People continue to debate whether technology is a cause, or a solution, to environmental problems. Looking at historical examples of large-scale ecological changes or catastrophes, how do we evaluate the role of technology?
Discuss the question above, it requires around 300 words.
The debate of ALL of the discussions up to this point have stimulated much more thought and reflection than almost any other class. I infer we can call ourselves historians as we review the toll of history and modern day society. This week is no different as the jidst of it forces us to determine the overall affect of technology on wilderness or environmental problems. I believe the role of almost everything in life is always going to ascend whether people like it or not. The rise of populations across the planet have forced for advancements to meet these exponential growths. Technology has certainly affected the role wilderness and its sacred ties to mankind, but wasn't it inevitable? There are many areas across the planet that has been affected by technology. My hometown had a dam put in that stop a beautiful portion of the river for recreational and fishing activities. By the first decade of the twentieth century, in the single most famous episode in American conservation history, a national debate had exploded over whether the city of San Francisco should be permitted to augment its water supply by damming the Tuolumne River in Hetch valley, well within the boundaries of Yosemite National Park. The dam was eventually built, but what today seems no less significant is that so many people fought to prevent its completion. The river was damaged as well environmental wildlife, however with the growing population of San Francisco, it was vital to human use. There will always be people whom enjoy wilderness (hiking, exploring, etc), but these humans more than likely carry cell phones in case emergencies, GPS information, and compasses, directions, which allow them to find there destination. Agriculture, dams, roads, logging, mining, and other activities change wilderness forever into something different than what we found before our attempts to improve the human condition. Many of these activities are beneficial to man. But there is value in setting aside large portions of our mostly untouched land as permanent wilderness, forbidding man to change it. Is technology a barrier between nature and us? Is technology a barrier between human relationships? Is technology bad? Technology will continue to grow, however I do wish there could be a middle ground on it's affect on wilderness, great debate though.