Even when we are gardening, we do not leave a "found" ecosystem intact, but please ourselves.
My point was that the manner in which we choose to please ourselves has a great deal to do with the consequences of our pleasure.
When we dispose of waste, it may be as careless as one pleases, and not matter, or it may do harm, depending on things like biodegradability.
Biodregradable waste is sufficient quantity can have a huge impact on the suitability of an ecosystem for human habitation or any other purpose. Why do you think we build sewage treatment plants?
In neither case were human beings in a position to even think in terms of "ecosystems" until recently, and therefore in neither case could ecological preservation be the result of a conscious choice for the bulk of our history. And yet, Nature survived pretty well.
Do you think it is entirely coincidental that we arrived at the point where we were able to think in terms of ecosystems at about the same time that we observed that our impact upon those systems was reaching the point where it might affect our prospects for survival? We began thinking in terms of ecosystems when we observed that our impact was becoming potentially dangerous to us. What could be more natural?
Anyway, if the "natural order" is fragile, then the obsession with environmental impact may make sense; if it is resilient, then we should "chill out".....
We have to assess not only the resilience of nature, but the rapid increase in our own ability to affect nature. When our ability to make an impact on nature exceeds nature's resilience, we have a problem. A lot of the scientists that are qualified to make that judgement seem to feel that we are at that point, and may in many areas have passed it. |
