Can the World Really Set Aside Half of the Planet for Wildlife?
Smithsonian,. 'Can The World Really Set Aside Half Of The Planet For Wildlife?'. N. p., 2014. Web. 5 Nov. 2014.
My current event is on an idea of evolutionary biologist E.O. Wilson, to save Earth from the mass extinction that we are currently facing. To understand this, I will explain exactly what this extinction means: as of now, more than 75% of all life on the planet is threatened with extinction, from krill to coral to lions to eagles to elephants. Every hour, at least one species of animal or plant goes extinct. The only time such loss of biodiversity has ever happened at this scale is the Paleozoic-Mesozoic Extinction, also known as the Great Dying. During this extinction, almost 97% of all life died out. The 3% left over would eventually become all of the life currently alive today, including millions of extinct life forms. But now, species are dying on a scale that may actually eclipse the Great Dying, and one species is to blame: us. We happily destroy everything that we touch, all in the name of “progress”. However, Dr. Wilson has a plan to stop this devastation: setting aside a total of 50% of the planet for wildlife, with humans using the other 50%. Progress has already started on this plan in Florida, with logged pine forests being replanted and wildlife already moving in. In theory, large “wilderness corridors” will wrap around the planet, allowing for animals to have a safe haven to live.
I really liked this article because it showed so much potential for the project idea: half of the planet set aside for nature! However, I believe that humanity can do better: with the population density of New York, all the over 7 billion people on Earth could fit into an area the size of Texas. If we can achieve something like that, than maybe we could learn just how small we are compared with the rest of nature’s splendor, and give us all a much-needed lesson in humility.
posted for B. Sperber
Kelsey Ravesloot
ReplyDeleteThis blog has a lot of facts on the topic. This can be a good and a bad thing, good because it gives the reader a sense of what is going on, but bad because it gets a little complicated with all the numbers. You used barely any repetition which is really good, but you don't need all the ":", try to use some other punctuation marks. You also said a few things that I had no idea what they were, so try to explain things you think other people wouldn't understand. This blog was overall very well written, and now I know a lot more about what happening today.