right to left wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Odd definition of natural. So mountain ranges, rivers, seas, oceans, lakes, swamps, and the like are not natural too?
Even you should know that a species, any species that is not subject to predation or other effects that could limit its growth is acting outside of the balance of nature....at least for a little while.
Nom, I should not know that because it is not correct.
At the present time, our consumption of renewable resources is overshooting capacity by at least 50%. Does that sound natural to you?
It is for humans and even other animals whose species will over populate until the population crashes due to disease or starvation.
This sort of thing occurs when a species is in a protected area with no natural predators and consumes all the available food until the population crashes.
Which would make the process unnatural how?
The die-off of a large reindeer herd placed on St. Matthews Island in the Bering Sea during WWII being the modern textbook example of how a population crashes. And until now, the human examples, like Easter Island and the various civilizations that depleted available resources, did not threaten the entire human species because the crises were localized events. But, that is no longer the case as modern civilization and its overuse of resources today is global.
Yes, but that is still a natural situation.
There are no undiscovered continents to start over again. So no, except for maybe a few isolated pockets on Earth like the Andaman Islands, there are no significant human populations living anything resembling a sustainable lifestyle....and that is not natural!
Why is that the "correct" definition of natural? It seems that the large number of people following that course would define it as a natural path, but I am looking at it logically.
That is the natural actions of humanity to build ... just as it is natural for beavers to create dams and create ponds, swamps, and other types of flooded lands.
In case you're not aware, a beaver's dam-building can have detrimental effects on other plant and animal life in the woods.[/quote]
Yes, and that is natural is it not?
The difference is that the beaver is still subject to predation and other natural controls on population growth.
Humans are too. Disease is natural and has limited the population in the past. Starvation and natural disaters are also means by which the populaiton can be controlled. Humans are also subject to the most efficeint predator on the planet .... other humans. War is a wonderful method of population control especially with weapons of mass destruction available in large quantities.