The origins of Godzilla
An excerpt from an interview with Ken Watanabe, the Japanese actor featured in the movie 'Godzilla'. Notice the interesting origins behind the conception of the Godzilla, and how we can use it for Banging in the intro and conclusion, as seen in the sample paras of an essay below....The recent spate of blockbuster movies all deal with issues that resonate with what we study in GP, so make sure you know what these are. Ironman, Spiderman, Captain America, X-men, even Harry Potter.....
I did one on Capt America some time back...see HERE
Introduction:
With the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki still fresh in the Japanese consciousness, Godzilla was conceived as a monster created due to exposure to nuclear radiation. An icon in popular culture ever since, it serves as a cautionary tale for the monstrous consequences that may result if mankind dabbles in nuclear technology. Therefore, to assert that nuclear energy is the ‘most’ promising alternative to fossil fuels is myopic as it ignores the risks of nuclear energy and overlooks the existence of other alternative energy sources. Nevertheless, these risks can arguably be contained and other energy sources are fraught with their own limitations. Besides, nuclear does have some undeniable benefits, such as being a relatively cheap form of energy without any carbon emissions. Hence, I am of the view that nuclear is still a ‘largely’ promising alternative to fossil fuels, even if it is not exactly the ‘most’ promising one
Conclusion:
I did one on Capt America some time back...see HERE
Qn: Nuclear energy is the most promising alternative to
fossil fuels. Do you agree?
With the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki still fresh in the Japanese consciousness, Godzilla was conceived as a monster created due to exposure to nuclear radiation. An icon in popular culture ever since, it serves as a cautionary tale for the monstrous consequences that may result if mankind dabbles in nuclear technology. Therefore, to assert that nuclear energy is the ‘most’ promising alternative to fossil fuels is myopic as it ignores the risks of nuclear energy and overlooks the existence of other alternative energy sources. Nevertheless, these risks can arguably be contained and other energy sources are fraught with their own limitations. Besides, nuclear does have some undeniable benefits, such as being a relatively cheap form of energy without any carbon emissions. Hence, I am of the view that nuclear is still a ‘largely’ promising alternative to fossil fuels, even if it is not exactly the ‘most’ promising one
Conclusion:
In the final
analysis, given that there are grounds for arguing that nuclear energy can pose
problems, it is thus not entirely convincing to conclude that it is the ‘most’
promising alternative to fossil fuels. Nevertheless, it is my opinion that
nuclear energy is still ‘largely’ promising. A clean and cheap fuel
notwithstanding, nuclear energy still emerges as the more viable option in the
light of the limitations of the other alternatives. As long as the risks are
well-managed and contained, we can continue to harness nuclear energy for the
benefit of mankind – without the menacing shadow of Godzilla looming in the
background.