Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Could we survive without protecting the environment?
I always hear stuff about being eco-friendly, Go Green, Protect wildlife, cause if you don't you'll destroy the world.
So I wonder...
Is it possible for humanity to become self sustaining, and maybe destroying the ecosystem doesn't have to mean the end of the world? Is there a possibility for man made alternatives to things like the Ozone, and the natural air filter that is the rainforests. Do we really need to save the tigers and whales?
What if would it look like if we were the only living things on the planet, yet we were somehow thriving? How would we do it, what could it look like?
6 Answers
- ?Lv 58 years agoFavorite Answer
At a certain point, out technology could be great enough for the ecosystem to collapse with humans surviving. Humans can already breed animals and soon enough make artificial oxygen and water.
However, the ecosystem is being destroyed exponentially and our technology is not. As population grows (population grows exponentially) the amount of waste, pollution, and extinction also grows exponentially, as more people means more destruction.
But as the number of people increases, our technological advancement does not necessarily advance. Yes, more people means more ideas and more innovation, but it seems these ideas are centered more toward business than science.
And so we have an imbalance between the environments decay and our rise. So, we will die before our technology even gets to the point where we are sustainable.
Unless there is some apocolyse that destroys some people but not all; that allows small sects of us to return to primitive lifestyles where there is no threat of this collapse in the ecosystem. Yes it's Romantic, but its the only hope I have for this species.
To answer your question about how it would look, I imagine it would just be a dome filled with oxygen/water,domesticated animals,and masses of people. It would probaly be overpopulated.
I also imagine it being very dark, colorless. All the people would be sad. There would be no struggle, no adventure, and we would all be bored. No emotion, no excitement, it would be purely rituals and routine.
Lets face it, the wild is fun! Its competition and we love competition. The destruction of the environment brings a destruction of what makes us feel alive, competition- tension.
Not only will we die if we don't slow our destruction of the environment, but we will also find the tediousness of a life without the struggle of nature.
- MichaelLv 78 years ago
ABSOLUTELY, because ex Pres. BUSH lied to everyone by telling everyone that Global Warming was caused by the environment when 43,000 scientists told him otherwise and the environment is in good shape like it was 200 years ago. I'm Global Command and my Global Teams found the cause of Global Warming and The Russians helped us delete Global Warming. Nature protects all non solids that rise into the upper atmosphere. In other words only solids can travel to or through the ozone, nothing else and as you can see its sunny outside, therefor there's nothing wrong between earth and the ozone. Mike
Source(s): FACTUAL LOGIC - Anonymous8 years ago
That's impossible. If we were the only living things on the planet, where would we get food? Oxygen?! We are part of the ecosystem, we can't survive without it. Everything is interconnected.
- SummertimeLv 78 years ago
No. That's why we are falling into the abyss. The sinkholes will take us to the next level.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Anonymous8 years ago
No.
This is why we abolished cars.