issue242 Societies should try to save every plant and anim

angeikimUID: 4857

242"Societies should try to save every plant and animal species, regardless of the expense to humans in effort, time, and financial well-being."

rainlannyUID: 68597

Agree
First, the ecological balance is very important to every species live on the earth, including human being. To keep the balance, we should try our best to save every plant and animal species which is in danger.
Second, the fittest survive is a law to determine which species is not fitable for the current conditions, we human beings should obey the law. however, the world we live has been changed greatly by human being greatly, and most specieses cannot sustain any more. ......Therefore, it is  the very thing to us that save the sufferred spceies.

paisleyUID: 64183

can not agree with it.

1.  saving every plant and animal species does have a lot good to our human beings for they  are a part of our varieties. To keep all species is a way to protect ourselves. Think of the food-chain and other unforeseenable corelations!

@. However, we should not to go extremes to carry out this goal. When we have to sacrifice our welfare for this abstract concept, things will turn out to be riridiculous.

angeikimUID: 4857

disagree :)

1.we should obey the law of nature. even though we human being have tremendously changed the world.
2. if we do as the speaker indicates we will waste lots of resources.
we should put our efforts in feilds/aspects, such as changing the living conditions, diminishing proverty, etc.

gteryyUID: 114434

我觉得这个题目也要辨证地看。
一方面，任何物种如果是经过自然选择生存下来的，必然是对社会、生态圈有用的。最终是对人类的生存有利的。（如果是我，会带上个人观点强调生命的平等性）所以所耗费的资源、时间是为了可持续发展的。
另一方面，很多物种是由于社会的不正常发展的科技造成的畸变等，比如如果人类培育出5条腿的青蛙，我想就不应该留下来了。
云云

angeikimUID: 4857

最初由 terryshen 发表
[B]感觉这篇写得很烂，再凑字数。：（

Given the nature law of the fittest to survive, I fundamentally disagree with the speaker’s claims. Although that it is our very responsibility to rescue extinguis... [/B]

有建议没有？：）秘诀之类的，分享分享吧。　

gteryyUID: 114434

是啊，我也觉得他写得好好。也不晦涩，还很流利。不会是米国吧？:)

这个还要讨论一下保护的物种是自然淘汰的还是认为破坏的

angeikimUID: 4857

其实我个人意见是，既然这些物种可以被认为造成的原因给破坏或者改变，本身就说明他们是不怎么适合属于被选择留下来的物种。
花费时间和精力去保护这些物种也是没有意义的。无论造成他的灭亡是人还是自然。其实人也是自然的一部分。如果是人造成他的灭亡也是自然选择的结果不是吗？

angeikimUID: 4857

okay, so, 同道同道。:)

村姑UID: 165867

这篇ISSUE是那种看着熟悉，写着困难的一种

zhang1982002UID: 153658

242"Societies should try to save every plant and animal species, regardless of the expense to humans in effort, time, and financial well-being."
Indeed, the human behavior influent the environment in the world, as a consequence , the balance of the nature is diminishing and the biology species come into the states rapid extinction. The advocate that emphasize the government should save every plant and animal with the limited public resource , however, could be problematic and unpractical.

The state of extinction could not always responsible for the human behavior. Admittedly, the man-made influence such as deforest, contamination, undue exploring have speeded up the diminishment of the species. With the degrading of the living surrounding , the animal and the plant decrease even vanish for ever. On the contrast, take nature law into account, without men’s affect there are also some species destined to vanish. The nature law could wash out some creature which could not adopt the changing surroundings .

Furthermore, it is not the duty for the government to utilize all the resource to deal with the extinction. There are some pressing affair to be address, such as education, legislation, poverty, the welfare and the public healthy. Government is established to optimize the limited public resource to do the public good. If the resource is allocated to fight the losing war. Before make a public strategy the professors and the leader should scrutiny the feasibility of the program. If the a plan sound great but hard to handle, the government either alter a better manner or forbidden it. There are so many species in the world , even to the economic prosperous states , to save all living species is a financial burden to suffer. In addition, to plan and execute a so vast and complex project is maybe a severely interference to the nature which may be in a much better state. Imagining the proceed of sampling , transporting. Person could calculate the possibility of the survival of the species. Alternatively, the task could be accomplished by the private fund and the volunteers , the government could though the legislating and the found correspondent commit to supervise the environmental affair , only provide financial aid to some extremely conditions such as industry which violent the nature heavily, selected animals and plants which are in server place and may extinct in future not far away.

If the government could copy with some other problem more effectively and efficiently , the problem of the save the species could be less server. When the industry are guarded to be a health circulation of development, and the  hazard released waste could be dealt well, the mankind attain a high moral and ethics level, the influence of the unwanted would be minimized.

Finally, the extinction which has appeared will be pressing in the future, However, the government should do its own function and not plan unreasoned programs. In the routing duty of the government and the support from the private ,  the problem could be handle to satisfy even the environmental activist.

franckyUID: 163555

zhang1982002写的比我好多多了，不过我还是想说点自己的看法
１．刚上了新东方，修锐说因为ＥＴＳ是犬儒主义，所以写驳论更容易得高分，偶深以为然．
２．题目说的是society,而zhang1982002把他换成了government.其实我到是觉得应该不只包括government的，而应该是整个人类的，还包括个人，多提一下是不是更充分一些？
３。连接词很重要的，新东方老师说该用连接词的地方一定要用，不知道应不应该用的争取用，所以第二段是不是加个in the first place 什么的更好一点
？同样还有第四段。
４。注意语法错误，呵呵，没了