Issue121【Triple Week】第1次练习by david36355

david36355UID: 2603992

挖坑儿埋了自己算了= =

TOPIC: ISSUE121 - "At various times in the geological past, many species have become extinct as a result of natural, rather than human, processes. Thus, there is no justification for society to make extraordinary efforts, especially at a great cost in money and jobs, to save endangered species."
WORDS: 432          TIME: 00:45:00          DATE: 2009-7-12 21:49:39
Humanism, a word driving the mass to care. Take a look at the blossom of the charity associations, the eruption of the activists appealing for peace, there is no doubt that species on the edge of extinction would be put on the board to arouse the world`s attention. On balance, I fundamentally agree with the notion, which is the necessary result for the humanism. However, the poor species needs extra care, but not  "extraordinary" care.
The animals near their extinction needs to be protected, which could be explained both by the emotional look and by the scientific notion. Primarily, from the bottom of the human`s heart, we can`t simply watch the species pushed to be crushed. Even if the most experienced hunter would be moved by the tear of a dying cub. On the other hand, saving the species could be of great benefit. It is not only the satisfaction that we humans are living in a world full of various neighbours, saving them would be an obvious push to the scientific research. Take the black and white animals, pandas, as an example. The once carnivores turn to be bamboo eaters, the tickling biological habit and the lack of adoption to the nature, all these matters and finally end up that the pandas are ready to be wiped of the earth. According to the notion of Darwin, they are not adjusted to the challenge of nature. Anyway, the to-be-extinct species are to be protected for their research value.
On the contrary, there is actually no need for the human to take every effort to save the endangered. Definitely, the animals and plants are threatened by the rush of the industrilization, but this could not be the necessary reason that we take the whole responsibility.
As mentioned above, the endangered in a great propotion lacks the ability to live on whether there`re the human beings or not. The species are to be kicked out of the train of the development, while the humans drag them up on. Had a poor patient over his 150s on the bed, with numerous pipes and machines around him to make his life a little longer, is absolutely ridiculous.
At the same time, to rescue the dying species out of the threats also means to stir the biological relationships by the human`s hand, which takes the risk to make more troubles to the other species. Had there been a zone with wolfs and sheep, and all the wolfs killed, the sheep would decrease out of  
Last but not least, taking too much effort saving the species is unreasonable.

泡面UID: 2513568

TOPIC: ISSUE121 - "At various times in the geological past, many species have become extinct as a result of natural, rather than human, processes. Thus, there is no justification for society to make extraordinary efforts, especially at a great cost in money and jobs, to save endangered species."
WORDS: 432          TIME: 00:45:00          DATE: 2009-7-12 21:49:39
Humanism, a word driving the mass to care. Take a look at the blossom of the charity associations, the eruption of the activists appealing for peace, there is no doubt that species on the edge of extinction would be put on the board to arouse the world`s attention. On balance, I fundamentally agree with the notion, which is the necessary result for the humanism. However, the poor species needs extra care, but not  "extraordinary" care.

The animals near their extinction needs (need) to be protected, which could be explained both by the emotional look and by the scientific notion. Primarily, from the bottom of the human`s heart, we can`t simply watch the species pushed to be crushed. Even if the most experienced hunter would be moved by the tear of a dying cub. On the other hand, saving the species could be of great benefit. It is not only the satisfaction that we humans are living in a world full of various neighbours, saving them would be an obvious push to the scientific research. Take the black and white animals, pandas, as an example. The once carnivores turn to be bamboo eaters, the tickling (?) biological habit and the lack of adoption to the nature, all these matters (matter) and finally end up that the pandas are ready to be wiped of the earth. (这个例子没大明白）According to the notion (theory) of Darwin, they are not adjusted to the challenge of nature. Anyway, the to-be-extinct species are to be protected for their research value.

On the contrary, there is actually no need for the human to take every effort to save the endangered. Definitely, the animals and plants are threatened by the rush of the industrilization, but this could not be the necessary reason that we take the whole responsibility.
As mentioned above, the endangered in a great propotion lacks the ability to live on whether there`re the human beings or not. The species are to be kicked out of the train of the development, while the humans drag them up on. Had a poor patient over his 150s on the bed, with numerous pipes and machines around him to make his life a little longer, is absolutely ridiculous. （这个例证很形象）

At the same time, to rescue the dying species out of the threats also means to stir the biological relationships by the human`s hand, which takes the risk to make more troubles to the other species. Had there been a zone with wolfs and sheep, and all the wolfs killed, the sheep would decrease out of  
Last but not least, taking too much effort saving the species is unreasonable.

1，习作的时候希望能把后面的补充完整
2，例子都很好，很有説服力，开头开的很好
3，有些地方我没太明白，可能是理解缘故，麻烦解释下