rculation systenbsp;of ive energy, and then vert ive energy into positive energy, so that we bsp;be better.

To a large extent, I agree with the truthfulness of this news report, whibsp;is full of distent and powerlessness to the environnt. Indeed, it would be norl for anyone to suffer these unfriendly things.

But it's like every day we have to go through 100 things, big and sll, ybe 50 things that ke us happy, but we reer quickly, and we always reer the 50 things that ke us unhappy. Why is that?

In other words, anger is easier to reer than pleasure, and unfriendliness is easier to reer than friendship? Or is it that there is no very happy thing, no eting a very friendly person?

If the answer to our question is the forr, then we should look for reasons in ourselves, better ge ourselves, uand others. Unfortunately, if the balanbsp;of hun relations is tilted, it will not produbsp;the best win-win friendly and progressive effebsp;But on the other hand, if the answer to the question is the latter, it is a social environntal proble so what we need to ge is the stant recyg of ive energy in the social environnt. This is the st fair judgnt and solution. If we have both, we have to ge ourselves as well as others and the social environnt. So National Geography, as a publibsp;publication, In fabsp;in a great sense, it is ging and affeg the society.

First of all, I generally agree with the truth of the above report, so how to solve the proble that anthropolo