任务一: 学习Academic Writing Style(需要打卡)

Many species of plants and animals have come and gone throughout the history of the Earth. From this perspective, extinction can be seen as part of a natural process. Some people have argued that we should not, therefore, make heroic efforts to preserve the natural habitats of endangered plants and animals when doing so would conflict with human interests. To what extent do you agree or disagree？

1. 同一个题目的两个response，一个6分，一个7分，哪个是6，哪个是7呢？

2. 他们的不同是什么，请至少找出6处差别，并认真分析

Response 1:

If you look at it that way, it’s true that humans and animals have conflicting interests. People have always exploited animals for food and clothing, and farmers have brought bigger and bigger areas of land under cultivation. But should we keep on doing this?

In regions of the world where the population is growing, and there aren’t enough resources, the conflict between humans and animals is really bad. If you go to Africa, for example, you can see large nature reserves alongside really poor human settlements. I love the idea of elephants and lions living in the wild. But often it’s the poor farmer living nearby who’s got to pay the cost in terms of land and lost earnings.

Response 2:

Looked at from a broad historical perspective, it is true that humans and animals have conflicting interests. People have always exploited animals for food and clothing, whilst farmers have brought ever-increasing areas of land under cultivation. Whether this process should continue is a question that requires careful consideration.

In regions of the world where the population is growing, and resources are scarce, the conflict between humans and animals is particularly problematic. This can be seen in parts of Africa, for example, where large nature reserves sit alongside very poor human settlements. People living thousands of miles away may value the idea of elephants and lions living in the world. However, it is the poor farmer living nearby who must pay the cost in terms of land and lost earnings.