The enviorment now and then

     
    READ THE Time article from February 2nd, 1970, “Fighting to Save the Earth from
    Man” on the link above. The assignment is to write a paper comparing and
    contrasting the environmental situation as outlined in the article in 1970,
    with that of today.
    paper should be 12 point, double-spaced and fully referenced in APA format. Any
    and all statistics, quotes or references must come from reputable sources and
    be cited appropriately.
    The paper must specifically address the following points:
    Wherever there are statistics on environmental pollution, wherever possible,
    update those statistics for today and discuss how they correlate (better/worse)
    with the situation as it prevails in 2012.

    The second paragraph begins, “The environment may well be the gut issue that
    can unify a polarized nation in the 1970s. It may also divide people who are
    appalled by the mess from those who have adapted to it.” In the context of
    current world politics, analyze to what extent this statement is still valid.

    On what basis might ecology be called “the subversive science”?

    People in 1970 were not as concerned or conscious of climate change as a global
    threat (though even in 1970, it gets a mention), but the much more tangible and
    immediate polluting effects of industrialized civilization, about which they
    were very concerned. Have people become more or less aware of environmental
    problems since 1970? How has that awareness changed and what impact do you
    believe the movement of the late 1960’s and 1970’s impacted on our
    understanding of environmental problems today? You must cite evidence, polls
    etc to support any claims you make with regard to these questions.

    According to the article, the balance of nature is “governed by distinct laws
    of life and balance” which “Man has violated.” To what extent do you believe
    this statement to be valid? Support your answer with at least two specific
    examples.

    “Variety is nature’s grand tactic of survival”. Comment on the validity of this
    statement with reference to an ecosystem of your choice. Contrast it with a
    practice from industrialized society which seems to contradict this.

    What is meant when Paul Ehrlich is described as a “Neo-Malthusian”? To what
    extent were Ehrlich’s predictions borne out?

    “If technology got man into this mess, surely technology can get him out of it
    again.” To what extent do you agree with the validity of this statement?
    Support your answer with specific evidence of technology solving and/or
    exacerbating an environmental problem.

    The article posits that there are a, “few deeply ingrained assumptions” such
    as: “nature exists primarily for man to conquer”, “nature is endlessly
    bountiful” and civilization should always seek to “produce more than you can
    consume, so that you can produce more.” Cite examples to illustrate whether
    these are widely held assumptions today. Analyze to what extent these are false
    or dangerous assumptions.

    The article concludes with a list of possible solutions, indicating that the
    “biggest need may be a change in values.” What kind of values need to be
    changed and what values should replace them?

    The late, great citizen scientist and ecologist, Barry Commoner, who passed
    away this year, is quoted as saying “We have the time – perhaps a generation –
    in which to save the environment from the final effects of the violence we have
    done to it.” More than a generation has now passed by, indeed almost two
    generations since he said this. How much time do we have left?

     

     

    ORDER THIS ESSAY HERE NOW AND GET A DISCOUNT !!!

                                                                                                                                      Order Now