Choosing a warning label for human DNA

PART A: Which TWO statements best summarize the central ideas of the text?

B. Human beings are a danger to the planet Earth; accordingly, any inhabitants of other planets have good reason to be unwelcoming towards us.

F. Despite the harm we have done to the environment, humans do have altruistic impulses that would facilitate increased efforts at environmental conservation.

Explanation:

These are the two statements that best express the ideas of the text "Choosing a warning label for human DNA." In this text, the author engages in an exercise in which he imagines how a "label" for human DNA might look. He argues that we would most likely have to warn beings from outer space about the danger of creating humans, as we are extremely destructive. However, the author argues that, by taking care of the environment, we might be able to save this planet and eliminate our need to colonize another one.

The first two options are the correct options.

Explanation:

The article "Choosing a warning label for human DNA" tells how we humans have the capacity to destroy our own habitat, the planet earth. Allowing us to be without a proper place to live. The article reinforces the idea that our generation cannot escape the environmental damage we cause, but that we could send frozen embryos or DNA strands to other planets, so that the inhabitants of these planets, help us to rebuild our species.

The problem is that the inhabitants of other planets, could see us with bad eyes. We are the species that destroyed our own niche, why would they help our embryos to survive on their planets? We would be seen as a dangerous species and it is likely that extraterrestrials would not agree to help us.

la respuesta a esta pregunta es

sinco

they are direct opposites. they can both be corrupted. they are inseparable.