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

It is true that people, including scientists and tourists, can easily access off-the-beaten-track places like the South Pole these days. Yet, individuals hold polarized views on whether

this

technological advancement is beneficial or not. On a more personal level, I believe that the advantages of

this

attitude outweigh its disadvantages. On the one hand, there are some beliefs among people worldwide that paving the way has detrimentally been influencing the environmental preservation of remote natural environments. The first reason is that

this

group highly debates that climate and ecosystem changes are rooted in the scientists' experiments and tourists' recreations.

In other words

, because of sampling for scientific research, the genes of local habitats may be manipulated,

as well as

hustling and bustling are more likely to result in deforestation and water contamination.

Additionally

, those who will have been undertaking expeditions in the remote wilderness, where they litter, set a fire, and so forth, are capable of jeopardizing the beauty of

this

untouched region.

However

, I would argue that these sorts of tourism industry and exploration should be allowed as much as possible.

Firstly

, we can effectively increase our encyclopedia of knowledge. In

this

regard, thanks to social networks, satellites, and online websites, natural fans themselves find it easy to see these picturesque views and read scientific articles through those who are travellers and researchers, respectively.

Secondly

, economic benefits and commercialization can potentially appear as a blessing in disguise.

For example

, travelling and commuting in

this

harsh environment requires related companies to recruit staff and employees. So, some companies and job seekers are profited, both directly and indirectly. It is undeniable that if there are no leaders and companies, adventurists and explorers will not see these places efficiently. In conclusion,

although

some people would like to not drop the subject of outnumbering drawbacks of

this

development, it seems to me that not only is

this

theory not acceptable but

also

this

attitude should strongly be supported.