Human activities play an important role in destroying the ecosystem.

[GirlNextDoor15]

So, I got this ridiculous topic from my teacher. It's actually a Biology debate and I'm the first speaker. Can anyone generate some ideas to me so that my head will not explode? I really need this ASAP. Thanks!
p/s : I'm on the opposing side.

[Accipiter]

Forestry says it all really

We're killing earth by destroying it's nature.

[GommeInc]

Interesting debate. We're also technically saving it with conservation so we're not entirely destroying it, nor saving it. I suppose you could mention burning fossil fuels and inventing things like cars and keeping with the same type of fuel for 100s of years when within that time we should of been developing alternative fuels sooner than later.

You could also mention how the advances of technology mean we're a damn sight lazier than we used to be, so even though a shop may only be a mile or two away, we still prefer to take the car than to walk or cycle, even though man was built to withstand cycling and walking, and carrying back shopping. You could also mention cleaning products we use often like bleach, anti-bacterial and washing up liquid which all have an environmental impact.

[Celacia]

I don't understand what we're debating.

We farm the planet for resources. Cage and capture animals at endangered levels just to keep them alive and destroy native animal's ecosystems. We allow greenhouse gasses worldwide to accumulate in our atmosphere which further alters the climate of ecosystems. We industrialize and create kilotons of practically non degradable waste which we simply bury. ...it is quite clear that the human race has left its mark on our one and only Earth. How quickly we, as a united people, realize this and think forward into the future will determine how it affects the generations to come.

[FlyingJesus]

Well of course humans have an impact on it, we're part of it. Not everything that a lion does is good for the overall condition of the planet, same with an ant or a salmon or any other animal or even plantlife with their limited choices but widespread influence. There's nothing unnatural about a semi-parasitic race like ours destroying the area they live in, and with humans living in nearly all inhabitable areas of the globe it shouldn't be any surprise to anyone that the rest of the natural world has been somewhat subdued to our whims. Let's not be so foolish as to think that we're going to completely destroy the planet and all its wonders just by living though - there are vast expanses that have little to no human contact and will likely remain so for all time. The only (current) threat to life as a whole is nuclear damage

[Celacia]

The only (current) threat to life as a whole is nuclear damage.

What about run away greenhouse effect? I don't suppose you've taken a look at Venus lately?

[AgnesIO]

I don't understand what we're debating.

We farm the planet for resources. Cage and capture animals at endangered levels just to keep them alive and destroy native animal's ecosystems. We allow greenhouse gasses worldwide to accumulate in our atmosphere which further alters the climate of ecosystems. We industrialize and create kilotons of practically non degradable waste which we simply bury. ...it is quite clear that the human race has left its mark on our one and only Earth. How quickly we, as a united people, realize this and think forward into the future will determine how it affects the generations to come.

Because humans are not already trying to change it? :S

Haven't you seen those hideous, tall white things that destroy landscapes?

[Celacia]

Because humans are not already trying to change it?

When humans advance technology, we don't usually like to go backward. People want to live with the same amenities they have experienced in the past. With our current advancements in alternative energy, we simply cannot supply the sheer amount of energy needed to power our homes, gadgets, vehicles, factories, etc.

Wind = Clean, dependent, but just doesn't produce enough energy.
Hydroelectric = Dependent, destroys ecosystems, but overall an important energy source.
Geothermal = Short-term it's great, the elevation of areas using geothermal energy is dropping yearly, though. Also depends on the area.
Solar = expensive, daytime reliant, technology isn't good enough yet.
Nuclear = amazing energy output, dangerous, could be discontinued or changed, produces waste that we cannot efficiently destroy.

For us to continue living this way, we will need to use non-renewable energy, it's that simple. For us to reverse the atmospheric damage we would need to all but eliminate CO2 output for a little over 100 years.

[FlyingJesus]

What about run away greenhouse effect? I don't suppose you've taken a look at Venus lately?

Well no, but I don't recall a time when Venus was inhabitable and I don't imagine you do either. It's a completely different planet with completely different atmosphere and geology. That aside, we're nowhere near a stage where greenhouse effects are going to actually destroy all life, and they're largely natural anyway

[Celacia]

I don't recall a time when Venus was inhabitable

Well no **** sherlock, the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. All scientific theories about the universe are based on speculation in conjunction with scientific law and observable evidence.

And that's the point. We don't know what happened to Venus' atmosphere. All we know is what happened on Venus happened in the goldilocks zone. If not for its atmosphere it could very well have been similar to Earth.

It's a completely different planet with completely different atmosphere and geology.

1. Planets are formed in similar ways.
2. The most abundent elements found on Venus are found on Earth and throughout the Universe.
3. As per its Geography, the surface (the crust) of Venus is six times older (600 million years old) than Earth's surface.

That aside, we're nowhere near a stage where greenhouse effects are going to actually destroy all life

Climate change is a funny thing. An Ice Age only takes a temperature change of two degrees celsius to throw our planet for a loop.
It's a delicate balance, and while global warming likely won't drastically affect us in our lifetime, we have to admit that we're harming our planet and we need to find a solution.