speech against the topic environment conservation and protection?

Cortez Badolato: 1

Donte Hamme: Speech On Nature Conservation

Kimberlee Bowdish: For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/axo1CYou could try talking about how all the factory's poloot the sky's with their smoke & has caused global warming & why all the lakes are drying up & how Australia is on water restrictions.

Otto Lingafelt: assuming you mean speech against the environment and conservation view point.The world has existed, or so it is believed, for 4.5 billion years, man has been on this earth for some 400,000 years. During all the time that the world has existed it has never needed anyone to dictate how it reacts or what creatures survive, it has done this all by itself. Those that argue that man has magnified the problems ignore historical facts that there has always been mass extinctions and global catastrophes, things have come and things have gone and all of these have happened without man's interference. Lets take conservat! ion, we now decide that man has the power of nature, he can by his actions decide which species lives or dies and which ones are worth saving, yet we base this on emotive feelings rather than fact, is saving an iconic species such as a Tiger any more worthwhile than protecting a tree frog? yet which of these has the greater case made for it. We do not yet understand the full complexities of survival and until we do any action we may take could prove, in hindsight, to have been greatly misplaced and we risk endangering far more than we save.Mother nature herself has created a world where the survival of a species depends on that species ability to adapt, and adapt to whatever is thrown at it, those that do live those that do not die it's as simple as that. Certainly man is changing the planet but changes have happened before and some animals lived and some died, so what is the difference now, is it that we have elevated ourselves to god like status and believe we have the ri! ght to dictate which survive? or is it we as man have a consci! ous and worry about things, whether we can alter them or not. To protect things that are endangered due to climatic, environmental and habitat threatened is one could say going against the very core of evolution, let those who can adapt survive let those who cannot die, and this applies to man as to every living thing on the planet.Now lets consider the environment, the earth has always had huge environmental shifts, they range from hot to extreme cold, from very wet to very dry, they have for the earth's entire existence been happening, whether they happen over thousands or millions of years or through some cataclysmic event they have still happened. The world had a massive ice age, it wasn't caused by man and it is highly likely that the world will have another ice age at some point and there is nothing we will be able to do about it, the earth does what the earth does. The simple fact is we do not know when any of the great climate changes will happen, the one thing we d! o know is that they will happen eventually, as the earth's climate seems to move in cyclic patterns, do we really think our actions will change this, or do we think we may be altering the cyclic pattern in some way, all we would be doing if that was the case is shifting the inevitable by a few years one way or the other, again the fact is no matter what we do these things will occur whether we like it or not. One can again put the point that the things we do effect the living conditions of the people and creatures on the planet and here there is some case, certainly our polluting of our environment is some thing where it affects us we should be aware of and try to stop, but the earth pollutes itself as well, it spews out vast sulphurous clouds in volcanic eruptions,it poisons waters by algae bloom and in a hole raft other other ways yet these we cannot stop and we seem to ignore this fact that concentrate on the things we do. A huge volcanic eruption will do far more dama! ge than any man made pollution, it will throw unimaginable amounts of d! ust, toxic material and ash, it will empty vast amounts of CO2 and sulphur into the atmosphere and will lead to more global warming/ cooling or sun blocking than anything we can do in a generation or more. Are we as mankind hung up on the trivial effect we have on this planet? are we again elevating our own self importance as we cannot grasp the fact that we live in a world were nature is so dominant ?and if you come right down to it in the great scheme of the world we are just another species destined to go extinct like so many before us, only man worries about the effect he has on his world, maybe and just maybe we should stop worrying, for their is nothing we can ultimately do about it and our brief moment that we rule this planet will, in the greater context of time, be lost in the vastness of the universe, for whatever man thinks his time will be just an eye blink .in the history of the cosmos, and be viewed as a footnote in its history....Show more

Danette Slot! nick: ah, well how about, the psychological reason behind why people in spite of all the evidences related to man made cause GW, seem not to care at all. well it goes the same with you, i mean here you are trying to come up with a speech about the environment in which you really know nothing about. and ONLY BECAUSE OF SCHOOL GRADES you're FORCED to this speech. in a speech YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO KNOW YOUR WORDS BY HEART. FOR THE MESSAGE IN YOUR SPEECH CAN INSPIRE OTHERS TO SAVE THE EARTH FROM DESTRUCTION....Show more

Brock Anwar: Include these quotes

Arlen Decorte: Bytes of Note - Hunting in Contextby George E. ClarkAmong those who care about the outdoors, few activities arouse such disparate feelings as hunting. For many in the United States, hunting brings to mind time spent in nature, parents teaching their children, and sometimes, given patience and skill, extra meat for the freezer. For others, hunting evokes thoughts of endangered species, the international! bushmeat crisis, the risk of injuries from firearms, and ethical issue! s regarding eating meat. The mention of hunting may also bring to mind gun violence not directly connected to hunting. (See http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm for statistics on gun-related crime in the United States; see http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00044112.... for a study of hunting-related injuries over a six-year period in the state of New York.)From an environmental standpoint, if managed well, hunting can replace missing top predators in an ecosystem. Conversely, these top predators are themselves likely to be missing due to past hunting. Hunting can also used to combat destructive invasive species such as the nutria, a ravenous rodent eating its way through wetlands in the United States, particularly in the Gulf Coast.Despite the division between the hunting and anti-hunting conservation communities, there is some common ground. Few on either side of the debate would dispute that overhunting, poaching, and unregulated trade in animal parts harm species! and ecosystems and may even promote new vectors of disease transmission.Poaching of animals for illicit sales has been documented in the United States as well as abroad. For example, a series of joint law enforcement efforts in the past decade have documented “extensive illegal taking and trade in black bear parts that originated in Virginia, including Shenandoah National Park”. Globalization drives poaching by providing access to international demand (for example, traditional medicines in Asia in the Virginia case, and London markets for African game in another).Beyond opposition to poaching and trafficking, there are positive common interests as well. Most prominently, habitat preservation should provide some incentive for hunting and non-hunting conservationists to develop a deeper mutual understanding and work toward common goals. For that to happen, it is important to grasp the complex set of regulations, cultural norms, and commercial and political interests that! surround hunting in the United States.Environmental conservation has d! eep roots in hunting in the United States. Theodore Roosevelt, the president who began the National Wildlife Refuge program and designated 53 refuge sites, was an avid hunter (see, for example, Through the Brazilian Wilderness, his account of a hunting and collecting expedition for the American Museum of Natural History). Aldo Leopold, one of the United States’ most revered conservationists and the key lobbyist for the wilderness component of the National Forest system, was a professor of game management and hunted throughout his life. (See http://www.wilderness.org/AboutUs/Leopold.cfm and http://www.aldoleopold.org/About/leopold_bio.htm. An interview with biographer Marybeth Lorbiecki gives nuanced insight into Leopold’s relationship with hunting.) Many hunters today continue in the conservation tradition through the Izaak Walton League, an environmental organization with a strong hunting ethics component.While hunting and shooting are express uses of many types of fed! eral land in the United States, hunting is regulated at the state level. Therefore, there are 50 different sets of rules on what animals may be hunted how, when, and by whom. There is similar decentralization of regulation of who may possess firearms and use them to hunt. Given the market for firearms to use in hunting, it should come as no surprise that one of the most prominent Web sites listing state hunting agencies belongs to the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), a firearms industry trade association whose board members come from Glock, Smith & Wesson and other gun manufacturers. (Page 15 of the NSSF 2006 annual report has a complete list of board members. NSSF is also one of the prime supporters of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus, a group of senators and representatives with an interest in hunting that commands a majority in each house of the U.S. Congress....Show more