The discussion on global warming shows very explicitly that we humans think of nature as “constant”. “Preserving” nature to us means to make it stay exactly as it is.
What a hubris!
First of all, when you look at the history of “nature reserves”, you can clearly see that we don’t understand nature at all. Whenever we try to preserve something, we create consequences that we did not consider.
For example shooting the wolves in Yellowstone National Park: the intention was to keep the population of Wapitis constant, the effect was an overpopulation of Wapitis, which resulted in a complete change in vegetation!
Second, nature is change itself! Nature does not mean stability, nature means adapting to ever-changing circumstances.
Even if there is a global warming (there are clues that there is, but there also is contradicting evidence), just let it happen, nature will adapt to it. Maybe without mankind in the long run, but it will adapt nevertheless.
Maybe the world will then not be inhabited by the creatures we like to see there, but there will be some form of life that is more adaptable than humans.
No comments:
Post a Comment