Exploration to normally remote areas, such as the south pole, is now seen as a plausible reality for both scientists and tourists. However, there are pros and cons to these kinds of activities. I believe, however, that the disadvantages are greater than the advantages.

Being able to travel and explore a new environment definitely has it’s benefits. One of these involves the chance of a new scientific discovery. Places like these can be seen as beehive of new information learned from plants and animals unknown to mankind and can open up doors of knowledge about new drugs and cures for diseases. It could be a breakthrough in the world of research. Another reason is the chance for the common folks to learn new things about the world. It gives opportunities for the expansion of knowledge into nature and can even be seen as a form of excursion for kids. For example, I still remember how fun it was to visit an old landmark in my country when I was a child and that memory is still stuck with me

That being said, these advantages do not negate the fact that opening up isolated areas could lead to destruction of exotic species only known to that area. The “invasion” of some of these places could lead to the extinction of plants and even animals due to exposure to diseases we carry. Speaking of animals, there could be wildlife that are more dangerous than we can handle (mammals that are unknown and reptiles that could be poisonous). In this case, we may not have cures suitable enough to help the injured.

To sum up, while the possibility of learning about another part of out earth might seem fascinating, the dangers it poses may be above the benefits gained,

Reply

owing to the advancements in technology ,vacations and research trips to the rural enviroments ,escpecially those located in the south pole have become common.evidently ,this phenomenon has more demerits than merits,and thus ,this essay will elaborate on the topic and justify these views.

on one hand,hinterlands are rich in cultures,traditions and even languages .this makes them the perfect grounds for research work.moreover,they offer a varriety of undiscovered enviroments,ecosystems and animal species.this gives researchers more content to exploit .in addition,these enviroments have not yet been affected by excessive human behaviors that lead to enviromental degradation,therefore they are very authentic.this inturn means that,scientist can get first hand information that is unbiased.

on the other hand,this circumstance puts these formerly inaccessible areas at risk,especially those that are human induced.in the past ,the natives of these regions could preserve their natural habitats without any foreign intrusion.nonetheless ,with the ease of movement nowadays,there is a possible threat of invasion of their privacy.the value of their cultures will soon diminish ,and they can even lose their native languages in the long run,as they will be trying to adapt to the international ways of communication.additionally,there will be substantial degradation of the enviroment and pollution of all forms,due to the increased inflow of outsiders.poaching of the rare,endangered species will also become inevitable as more people with hidden agendas will be able to access these areas.

in conclusion,there is no doubt that the effects brought up by this phenomenon are not entirely positive or negative .nonetheless,the drawbacks outweigh the benefits.

Reply

Transit to distant natural habitat is achievable by researchers and travelers at the moment, for instance, the South Pole. While there are considerable merits to this advancement, I believe the drawbacks are ubiquitous.

To begin with, there are endless possibilities of exploration of the uncharted. With the help of 21st century technological advancements, the scientists and explorers can uncover the hidden mysteries which will help them iron out the complexities of modern era. For instance, what if they find a bacteria or virus which can be modified to invent a cure for HIV or Cancer?. Besides, deep exploration can lead to not only a cure but it can help reveal a plethora of undiscovered species. Moreover, natural minerals and materials can be discovered by delving deep into the earth.

Secondly, such whimsical environment can contain some major demerits. Safety is the biggest concern for the scientists and travelers. If the surroundings are toxic and hazardous, it can put them in harm’s way. For instance, volcanic eruptions, emission of methane gas, acid rain and so on.
Apart from that, even if they managed to reach the forbidden door, there is no guarantee they will not unintentionally harm the nature. Because of the voracious nature of human, It is evident that substantial damage has been done to nature, such as massive deforestation or water contamination due to mankind’s lack of environmental awareness.

To summarize, due to the obscure involvement of risks are far greater than the safety, I believe the hindrance are more significant than the possible benefits for the mentioned reasons.

Reply

Advances in transportation technology have resulted in easier access to isolated places like the South Pole, but this has a knock-on effect on the environment with many environmentalists struggling to cope with the problem. Despite the drawbacks of this development, there are some advantages as well. This essay outlines the perceived drawbacks and benefits of increased travel to remote places and explains why there are far more significant disadvantages.

The biggest advantage of this problem is that scientists can make new discoveries about microbes and other species of animals and plants. The lack of proper transportation deters researchers from examining the various forms of life available in those countries. For instance, in recent times a variety of new microorganisms and their characteristics have been discovered as opposed to the past. Such findings are crucial for the development of science. Thus the more accessibility to these places, the more growth in the different fields of biology.

Despite this, however, the disadvantage of loss of biodiversity can not be overlooked. Whenever more and more people visit these locations, some areas have to be developed to provide accommodations for them. Any development requires some interference with nature which comes at the cost of it. For example, there may be damage to the natural flora and fauna. Moreover, with more humans in an area, more resources would be required, resulting in the depletion of natural resources. The more popular these regions become, the more adverse effects it has on the environment.

To conclude, the increase in travel to remote areas leads to advancements in science. Nevertheless, the fact that it can be detrimental to the environment can not be ignored. Therefore, the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.

Reply

With advancements in technology, researchers and explorers can now travel to remote natural environment like the South Pole. I feel exploring the South Pole has more benefits than drawbacks.

