Scientists and tourists travel to remote natural environments, such as the South Pole. Do you think the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?

In recent decades, owing to the development of transportations, it is convenient for people to travel around the world, especially in remote zones like the South Pole. Some

scientists

suggested that it is beneficial for their research, but there are

also

some threats to the environment behind it. Travelling to isolated

areas

expands the scientific horizon. In order to conduct studies like global warming, it is necessary for

scientists

to visit remote natural

areas

. Researching on local regions can provide essential and valuable information, where is hard to find from books.

Besides

,

this

can

also

be helpful for

scientists

to acquire

first

-hand knowledge, while those pieces of knowledge become strong evidence in their studies.

Hence

, trips to some remote natural environments for a brighter future are needed.

However

, the drawbacks of these trips exist.

First

, a number of tourists came to travel with no awareness of environmental protection, so leading a series of problems on the local habitats. Any unsuitable actions including throw trash on the ground randomly, the result of

this

would damage the scape view and eventually polluted the

areas

.

Thus

, without any impact of passengers on the environment, the extinction rate of animals living in isolated habitats would not increase.

Second

, due to the high investment of transportations, the expense of visiting remote regions is usually expensive, so only the wealthy people and

scientists

are able to afford

this

trip.

Hence

, travel to remote

areas

benefits a small part of people. In summary,

although

there are some negative outcomes of the tour to remote natural

areas

, it is beneficial for the development of science.