This is the Triple Divide Peak inside Glacier National Park in northwestern Montana.  It is sixteen miles into the wilderness as the crow flies from the nearest “town”, a village of 396 people. The big town in the area; Browning, MT., the capital of the Blackfeet Nation with a population of 1,026; is seventeen miles further away. Water flowing from this peak contacts and effects water throughout the North American continent. The upper part flows into the North Pacific and effects waters from Northern California to Alaska.  Waters flowing off the right side go up through Canada and out the St Lawrence Seaway effecting everything in between including Hudson Bay.  The lower left flows through the Missouri River, down the Mississippi and into the Gulf of Mexico. (i) This site is so environmentally sensitive that scientist from all over the world come to study it.  The Triple Divide is polluted and we must all share the blame. 

      None of us like to take responsibility for something that goes wrong, is wrong or is bad. How many of us want to stand up and say “Yes, I’m partially to blame for killing the Earth.”   Believe me, I can understand that.  Nevertheless, just not admitting it, or going even further by blaming it on something or someone else, just doesn’t work.  An ‘alternative fact’ by any other name is a falsehood, intentional or otherwise.  But this is leading to a discussion of ‘alternative fact’ which I don’t want to have here.  Suffice it to say, facts are facts are facts and by definition that means that they are a truth that is supported with documented empirical evidence.  

     I am an environmentalist, a conservationist, a naturalist.  It would take me very little time to gather overwhelming proof that humans are doing far more than our fair share to destroy nature and bring about the Sixth Mass Extinction.  Until the pandemic I spent the majority of my time off-the-grid.  My home is a twenty-one foot Roadtrek. That’s minimalism.  We use solar and can go over two weeks on less than forty-gallons of water. We avoid plastics; carrying our own cups and metal straws for truck-stop drinks, etc.; recycle what little waste we have, don’t use processed foods, rarely eat fast-foods, avoid drive-thru to save gas and avoid paper products. We check everything we do or buy for environmental impact.  You’d have to admit that not many people try any harder to be good citizens of Earth.  BUT … you knew there would be a ‘but’ somewhere, didn’t you? …  I still cannot say “It isn’t me killing the earth.”  I can’t escape my share of the blame and I can’t blame my actions on someone or something else.  

     Yes, we do a lot to conserve and be environmentally friendly. Our solar is great, but the panels and batteries caused pollution and required a great deal of energy in the manufacturing process.  Sure, once I get them they’re environmentally friendly but I must accept some responsibility for creating the demand for their creation. Yes, our van home has a very small environmental footprint, but it still uses gasoline. Our Roadtrek is twenty-four years old, but RVs are still be manufactured by the thousands and that has a significant environmental impact. I must maintain ours to keep it operating in the most environmentally efficient manner possible, and that requires tires, spark plugs, brake pads, oil changes, etc., all of which have a significant environmental impact. Our furnace, stove and fridge run on propane.  That isn’t as environmentally friendly as the propane industry would like you to think.  We use cell phones to communicate. The manufacturing and maintenance of cell phones is a significant pollutant. I cannot deny that I’m contributing to pollution no matter how hard I work to minimize my impact. 

     I’m not suggesting that we all need to hang our heads, pound our chests and chant “Mea culpa! Mea culpa! Mea maxima culpa!” (ii)  I’m suggest that we stop trying to place blame on someone or something else. Accept the science.  Whether the actual percentage of our contribution is 10% or 90% doesn’t matter. We know that we are making a tremendous contribution to our own demise. Accept that we each contribute to the problem and, therefore, we can each do something to address the problem. 

     Science Daily reported that since the lock-down nitrogen dioxide levels have fallen 20-38% in the US and Europe and 40% in China. (iii)  The International Energy Agency reports that the demand for energy has fallen 6%. (iv) That is equivalent to the entire pre-Covid energy demand for India.  Emissions are on target to fall 4-8%.  Jet fuel consumption is down 65% because, according to the Center for International Climate and Environmental Research, Europe has 90% fewer flights and the US has 50% fewer airline flights. (v) This alone means that each day we reduce CO2 pollution by 975 tons just on the NYC to LAX flights, and that is a low estimate. (vi) 

     COVID-19 has forced us to see that we are quite capable of doing what is necessary to reduce the pollution that is killing our planet.  It has forced us to realize that we have the ability to save countless plant and animal species from extinction, one of those being the homo sapiens. 

