Is technology destroying or improving the environment?
435955
it's doing a bit of both really but its doing more damage and its only doing some improving as its had to due to amount of destroying
919397
This is shocking. I don't know if I should; your teacher should see this the way it is. Oh well . . . \n\n\nThere are some opposing assertions here. \nThey deride my opinion because they are saying it is too pessimistic, and that humankind will not be ruined. Their claims are like these: \nWe are in the middle of a growth period, and if technology is to advance, solar energy must be substituted for coal and oil energy so that pollution can be decreased, and we finally find the way to live together with nature. \nAs we were in the previous industrial-revolution era in Britain, we are in a time of transition; even though it seems bad, it's just a 'standing on tiptoe'. \nScience technology must lead us to the ideal society.\n\n\n\n\n***This is STILL terrible, I'm not going to re-write the whole thing. Plus they will know this is not your work. Get a tutor, quick.
678939
right for scientific advancement\nwrong for violating nature.\n conclusion:\nwe should develop the technique but we should use it only in very demanding situation.
190873
Polution, and destroying trees and stuff. Basically living, destroys the envirment.
377991
Yes in general the world has become worse. Of course there are certain small areas that are "safer", and technologies that have made us "safer" but sometimes they bring their own badness, so generally, it's a lot more dangerous.
906697
Humans have made huge impacts on the physical environment by logging, farming, building, and really just existing. The problem is the rate of change is accelerating as the population grows exponentially and people become industrialised and require more and more. The earth really cannot sustain this growth in all aspects of people greed and need. There is no easy way to slow it let alone stop it.\n\nAs a planet we are doomed! not tomorrow but before this century is out.
61173
Both. As non-sustainable practices begin to have more and more consequences we will be forced to find alternatives, and often will not find the alternative in time to prevent significant suffering. In some areas we may have enough foresight to change before the impact is felt. I am encouraged to see more and more wind power being installed, both on land and on ocean based platforms, but at the same time I am discouraged to see people choosing to drive large SUV's which will have a negative impact on the future. In some areas reforestation is taking place, where 100 years ago there was deforestation. This is encouraging and is simply the result of changing economic use. I have also been encouraged to see negative population growth in the most industrialized countries; this suggests the present stresses on the planet may be relieved.
925474
Advantage - technology makes our lives easier\n\nDisadvantage - Uses up natural resources at an unsustainable rate, degrades the natural environment
218926
Yes it is. Interestingly enough, it is ALSO an effect of progress. technological progress.
800911
What technology?\nBoth of what? benefit and exploitation?\nCould you ask again in the form of a question?\n-->
803972
1. As an engineer, I've worked intimately with high-technoloogy. The interesting thing is that many people are unaware of some of the ways technology influences their lives. From the sensors that control the airbags in their cars, to traffic indicators with burried sensors, to cell phones, and even the way mail gets sorted. It's ubiquitous.\n\n2. Technology helps in research, in travel and even entertainment.\n\n3. Technology, when it malfunctions can be extremely frustrating. About the only thing it doesn't help with is in enjoying the out-doors, as long as you don't count the technology in your footwear, and you don't use a GPS.... etc.\n\n4. I know many people who've gotten together on MySpace and other sites. I, too have made friends. Certainly it's helping people to get together in some ways. On the other hand, if you spend all your time on the computer, you tend to lose the real-life relationships that are very important.\n\n5. False dichotomy. People want to see things as good or bad; right or wrong; innocent or guilty; straight or gay; whatever. Technology can't be pinned down to such a thing. I think that technology is purely neutral. It's how it is used that is good or bad. Just like a gun, an inanimate object. It could be used to gather food, for protection from wild animals, or even as a hammer. It could also used to commit a crime. The object, or technology has no inherent good-ness or bad-ness.\n\n6. Technology is becoming more ubiquitous and more embedded in our lives. It will continue on to the point where we view it as an extension of ourselves, like clothing. We hopefully will use it more and more, but not become so dependent on it that we are unable to function without it.\n\n7. That's an impossible question as every tool we have is technology. From the early spears to kill game, to heated rocks to keep oneself warm in the cold. People tend to think of computers and cell phones and automobiles as technology, forgetting that they are simply logical extensions of the technology of our forebears. To attempt to exist completely without technology leaves one naked in the woods.\n\nWithout computers or telephones or automobiles, some of us would still be quite happy, knowing how to survive without these things. Hopefully I could retain some of my books (technically, they are technology), and I could be quite comfortable (assuming that the technology deficit happened during the spring or summer and I was able to prepare for the harsher seasons).
368755
That we are killing eachother and destroying our environment
764798
Did the oil companies destroy the environment?  Really?  The environment is destroyed?  Have you been to eastern Europe?  I have, and let me tell you, our environment is not even close to being destroyed.  The environments over there are WAY worse off than they are here, and guess what?  All that destruction was done by their governments under communism (not by 'greedy' companies)!  And who do you think is driving the oil industry anyway?  Everyone who buys fuel, or anything made out of plastic or other oil products, or buys something shipped with oil burning methods is driving it.  You need to learn some basic economics and think about things holistically to see the real forces that drive things.  Good luck with that.\nOur judicial system will never be cleaned up as long as it has so much power.  It is a law of nature that power attracts the corrupt.  If you want a judicial system that is corruption free, you need to drastically reduce its power over the people.  Most people look at government and its branches as a benevolent big brother rather than the necessary evil that great men like Ben Franklin and Jefferson did.  The bigger and more powerful it gets, the more corrupt it will get, period.
827983
B - Habitat degradation would be the closest I would say. \n\nBut, environmental degradation would be a better answer:\nIt is related to the deterioration of the environment both in terms of quantity and extinction of some wildlife species and quality like air, water or land pollution.
801546
The technologies of today could be considered by many to be "best", and they are changing our world now, and will still change it more in the next 5 - 10 years.  Witness Global Warming and climate change...\n\nAny technology that can slow or reverse this trend gets my vote for "best".
702459
Modern technology in some instances would be used to speed training and provide better results. \n\nFor example, I can get on my computer and literally find an answer to any question or information on any topic I choose, whereas in a non technological environment, it may prove to be difficult or near impossible to quickly learn some things, as in (The hard way). \n\nIn summation, your statement refers to dull witted and unhealthy beings, I hardly find technology to be at fault here, more like pour upbringing and substandard  public school results . . . . . . . .wouldn't you agree?\n\nDarryl S.
624340
All the studies I have heard on this have been either negative or inconclusive.  Many years ago at University people were hypothesising about electronic 'smog' but the debate never really got anywhere.\n\nI can't rule out that the growth of electronic devices has created a higher level of this smog and that, since our synapses work on electrical signals, this can't be a problem.  I still await any conclusive research.