....我的目标暂时就是3.5了