FOOTNOTES:

(i)  Triple Divide, Montana.   https://editions.lib.umn.edu/openrivers/article/where-the-water-flows-understanding-glaciers-triple-divide-peak/

(ii) “mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa” is from the old Latin mass and means “my sin, my sin, my most grievous sin”   

(iii)  https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/05/200511124444.htm  see also:  https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2020/drop-in-air-pollution-over-northeast

(iv)  https://www.iea.org/news/global-energy-demand-to-plunge-this-year-as-a-result-of-the-biggest-shock-since-the-second-world-war

(v)   https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-review-2020/oil   see also: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-52485712

(vi)   my calculation based upon distance, number of flights at 50% reduction, at 53# of CO2 per mile.  

see also: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/23/coronavirus-pandemic-leading-to-huge-drop-in-air-pollution    -and-  https://cicero.oslo.no/en

   Hope lies in the wilderness.  Life comes from nature.  
     The large chunk of limestone, which most likely fell from the escarpment next to me many ages ago, made the perfect resting place.  I sat on the boulder as the brook next to me gurgled over and around the rocky debris of ages past on its way to the Russell Fork River over seven-hundred feet below.  It is rather mind boggling that these gentle flowing waters can carve the magnificent towering escarpments and natural arches that I see around me.  I removed my backpack and took off my lightweight Mexican cowboy hat that I bought for living in the desert, dipped a handkerchief into the cool water and wiped my face and head.  It was in the eighties but worse than the heat of July in eastern Kentucky is the humidity.  While the escarpment and lofty forest canopy afford me some shelter from the summer sun, nothing protected me from the humidity.  As long as I sat still, I was fine.  As soon as I would move I began perspiring profusely, constantly having to wipe the sweat from my eyes.  

     As I sat and admired the scene around me, I couldn’t help but think of John Muir’s famous trek from Indianapolis, Indiana to Florida in 1867.  His awe of the beauty of Kentucky as he crossed the Ohio River was soon replaced by the desire to be just about anywhere else on earth. The heat and humidity of the south just about finished John Muir before he could become the Father of American Conservation.  

     I grew up in these eastern mountains, although much farther north, where I learned to love the wilderness and nature. I have spent the last several years in the Rocky Mountains and claim Montana as home.  The Appalachian Mountains are not as spectacular and showy as the Rocky Mountains.  The highest point east of the Mississippi is Mount Mitchel at 6,684 feet. Lake McDonald in Glacier National Park, northwestern Montana, is the lowest point in the Rocky Mountains at 3,120 feet. The glacial moraine along the lake’ s east side are still, at 6,600 feet, called hills.  Nevertheless, there is the majestic beauty of old age in the eastern mountains.  There are no “tree-lines” unless some nasty coal company has cut the top off a mountain.  Unless there is more uplift, this is what the Rocky Mountains will one day look like.  

     Growing old with grace and dignity, the Appalachian Mountains present as a carpet of green that almost invites one standing on a high overlook to jump into its lush foliage.  The upper story of the canopy is dominated by several varieties of Oaks.  A good ten-percent of the trees in this part of the Appalachians are Oak.  The beautiful Tulip Poplar is the Kentucky state tree.  I am also surrounded by Maples, Hickory, Sycamore and Ash trees.  The under story around me is predominantly Rhododendron and fills the hollows and ravines.  

     We were camped on the edge of one such Rhododendron filled ravine. Studying my topographic map I noticed that the ravine beside us led down to a road that I could follow for a short distance to a trail. I’m very accustomed to going cross country in the wilderness, so this wouldn’t be any big deal. As long as I headed downstream there was no hopes of getting lost. As I made my way the few hundred yards from our camp to the road I had a difficult time maneuvering through the dense Rhododendron. In the area of the Allegheny Mountains where I grew up the Rhododendron would bloom in late May but here there were still plenty of flower in early July.  

     One of the trails I followed made its way up to almost 1,800 feet to an overlook that looked out over the gorge, called the Grand Canyon of the East.  It was breathtakingly beautiful but I must admit to having as much reverence and admiration for a place called the Notches.  That’s where I stopped to rest. It was more of a ravine than a hollow, with very steep sides and of great outcroppings of limestone like the escarpment next to which I rested. Often there were recesses in these walls with the allure of a cave holding ancient secrets. Of course I had to make my way through the thick Rhododendron to check them out. I could only imagine how often their deep, dark, cool recesses might have been shelter for animals, including the indigenous homo sapiens. There have been reports of Black Bears in the area.  I’ll admit to approaching the caves cautiously.  If I were a Black Bear on a day like today, I would be escaping the heat either in such a recess or lying in one of the creeks. 

