The balance

In order to have luxury stuff, people might hurt the nature such as killing animals for fur. Apart from a little group of people, everyone would gather around the same idea that it is unacceptible. I guess at least %80 of people would agree that having a fur jacket is not something to be proud of. Maybe only in old days.. But today, we can see even Kloe Kardashian starring on the PETA ad " I would rather go naked than wear fur" I hear you say " Well, it is obvious that fur is known as unacceptible by most of the people. To destroy the nature for luxury is not okay anyway. But what about the real needs? Like knocking down the trees for heating and building hospitals?" Just like eveything else, a plan of what we should do next would have helped the human race in the very early years. Offcourse it was not possible to have such plan under those circumtances since the people did not know much about how the nature works and what causes what. That is why I am not blaming those first people on the earth. They all need somewhere to live in and as soon as they had the ability of building, they started to make wee basic houses. It is fair enough. Then the human race learned more and more and they builded hospitals and schools. It is still  fair enough. But then -like how it is now- they started to build massive buildings that are not needed all that much. It is called greed. And it will turn out to be the reason why the earth is going to be a place with no any livings on. To me, building hospitals seems to be ok unless they build up too many just to create their own business. The technology and the science should find some alternative ways and decrease the harm to the nature as much as they can. In that case we should be careful about the consequences of our activities. Its not only the president of a country or a CEO of a company that releases so many chemical refuse. Its is also every individuals who needs to care and take precautionary principles.

Biomass

Threes are cut down and they get destroyed when the scientists are trying to measure the biomass of the plants. It would lead us to have questions like so" is this ethical?" Well, obviously cutting down the trees is not the best thing to do. However, we need to think about the reasons why the scientist would do it. They are not like the enemies of the forests and I am pretty sure all those biologist do care about the environment as much as we do. They are cutting the trees down for the greater good the ecosystem. What they learn could benefit the ecosystem way more than those chopped trees. Maybe not. But I think we still have to consider the possibilities of benefits for biology. Trees are cut down for so many reasons like to make papers and furnitures out of. So is it unethical to make papers as well? I think this issue can be expanded and be discussed as generally, not for biomass. I personally think that people should find something else to use rather than trees since the technology is more and more improving.Anyways. Lets go back to biomass. So I would prefer one of those mathematical table that they use for the animals but I guess they do not have it for plants. Hope that they are gonna find one soon. For now, It seems to be ok to chop them off and I recommend them to plant new ones on the same area.

Was Linnaeus racist or not?

Thanks to Linnaeus that he created such an easy naming system. Congrats to him for writing all those books and being a good botanists. (For more info about what he has done: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Linnaeus) However, I do really think that he was kind of racist when he divided Homo sapiens into different varrieties. Maybe, he is not racist as a person (because I would not know how he actually feels like and think as) but his ideas towards grouping people would lead to racism so easily. It is obvious that he sides with European and it does make sense why he would when we consider he is a Swedish botanist. He sounds so racist when he says that he Americans are regulated by custom, Asiatics are governed my opinion, Africans are governed by caprice whereas European people is governed by laws. In that case Europeans look like the only race that plays with the rules and they are the peaceful lawful ones. Therefore they would look more modern. The reason why he classifies it in this way might be that they have slaves from different ethnics in their country and they just want to have a scientific evidence to feel that it is ok to hold the slaves.