>>2817379>even these “ecology professionals” you speak of know so little of the dynamism of the natural worldDon't get me wrong, I didn't add that because I want big-brained scientific responses, this IS like an emotional/wounded idealism thing. It's just that I don't find that the average person is really aware of how much life has declined, like the quantitative decreases in populations, of imperiled ecosystem area--the actual scope of this issue doesn't seem to occur to people outside of this professional sphere. I travel a lot and meet lots of ordinary people who are very knowledgeable of the ecology of their corner of the world, but frankly they are older and remnants of a time when people could just casually absorb more of an understanding of the natural world.
In any case, the distinction is that what is in "nature" is neither right nor wrong; it is true that human nature is likewise neither right nor wrong, consequently this tells us nothing about what ought to be. Only how difficult it is to achieve what ought to be.