     I covered a lot of ground in Breaks Interstate Park – a park shared by Kentucky and Virginia.  It was all beautiful but my favorite spot is the Notches.  

     I strongly believe that hope lies in the wilderness.  Peace and renewal is our mantra.  It took me most of a lifetime, but I now know that this is where I belong.  It is where I feel free and experience true inner peace.  I return home; return to the wilderness; to recover from the stress and anguish caused by what we call civilization.  In the wilderness I am safe.  Kiaayo (the bear) will not kill me for fun or attack me because of the color of my skin or what I believe. 

     Most modern people have neither the desire nor the skills to avail themselves of the life-saving gift of nature.  We have been, and continue to be, worse than cruel to nature, yet nature, without revenge or retaliation, continues to provide us with those things essential to life: air, water, food, medicine and shelter.  In fact, nature is the only source for these things.  

     Hope lies in the wilderness.  Life comes from nature.  

My, oh, my!  We environmentalists are such alarmists. After all, the latest scientific evidence is that we have at least ten to fifteen more years until the point of no return. Oh, but we’re talking about deniers, so it doesn’t matter if there is scientific evidence.  That’s the denier mentality. Most likely a fair number of the deniers in our government will not be alive to see that day, so why should they care?   

The mentality of the denier is utterly fascinating.  Totally wrong and usually dangerous, but really quite fascinating.  I would have less anxiety studying such though process if it weren’t that it is the deniers who are currently running this country and they’re pushing hard to remove any programs that might save or salvage our environment and our lives.  Nature will ultimately prevail but we won’t be around to enjoy that. 

The denier mentality is nothing new, but prior to 2017 I don’t believe that the blatant denier of established fact had much credibility.  It appears that we have Kellyanne Conway to thank for the term “alternative facts” and a credibility for denying and lying.  On January 22, 2017  Trump’s campaign strategist and counselor, Kellyanne Conway, defended totally erroneous information provided to the press by Press Secretary, Sean Spicer. (i)  She called the erroneous information “alternative facts” and a new term, a godsend to liars, narcissists and deniers, was born.  She later appeared on Meet the Press where, in defending the administration making false claims and losing credibility, she said “Our press secretary, Sean Spicer, gave alternative facts to that, but the point remains that ….”  Meet the Press host,  Chuck Todd, interrupted. “Wait a minute. Alternative facts? … Alternative facts are not facts. They’re falsehoods.” (ii) 

This term, “alternative facts”, was coined for the purpose of justifying a press secretary who gave totally erroneous information about Trump’s inauguration attendance. Actually I don’t care about how many people did or did not attend the event.  I do care about the fact; i.e. the truth; that this was the justification for the first of thousands of pieces of misleading information and outright lies. When has an administration made so many false or erroneous statements that people are actually tracking, categorizing and documenting?  In fact, a January 20, 2020 Washington Post article written by Glenn Kessler, Salvador Rizzo and Meg Kelly, entitled  “President Trump made 16,241 false or misleading claims in his first three years.”  states, 

“We started this project as part of our coverage of the president’s first 100 days, largely because we could not possibly keep up with the pace and volume of the president’s misstatements. We recorded 492 claims – an average of just under five a day – and readers demanded that we keep it going for the rest of Trump’s presidency.  Little did we know what that would mean.  In 2017, Trump made 1,999 false or misleading claims. In 2018, he added 5,689 more, for a total of 7,688. And in 2019, he made 8,155 suspect claims.” (iii) 

I’m not writing to argue about “alternative facts”.  Any reasonably intelligent person knows that a fact is a fact is a fact is a fact.  There is no alternative. An alternative to a fact is a non-fact, a lie, an untruth.  If you believe that something considered “a fact” is wrong, and you can prove it, what you provide is not an “alternative fact” but “the fact” because a fact is something that is known or proven to be true. Opinions are not fact.  They hopefully contain fact but fact is not essential for an opinion.  One can hold the opinion that the sky is actually orange, that’s why we get orange and red sunsets, and that opinion doesn’t make the sky orange. It is strictly opinion. My essays are my opinion. I work hard to present truth and facts in them, which I document in my footnotes, but my opinion still isn’t the fact or the truth.  For me to say that climate change deniers are wrong is simply opinion. For me to provide thousands of documented facts, replicated studies, and peer reviewed articles is something else. Now we’re talking about fact. 

