Balance of nature: loss of diversity (Introduction)

by dhw, Friday, July 15, 2016, 12:49 (3053 days ago) @ David Turell

QUOTES: "'Decision-makers worry a lot about economic recessions, but an ecological recession could have even worse consequences - and the biodiversity damage we've had means we're at risk of that happening. Until and unless we can bring biodiversity back up, we're playing ecological roulette."-"'The greatest changes have happened in those places where most people live, which might affect physical and psychological wellbeing. To address this, we would have to preserve the remaining areas of natural vegetation and restore human-used lands," added Dr Newbold."-David's comment: This study illustrates why the 'balance of nature' and the h-p bush are so important. Both are one and the same, that is obvious. Both are needed. Isn't that obvious?-According to you, the balance of nature only means that life goes on. It has constantly changed as parts of the h-p bush have gone and others have come, and so it is simply whatever the h-p bush makes it. I myself consider the loss of biodiversity through human negligence a colossal tragedy, and the fact that humans are changing the balance of nature - and as a result may even threaten their own existence - is obvious to us all. But that has nothing whatsoever to do with your hypothesis that God personally designed millions of natural wonders like the weaverbird's nest in order for nature to be balanced in order to produce food in order for life to go on in order to produce homo sapiens - or simply because he likes complexity for complexity's sake.