What came first, creation or destruction?
Neither, in view that power and rely can not be created or destroyed, purely made to alter form. each thing has consistently existed in some form or yet another and could proceed to accomplish that. creation and destruction are purely psychological categories of perceptual assertion. The creation of one form is the unfavourable of yet another, and destruction is the creation of a diverse form. the two one relies upon on a selective attitude which has no certainty, and at suitable are descriptive words for sequential substitute. The ideas is dualistic and chooses a place that's presumed to be fullyyt actual. The hindrance of the ideas is it incredibly is operates from an narrow container of context, as a result human beings have self belief that the glass is the two 'a million/2 comprehensive' or 'a million/2 empty', and fail to evaluate that that's the two and neither on a similar time.
What does this mean, "every act of creation is first an act of destruction"?
Life rises from death, except for the most primitive life forms that "eat" minerals. Even eating minerals requires dissolution or destruction of the material before assimilation, so that can be called "destruction" Building requires preparation of the ground, then covering it, an act that makes everything there die, another act of destruction. Next building with materials that came from mines or trees - destroyed to be utilized. Need I go on? It also applies to politics and social order. For anything to change, the previous must give way. Gradually or suddenly, the previous practices, beliefs, procedures, whatever, must be ended so that the new can begin. Change is inexorable and inevitable. The dinosaurs were the most successful creatures on earth, and still hold the record. However, time came when they were unable to change quickly enough to continue. Consequently they were swept away for the new, which was coming no matter what.
Well what we know is in the time sine the end of the Galactic civil war the empire fractured into many different factions. The FO was formed from former Imperials who retreated into Unknown space. They have been planning for at least a decade or more for there eventual return. They have a large presence, but are still not as large as the New Republic. What they have to rely on is subterfuge and espionage in conjunction with Imperial sympathizers in the New Republic. They have more than just Starkiller base just like the Empire and the Death Star.The FO used the confusion after the destruction of Hosnian Prime to strike while the iron is hot. They basically did a galactic blitzkrieg and swarmed over the galaxy and picked up allies along the way. They probably linked up with other remnant factions to bolster their forces to make the take over easier. Once their capital got destroyed the New Republic forces are in disarray so they can’t put up an effective defense. Remember TFA and TLJ are over the period of at least a few weeks between these movies.
What does habitat destruction mean?
A habitat is a natural area where certain species live. Salmon habitats are in rivers. Bears habitats are in forests. Human habitats are in cities and suburbs... Habitat destruction is a term for describing the unnatural destruction of the living areas of these animals. To use salmon for example, when cattle are allowed to graze in area near stream beds, they tend to destroy that habitat for the fish...they crap in the water, they tear up the grass that supports the soil near the streambed causing erosion, etc etc. Thats where habitat restoration comes in!
Josef Schumpeter coined the term creative destruction to help us understand that growth requires leaving behind the old and embracing the new.In other words we must be willing to let go of those things we hold dear to embrace the future.He is no fool who gives up that he cannot hold to gain what he cannot lose.Creative destruction - Wikipedia
It isn’t always, but it can be. The issue is whether there is a superior way to do things that can replace an old, obsolete, inefficient way. For example, consider a house that was damaged by a weather event and would cost a lot to repair. It might be a lot smarter to tear it down and rebuild from scratch, using building techniques that make the house better able to withstand the next weather event. This same reasoning might apply to a really old house that was falling apart and needed extensive and very costly repairs. For example, I once considered buying a really old house in a nice neighborhood that had grossly out of date heating and cooling systems that could not be easily replaced with newer systems because it lacked the appropriate electrical, plumbing and duct work. I didn’t buy it, but someone else did, tore it down, and built a modern house on the same lot.Or consider this example. In World War II, the countries that suffered the most extensive damage were Germany, Japan, and several of the “behind the iron curtain” countries. The allies bombed their factories and pretty well wiped out their ability to manufacture things. So what did Germany and Japan do? They rebuilt from scratch, but this time replacing old, obsolete factories with new, modern, highly efficient factories. As a result, both Japan and Germany are among the strongest economies in the world and they have competed very successfully with, for example, US companies in such industries as automobiles, televisions, and so forth. The US might have been more competitive in these industries had the Japanese or Germans bombed our oldest and most obsolete factories.By the way, this did not happen behind the iron curtain because the communist economic system is much less conducive to developing a healthy economy.
It would have required any kind of local government that did not prioritize draining the waters of the Aral Sea's tributaries, the Syr Darya and the Amu Darya, for agriculture to the exclusion of any other needs. Since it's quite common for countries located upstream to selfishly extract water regardless of the effect of downstream countries--see the United States in relation to Mexico in the Colorado basin, or Turkey in relation to Iraq and Syria in the Tigris-Euphrates basin--at the very least this would probably have required the Aral Sea drainage basin to be politically united. In that it's quite possible for large countries to overlook particular problems of all kinds, including ecological ones, in outlying peripheries, we might also need the Aral Sea drainage basin to be independent of other countries. Does this mean an independent Turkestan of some kind? Quite possibly.
Where do i learn destruction spells in skyrim?
In whiterun go to the Acadia's Cauldron or the Pawn shop next to it they often have books of: Icebolt, firebolt. Those are novice level spells. Then try going to the College of Winter hold which is way up north to the middle of the map and it doesn't matter how much damage you do just keep using them to level up and you can also find more mid level destruction spells from the Court Wizards in different Kingdoms, I know that Riften Court mage sold me expert and Master level spells. Or you can use this great wiki. http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Skyrim