The point of bringing this up is that we see here the ease at which our current GOP Congress and Administration will spout “alternative facts” and expect the American public to accept them as truth.  The fact that there are so many people who will accept the concept of “alternative facts” and accept and believe  irrefutably erroneous statements is a sad commentary on our population, but, to avoid getting any farther afield, I must defer this line of thought to the reader. I would recommend reading Charles P. Pierce’s book “Idiot America: how stupidity became a virtue in the land of the free.” (iv)  

Honest. I haven’t forgotten what started this.  We were talking about the denier mentality. “Alternative facts” have given credibility to the denier: ‘My opinion is as good as your fact.’   I guess we can’t see this as too new.  Kellyanne Conway just gave it a name. Galileo had the evidence that the earth revolves around the sun, but the Roman Catholic Church (the denier) called that heresy.  He ended up in house arrest from circa 1610 to his death in 1642. (v)  “Alternative fact” dominated until the truth absolutely overwhelmed the church. 

Of course, you and I both know that the scientific world has provided overwhelming fact that the sixth mass extinction is real, climate change is real, and that the extinction’s time line has been dramatically pushed up as a result of human behavior.  97% of the world scientist actually agree. The denier’s reaction is to attempt to discredit the scientist.  They make no attempt to argue or discredit expert data and research. They personally attack the scientist as heretics; saying that the scientists are purposely perpetrating a hoax to mislead the general public for political gain.  What political gain?  The only one who has anything personal to gain is the capitalist denier who is making a fortune by not addressing the problems.  The longer the capitalist can keep our government and millions of people deniers, the more money she/he will make.

The biggest problem with the denier mentality is that it is based upon a ‘my-mind-is-made-up-don’t-confuse-me-with-facts’ attitude.  This in itself precludes any discussion, debate or argument.  It is easy, comfortable, and now, suddenly, powerful to be a denier.  To argue that there will not be a sixth mass extinction requires an argument, fact or at least some semblance of data or proof. To argue that humans are not responsible for the rapidity at which the extinction approaches requires an argument, fact or at least some semblance of data or proof.  To argue that climate change is a hoax requires an argument and evidence that we environmentalist and scientist have fabricated our data.  The denier can’t come up with the data or the proof, so it is much easier, and currently more powerful, just to deny what we say and attack us personally.  Let him have the rat. 

FOOTNOTES. 

(i)  Blake, Aaron (1/22/2017). “Kellyanne Conway says Donald Trump’s team has ‘alternative facts.’ Which pretty much sdays it all.”  Washington Post.  see also:  New York Post (1/22/2017) “Conway: Trump spokesman gave alternative facts.” 

(ii)  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_facts#:~:text=%22Alternative%20facts%22%20was%20a%20phrase,President%20of%20the%20United%20States.     This article is very well documented if you care about things like facts. 

(iii)  https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/01/20/president-trump-made-16241-false-or-misleading-claims-his-first-three-years/

(iv)  Pierce, Charles P. (2009). Idiot America: how stupidity became a virtue in the land of the free. New York. Doubleday. 

(v)   https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/galileo-is-accused-of-heresy#:~:text=Galileo%20was%20ordered%20to%20turn,and%20secluded%20during%20the%20trial.

Because we have skills many other animals don’t have, those skills come with responsibility. A number other animals have the problem solving skills and causal reasoning that we have, (i) but we have the more complex brain. That’s because we’re the new creature on the planet.  We’re the new species in evolution. Unlike humans, most species of animals are hard-wired to do the right thing. Whether a good or a bad thing, we have the ability to make “rational” decisions. With these gifts of nature comes responsibility. If we clear land to plant a crop we have certain responsibilities to nature to avoid damage to the environment; avoid destroying habitat for other animals. 

    For example, I put a trail through our Black Fox Hollow, which I’m proud to report is now a certified wildlife habitat.(ii)  I fear that most people would fail to see the environmental impact in a simple trail. So let’s take a look.  It is our responsibility to nature. 

