It is now possible for scientists and tourists to travel to remote natural environment, such as South Pole. Do the advantages of this development outweigh the disadvantages? v.2

It is true that with recent advances in technology, it can be easy for the human to conquer vacant lands such as the south pole. While this trend can be beneficial to some extents, I believe that it has more drawbacks. On the one hand, there is a common belief that discovering remote areas can create positive influences on the human because of two major reasons. Firstly, travelling to remote natural environment plays an important role in collecting reliable data for science. For example, this data can help scientists properly explain some complex phenomenon such as El Nino, global warming or desertification. Secondly, because undiscovered habitats tend to hold great mysteries, it can receive special attention of a great number of tourists. As a result, this acts as a precursor so that the government can develop the tourism On the other hand, I would strongly endorse that those benefits are outweighed by drawbacks. The first supporting point for this view is that since visitors are likely to produce a large amount of untreated waste that can pollute water sources and harm the fauna and flora around isolated areas. This leads to the damage to the environment. Moreover, tourists and sciences can face serious danger when they conquer isolated areas. A clear illustration is that they can encounter dangerous wild animals or even they are in a situation without food in some days. In conclusion, while going to undiscovered areas can make beneficial impacts on the human, I believe that this tendency can be much more advantageous.