Scientists and tourists can travel to remote natural environment such as the South Pole. Do you think the advantages outweigh its disadvantages?
It is said that scientists and travellers can visit far-away natural territories.
This
essay would argue that despite people
enjoying new places
, some individuals will damage them, which means that the advantages do not outweigh the drawbacks.
On the one hand, when humans visit new places
, especially different landscapes that they cannot see in their own cities, they will relax and enjoy more. Also
, this
will make them more interested in nature,
and want to travel around similar Remove the comma
apply
places
in the future. In some way, this
will allow people
to know that natural habitats are decreasing, so they can understand how valuable are, so they need to be protected. For example
, Spanish people
instead
of going out with their friends in the town, prefer travelling to a natural environment because the air is fresher and it is more comfortable, so therefore
it is easier for them to leave the stress of work behind. However
, I’m of the opinion that when people
travel to natural places
, these regions will be contaminated easily by the rubbish that people
throw away, so there are too many disadvantages.
On the other hand
, after visiting remote natural places
, scientists might opt to do experiments in those regions and also
since new resources can be found. Also
, some people
will think that these are good locations to develop, changing all the natural places
to industrial areas, helping them to increase their economic situation. But all these activities will damage the environment, leading to higher global warming and contamination. For instance
, lots of forests are cut down because they are used for creating products that humans need, but this
causes some animals to lose their living place, and also
it results in a higher amount of carbon dioxide and a lower amount of oxygen, and people
need oxygen to live, so without trees, people
’s live can be in danger. Therefore
, I would argue that the disadvantages of travelling to natural territory are more significant than the benefits.
In conclusion, although
people
can have a good time in areas distant from the cities, they can pollute and destroy those places
too, for these reasons, the negatives far outnumber the positives.Submitted by elenazheng1211 on
Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Writing9 with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
task achievement
Provide more specific examples to support your arguments.
coherence cohesion
Ensure that your introduction and conclusion address the question more directly.
coherence cohesion
Consider organizing your main points more clearly.
lexical resource
Use a wider range of vocabulary to improve your lexical resource.
grammatical range accuracy
Pay closer attention to sentence structure and grammar.
Your opinion
Don’t put your opinion unless you are asked to give it.
If the question asks what you think, you MUST give your opinion to get a good score.
Don’t leave your opinion until the conclusion.
Here are examples of instructions that require you to give your opinion:
...do you agree or disagree?...do you think...?...your opinion...?