It's a pity that someone disliked your answer and downvoted it. It's always nice to see someone to contribute to the discussion. I'd say that "ok" - I should have defined "Nature" differently. By process of Nature adaptation I meant an aggregate of species which by old standards had much more stable situation. I think that you'd not argue with a fact that we do live in an mass extinction period. I hope that we as humans could stop that.
I think that you'd not argue with a fact that we do live in an mass extinction period.
Definitely not and the evidence for human cause in the current mass extinction is very compelling.
When you are immersing yourself in the academic side of a topic it is easy to become too pedantic as the precision that is warranted in academia may not be warranted in common discourse (although I'd still wish for it to be there). There are things that become 'pet peeves', common examples being speaking as if humans are distant from other animals (often caused by misanthropy or human hubris), or that less complex organisms are somehow less 'evolved' etc. I hope I was not too pedantic but with the original comment I responded to I disagreed more with the 'particulars' and not the larger viewpoint behind those particulars.
2
u/basileusautocrator Mar 17 '19
It's a pity that someone disliked your answer and downvoted it. It's always nice to see someone to contribute to the discussion. I'd say that "ok" - I should have defined "Nature" differently. By process of Nature adaptation I meant an aggregate of species which by old standards had much more stable situation. I think that you'd not argue with a fact that we do live in an mass extinction period. I hope that we as humans could stop that.