It is now possible for scientists and tourists to travel to remote natural environments, such as the South Pole. Do the advantages of this development outweigh disadvantages?

With the aid of the latest transportation technology, researchers and enthusiastic travellers now are able to set foot on isolated natural areas,

such

as the South

Pole

. While

this

trend is beneficial to some extent, I would argue that its drawbacks are more significant. On the one hand, undertaking expeditions to undisturbed and remote places has several benefits.

To begin

with, the discovery of new spaces allows everyone to gain a better understanding of the Earth and new species.

For instance

, when going to the North

Pole

, scientists can learn about the life of polar bears, which live far away from humans.

This

newfound knowledge can be a precursor to clinical breakthroughs or provide scientists with comprehensive insights to more effectively deal with environmental issues

such

as climate change.

On the other hand

, the disadvantages are quite prominent and immensely impact ecological balance.

Firstly

, travelling to remote natural areas can be risky if the people are not sufficiently prepared. The temperature at the South

Pole

,

for example

, is often relatively low, which has a negative impact on people's health/ which adversely affects people’s health. in the South

pole

, a significant number of explorers disappeared because of unexpected weather or terrains. The presence of humans in these areas jeopardizes the animals and contaminates their natural habitats.

In addition

,many tourists bring carbon footprints when they use planes or boats to reach these places, they

also

generate loud noise, which frightens surrounding animals. In conclusion,

although

remote natural travel has some advantages, the disadvantages of

this

trend outweigh the benefits since it is not only costly

,

Remove the comma

apply

show examples

but

also

puts people's lives in jeopardy