立志半年内雅思走上8777主攻写作的读书笔记
The minute I saw this topic, I had all the complicated thoughts about homeless street cats in my mind... People see these cats and dogs with conflicting views. To be honest, I don't think that too many of them could do anything good to the world. Besides, these poor animals suffer a lot being outside and unprotected. I guess I have some misunderstanding on wild animals, as street cats are more abandoned pets than wild species. So I looked them up in the dictionary, which says n. Animals that have not been domesticated or tamed and are usually living in a natural environment, including both game and nongame species. Well, such formal explanation, but not helpful at all. But scanning the list of the so-called top 10 wild animals, which are lion, wolf, eagle, giraffle, turtle, red panda, hawk, dolphin, owl, and leopard, I'm just happy I had second thought clarifying what are wild animals. Can I blame my childhood without enough visit to the zoo? I don't know, but I'll definately save some money for animal parks visiting next few years.
Wild Animals
Wild animals have no place in the 21st century, so protecting them is a waste of resources. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Introduction
- It is sometimes argued that...
- I completely disagree with this point of view.
Main Paragraph 1
- wild animals mean a lot in the 21th century;
- species evolution history;
- important part of the ecosystem;
- better understanding of the world;
Main Paragraph 2
- no painful extinction due to lack of protection;
- big money spent on dinosaurs research because they died out;
- animal parks business; people pay to see wild animals;
- harmonous natural environment for next generation;
Conclusion
- In conclusion...
Eyes Rolling
Even squeezing out these bullet points is hard enough for me. Sometimes I picture the panic after knowing the real topic. Perhaps just because I haven't practiced enough?
Great writing from Simon
Some people argue that it is pointless to spend money on the protection of wild animals because we humans have no need for them. I completely disagree with this point of view.
In my opinion, it is absurd to argue that wild animals have no place in the 21st century. I do not believe that planet Earth exists only for the benefit of humans, and there is nothing special about this particular century that means that we suddenly have the right to allow or encourage the extinction of any species. Furthermore, there is no compelling reason why we should let animals die out. We do not need to exploit or destroy every last square metre of land in order to feed or accommodate the world’s population. There is plenty of room for us to exist side by side with wild animals, and this should be our aim.
I also disagree with the idea that protecting animals is a waste of resources. It is usually the protection of natural habitats that ensures the survival of wild animals, and most scientists agree that these habitats are also crucial for human survival. For example, rainforests produce oxygen, absorb carbon dioxide and stabilise the Earth’s climate. If we destroyed these areas, the costs of managing the resulting changes to our planet would far outweigh the costs of conservation. By protecting wild animals and their habitats, we maintain the natural balance of all life on Earth.
In conclusion, we have no right to decide whether or not wild animals should exist, and I believe that we should do everything we can to protect them.
Notes
Source: 雅思考官9分范文合集-雅思前考官Simon
网友评论