     Almost all animals end up making trails simply because they use the same routes. Hunters call them game trails. I love to follow game trails when I’m “off trail” (iii) When we create a trail, either purposely or like other animals do, we firstly impact the environment with our presence. When I wander the wilderness well away from human trails, roads, camps, etc., I don’t have to worry about causing a steady stream of homo sapiens behind me that might negatively impact the lives of the animals whose habitat I’m visiting. Nevertheless, I still must be extremely careful where I step and what I do. Going “off trail” should be a very thoughtful act. When done properly, it isn’t as easy as it appears but provides a wonderful intimate experience with nature. 

     If we create a trail, as I did in the hollow, we must be aware of at least five things. (a) We must be aware of the impact our trail has on wildlife. Is my trail too close to places where animals might den and give birth to their young. I know that we have a number of animals that borrow or den in the hollow.  Most of them are near a brush pile that I purposely created for that purpose. I kept the trail away from there. We were rewarded for our efforts this year by the presence of a beautiful Red Fox and the three kits to whom she gave birth in the safety of the hollow.  We learned that three of them, the mother and two kits, were captured and released in a very nice place. The remaining kit has returned to the hollow, probably because this is a safe place for her with food and water.  We would not have had this wonderful experience if we had put the trail too near their den. 

      (b) Does my trail destroy any food source or keep animals away from vital food sources?  Governments building roads and putting up border walls are the worst at destroying food sources or keeping animals away from food sources.  Our current GOP Congress and Administration are doing irreparable damage to the environment and cutting off animals from food and essential migratory routes.  As you travel through the west you will see wildlife bridges across roads, especially four-lane roads, to provide animals with a safe means of accessing food and following migratory paths.  The Black Fox Hollow trail makes a loop. Inside the loop is an area rich in plants and seeds that provides food for birds and small animals.  Were it not for the very light foot traffic on our trail, such a small loop; only 1/8 of a mile; could potentially be a barrier to animals seeking food.  Since the trail does not have heavy traffic, it is not a hindrance. 

       (c) Human presence can be stressful to wildlife.  Even bears (omnivores) and big carnivores will move away from humans. I’m very familiar with bears. They have been a significant part of my wildlife management avocation, an important part of my life, and almost a daily event in our lives managing a campground sixteen miles into the Rocky Mountain wilderness.  I can’t help but wonder whether they can tell that we humans are a violent and dangerous species.  If we put stress on bears, wolverines, mountain lions and other large animals high on the food chain, you can imagine our impact on those further down the chain.  Stress is as deadly for a wild animal as it is for the human animal. Does my trail cause stress?  Is that stress forcing them away from important parts of their habitat?  Our trail, by design and lack of heavy traffic, does not interfere with the fox hunting. Also we know that most of their hunting is going to be outside the loop.  If you are on a wilderness trail, in bear or mountain lion country, and you see an animal carcass near the trail, get away from the area as quickly as possible.  Your presence could well stress a big predator into believing it must protect its kill or its food by attacking you. 

     (d)  Is my trail going to cause erosion damage?  A poorly constructed trail can be an erosion nightmare!  In my pictures you can see that my trail is small with minimal impact. At the same time you will notice the picture of the graveled area. I put creek gravel on areas that showed signs of heavy water drainage. Had I not put that gravel in those areas I would soon have deep erosion ruts which would cause significant damage to the land.  If you hike a well maintained trail, you will notice areas that have rocks, logs or other erosion barriers and even small channels dug to move water away from high risk areas.  When we start removing the plants that hold the soil, we risk erosion damage. You will notice that my trail is not totally bare, but that’s only because it isn’t heavily traveled.  

     (e) Is my trail going to impact or destroy vegetation or microbiotic crusts? (iv)   My trail winds because I designed it that way.  Trying to imitate a longer trail in the wilderness, who wants to walk in a straight line?  At the same time I was mindful of the vegetation through which my trail would pass.  I kept it almost complete through grasses, ground cover and wild onions that are very hardy.  One big bend avoids a group of Hackberry trees that have a number of edible and medicinal plants growing below them.  I don’t have to worry about microbiotic crusts in the hollow, but it is a very important factor in trails and off-trail hiking in the desert. I can’t strongly enough impress upon my readers the importance of acquired skills and extreme awareness, mindfulness and observation when off trail.  There are great numbers of places where one wrong footstep will take nature a hundred years to repair.  Part of my job on one of my trail patrol assignments was to keep mountain climbers from taking short-cuts through fragile alpine vegetation. Unknowing and thoughtless hikers often cut corners on trails. Usually there is a reason for a corner, curve or switch-back. Cutting corners often results in environmental damage. 
     So why should we care?  Why do I think we have a responsibility to nature?  

