[PBzeer]

A little thought exercise.

If it is incumbent upon us to preserve all forms of life, so as to maintain a "natural" state of being, a balance between hunter and hunted, why do we so fervently seek the extinction of nature's own method of population control?

It's often said that mankind knows no natural predator, yet, this isn't true. Be it swine flu, typhoid, malaria, or any number of diseases, they are all predators of mankind. Nature's way of keeping the human population in balance.

We build levees and dams to halt the natural state for the convenience of mankind. Is that any less of a pollution of the earth than greenhouse gases? We build a house in Florida, only to have it destroyed by a hurricane, and then rebuild it, in defiance of the natural order.

In other words, "environmentalism" isn't about saving the planet, it's about keeping it habitable for mankind. Whether that's to the benefit of the planet or not. Put another way, it's okay to pollute the planet, as long as it doesn't have a negative effect on human existence. Not quite the pious reverence advocated by the noble enviro-supplicant.

Of course, there will be those who try to make this a statement of position, rather than the mere musings that they are. Those who take offense at their eco-consciousness being called not noble idealism, but merely a selfish interest in their own existence. But once you get past the flowery rhetoric, that's all it is.

I'm all for clean this or that, just don't try to wrap it up in some purity of devotion to Mother Earth. "Cause it ain't.