Has the destruction of the extended family contributed to climate change?

No

8 of 9

by Adam Smith

Write now Print Invite a writer™ Add to Favorites RSS Feed Contact this writer

The destruction of the extended family has not contributed to climate change. I have read many articles of the opposing viewpoint on this topic and I must say that it is no more than speculation and circumstance.

Of course we are a more mobile society than we were even 30 years ago. Which in itself is not a bad thing. There are many different angles at which to look at this though. To be more mobile, we must use vehicles of transportation (Automobiles, Buses, Airplanes, etc), most of these have adverse effects on the environment. But this is either here nor there as the travel of extended family from home is negligible in light of our daily travel.

Another argument I have heard was that people taking up separate residences in different places have increased the amount of houses, thus increased the amount of land used and finally decreasing the amount of nature, and natural habitat for animals. This, as an end result having hurt the climate. Again, I see the result as true, but ever so negligible.

As far as climate goes, there are things that we can do to fight against climate change and global warming. I'm not a hippie-liberalist-tr ee-huger by any means, but I dont think that means we all cant do a little something like plant a tree, recycle, or walk instead of drive for some distances. Beyond the environment, it saves money and that is what most people think is important.

Learn more about this author, Adam Smith.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.