Today's current affairs discussion was very interesting.But i feel that we did not really touch on the point of " economical development always outweighs enviromental conservation" . Everybody was only talking about the pros and cons of land reclaimation in Singapore but fail to realise that this isn't really the question at issue.
In my opinion, land reclaimation is only something that Singapore and a few other countries do to increase their land little by little and it does not really affect the enviroment.Although the representitive of the fishes says that land reclaimation destroy their habitats and ultimately kill them, global warming is what destroys the most coral reefs. Scientists say that even if the global temperature rises just 3 degrees, many coral reefs would be destroyed.
Deforestation, pollution and desertification are more serious problems which affect us and the Earth. The rate of deforestation and desertification has been increasing at an alarming pace in the last few decades. This causes habitat lost for animals and in the case of desertification, there is less farming land as the land is changed in deserts. P
ollution has also affected a lot of the world population eg. people who rely on water from rivers which are polluted may get diseases from drinking polluted water. I feel that these topics should have been discussed and not land reclaimation.
In geograhpy lessons, I have learnt about man-land relationships. Everything that we do affects the Earth, which in turn affect us. So if we chop down more forests to build more factories which produces lot's of greenhouse gases, the temperature will then rise, the coral reefs will be destroyed and many fishes would die so we would not have fish to eat and we would not have enough nuitrition. (that's a lot in one sentence)
Thus I feel that the motion of today's debate is not correct. Enviromental conservation has the upper hand.
Samuel
In my opinion, land reclaimation is only something that Singapore and a few other countries do to increase their land little by little and it does not really affect the enviroment.Although the representitive of the fishes says that land reclaimation destroy their habitats and ultimately kill them, global warming is what destroys the most coral reefs. Scientists say that even if the global temperature rises just 3 degrees, many coral reefs would be destroyed.
Deforestation, pollution and desertification are more serious problems which affect us and the Earth. The rate of deforestation and desertification has been increasing at an alarming pace in the last few decades. This causes habitat lost for animals and in the case of desertification, there is less farming land as the land is changed in deserts. P
ollution has also affected a lot of the world population eg. people who rely on water from rivers which are polluted may get diseases from drinking polluted water. I feel that these topics should have been discussed and not land reclaimation.In geograhpy lessons, I have learnt about man-land relationships. Everything that we do affects the Earth, which in turn affect us. So if we chop down more forests to build more factories which produces lot's of greenhouse gases, the temperature will then rise, the coral reefs will be destroyed and many fishes would die so we would not have fish to eat and we would not have enough nuitrition. (that's a lot in one sentence)
Thus I feel that the motion of today's debate is not correct. Enviromental conservation has the upper hand.
Samuel
No comments:
Post a Comment