welcome

The stories by our old folks tell a lot about a world that is greatly changed now. They speak profoundly of the way they could graze animals in forests, hunt and gather, play, lit fire to roast their catch, swim in rivers, go into parks and many other things. They remember of the ancient medication that they were used to, just 'herbs', the air was clean then, rain was all over, not much of floods and yes life was so enjoyable.
The picture is totally different now, we hardly see forests, shrubs, variety of animals and plants. many continents now are facing high rates of biodiversity loss, floods, reduced river flows, high incidences of disease out breaks and drought. this is a clear manifestation of a changed world.
In 1987, the world commission on environment and development through the chairmanship of Gro Harlem Bruntland produced a report entitled 'our common future'. It defined sustainable development as "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of the future generation to meet their own needs".
A number of arguments have ensued from this definition, they include 1. other countries greatly exploited their natural resource for them to have developed 2. is it morally upright to think of the a future generation that is not there while the present generation is suffering?
Maybe to start it off, to gain our bearing why we must act to save our environment we need to explore these arguments further. what is your take?