Return to CreateDebate.comworldgeo • Join this debate community

Online World Geography


Erick's Waterfall RSS

This personal waterfall shows you all of Erick's arguments, looking across every debate.
1 point

With the increasing population of the planet, more oxygen is needed to help sustain such new life. Due to our natural interaction, plant-life and humans have always had plenty of their own life sustaining force; Plants produce oxygen, which we as humans use to live, recycling it to produce CO2, the life-force of plants. But, thanks to deforestation, we are steadily decreasing the amount of oxygen in the world, and filling it with CO2, which is lethal to humans in doses too high. So, in the best interest of the human race, not just for now, but forever, deforestation should be cut down to a very bare minimum, since it does provide a useful service.

As for those who see it as a financial decision, as stated in an article on rain-tree.com, "Many organizations have demonstrated that if the medicinal plants, fruits, nuts, oils and other resources like rubber, chocolate and chicle, were harvested sustainably - rain forest land has much more economic value than if timber were harvested or if it were burned down for cattle or farming operations." This goes to show that instead of burning and clearing the land for senseless farming that will only last short periods of time, we can use what we have and harvest it, creating a much better profit, by at least six times the amount you would make at max for timber, according to rain-tree. So bear in mind that although it is a financial decision, it is not the best, for money or survival. We can either stop the destructive force that is deforestation, or we can suffocate on our own greed. You choose.



Results Per Page: [12] [24] [48] [96]