For one, scientists will get a chance to conduct research on this untouched land. For instance, they can conduct research on penguins, polar bears, walruses and whales. Moreover, they can do experiments to reverse the rise in global temperature which will be a plus point for mankind. Additionally, visitors can experience extreme adventures that the South Pole has to offer. Hence, there are a lot of advantages in visiting the South Pole.

However, along with numerous advantages there are some disadvantages as well. Firstly, presence of humans will degrade the natural environment of the South Pole. People change their surrounding to their own convenience which adversely affects the environment. For example, when visitors were first allowed in the Amazon Forest for jungle safari, they left plastic bags and bottles there. Secondly, in the South Pole basic amenities are not available. People will have to be prepared for all the mishappenings that nature will throw at them. Finally, as temperature there is well below 0 degrees, travelers can face serious health problems even if they take extreme precautions.

The above look illustrates that though there are a few demerits in exploring the South Pole, the merits outweigh them. The research potential and the experience that South pole provides to scientist and tourists shadows the drawbacks that comes with it. Hence, it is worth exploring the south pole.

Reply

People always wanted to explore the untouched and uncharted territories of the South pole, but it was not possible until now. The remote natural environment of the region can possibly be visited by the researcher and general public alike. This essay will argue that despite, the vital information which would be provided by the scientists for the world by studying the south pole, there is a great chance that the continent would suffer due to tourist activities.

If scientists could study the glaciers in the South pole then they would be able to understand the effect of global warming on the rest of the world and would prevent the damage. Although it is hard to contemplate whether human activities have any effect on unexplored regions of the globe or not, nobody would know that unless the researches are conducted on those areas. For instance, if the glaciers are melting significantly then there is a high chance that the world is beyond saving and we are too late to right our wrongdoings, but if they haven’t been affected yet then the scientist could come up with a solution just in time.

On the other hand, tourists had done more harm to any tourists attractions than good; therefore, it is reasonable to state that their activities in the south pole would only harm its natural environment rather than preserve it. Tourists mostly visit places in their leisure while carrying many products for their pleasure, such as plastic bottles which are one of the biggest reasons for pollutions and could create greenhouse gasses after being burnt. Hence, human interactions with nature could cause damage to the environment which would be problematic for every living thing in this world.

People are naturally attracted to places they have never been to and the south pole is no exception in that regard; Although, scientists could provide life-saving information to the world but, the process could open the door for everyone and people can spoil nature for their pleasure rather than knowledge. in my opinion, the advantages can help humanity whereas the price to achieve that is much higher; hence, it is much efficient that the south pole should only be traveled by the scientists.

Reply

Due to technology development, people are able to travel to remote destinations such as the arctic. While this trend is beneficial to some extent, in this essay, I would argue that its drawbacks outweigh the advantages. This essay will first demonstrate that touching such isolated places with tourist may change their ecosystems very quickly, followed by a discussion of how entering the scientist would lead to increasing the knowledge of environmental researchers.
On the one hand, visiting remote natural places has some benefits. Firstly, when scientists visit such intact places, they can acquire more knowledge about the natural habitat . For example, researchers are able to learn more about polar bears by going to the North Pole. Scientists can also search about the plants growing in very cold weather and improve their information in this regard. Secondly, visiting the new isolated places such as the Arctic and Antarctic is very attractive for tourists. This gives them valuable experience and unforgettable memories.
On the other hand, I believe that this possibility has far more drawbacks. The main one is that traveling to unexplored regions is considered as a danger to such places, for they need accommodation, food and transportation which result in soil and air pollution. Unfortunately, bulk of studies have showed human change surrounding ecosystem in favour of their benefits, in other words they are not kind to their natural environment.
In conclusion, traveling to remote destinations can be advantageous for scientists, however, disadvantages regarding environmental preservation outweigh and are more important.

Reply

Nowadays, the opportunity has become available for tourists and scientists to travel to distant natural areas. In my opinion, I tend to believe that travelling these areas can bring about more problems compared to advantages it might bring.
One the one hand, travelling to remote natural areas has some benefits. Firstly, scientists and tourists can discover new things about nature. Since the South Pole has not been completely discovered due to its climate, it provides an opportunity for scientists to learn interesting things about its environment. For example, a different sky vision can be seen only in south pole which many tourists and scientists are willing to see. Availability of such opportunity for tourists and scientists is a good experience. Secondly, being able to travel to remote areas tourists can experience life in different conditions. In other words, the temperature in the south pole is usually cold and having an adventure under extreme conditions is a great experience for some people.
On the other hand, despite the advantages above, I believe people could face serious drawbacks from travelling those areas. One potentially dangerous problem is that the temperature of the south pole is usually below -10 degrees, and that would probably create some possible serious health risks for scientists and tourists. Making a decision to travel isolated areas with low temperature will probably put tourists and scientists into a big trouble. Another evident issue is that, many vehicles such as helicopters and their communications systems have failed to work in such areas. This would probably bring about life-threatening situations if not prepared beforehand.
In conclusion, despite some benefits of travelling to isolated natural areas, I tend to believe that the disadvantages of travelling isolated areas far outweigh the advantages.

Reply