     Nature is our life.  We are a result of nature, both as a species and as individuals, therefore we owe our very existence to nature. We are a part of nature. There is an undeniable oneness in the universe that has been confirmed by quantum physics. (v)  Even if we are so selfish that we haven’t an altruistic bone in our body, we can still relate to the fact that by hurting nature we are hurting ourselves.  Unlike other situations where we are expected to simply believe that someone/something has done something for us, we have empirical evidence that nature is not only the source of our existence but also provides everything that we need to survive: water, air, food, shelter.  We could not exist without nature.  We cannot live without nature. 

FOOTNOTES:

(i) We’re discovering that more and more species do have problem solving skills and causal reasoning.    https://www.primate-cognition.eu/fileadmin/content/Primate_Cognition/Dateien/Schloegl___Fischer_2017_Oxford_Handbook_of_Causal_Reasoning.pdf

(ii) Black Fox Hollow was certified as a Wildlife Habitat by the National Wildlife Federation in May 2020. 

(iii) “off tail” is where one goes cross-country not using an established human trail or road.  With the proper back-country skills it is an exciting and rewarding way to explore the wilderness. It does, however, require a significant skill set and the willingness to be mindful and observant that you don’t do environmental damage or negatively impart local wildlife.

(iv) Microbiotic crusts consist of lichens, bryophytes, algae, microfungi, cyanobacteria, and bacteria growing on or just below the soil surface (Eldridge and Greene 1994). These types of crusts have also been known as cryptogamic, microphytic, microfloral, or cryptobiotic,      https://www.fs.fed.us/r6/icbemp/science/leonard2.pdf

(v)  Ricard, Mattdhieu and Trinh Xuan Thuan. (2001).  The Quantum and the Lotus: a journey to the frontiers where science and Buddhism meet.  New York. Three Rivers Press.  Especially Chapter 4 “The Universe in a grain of sand.”  

  Isn’t it amazing how nature can carve mountains and move boulders like this. This is the rock which we use to make monuments to ourselves.  No artisan is capable of creating any statue or building or painting that can compare to the wonders of nature.  Yet we appear daily to do our best to replace the magnificent natural world with our fragile monuments and scrape the earth to make way for our infestation.  Even though nature is the sole source of all that gives us life and sustains that life, we purposely pollute and destroy nature. Isn’t that tantamount to omnicide?  My only hope lies in my firm belief that nature will prevail.  

     This really isn’t anything new.  I would venture to offer a theory of how this all came about. 

     I have written several essays about social systems (i) concluding that they are not the friend of the homo sapiens. Quite the contrary. My theory in this case goes back to the days when social systems were just developing.  I can’t put a date on it, but suffice it to say that homo sapiens prospered for ninety-percent of our time on earth without social systems.  Social system began to develop with the concepts of private land, ownership, government and organized religion. Because of their superior recording systems we are most aware of this in ancient Egypt and China.  

     Since any expertise I might be able to claim as an historian or student of human development is going to relate to Europe, including the Mediterranean countries, and North America.  I can claim a strong understanding, verging on an expertise, of the Abrahamic religions. (ii)  Judaism, the parent religion of the three Abrahamic religions, appears to be the original antagonist. Even though other religions were beginning to become organized and socialized over a larger area, they still held nature in a central role.  

     Judaism was the most obvious to start placing people above nature and treating nature as something apart and humans as not being a part of nature.  Now, I’m sure that there can be arguments made against other religions, but these other religions did not spawn the religion that would dominate Europe by the time Europeans began to colonize the world.  Judaism’s attitude toward nature is established in the first chapter of their Torah “fill the earth and subdue it.” (iii)  This is a part of what Christians call the Old Testament, and so Christianity, the first child of Judaism, took this ‘other-than-nature’ attitude with them on their colonial conquests.  

     This concept may have been present in other cultures by the time that white Europeans began to colonize the world, but a major part of that colonization was to impose their belief systems on those whom they conquered.  The colonization of North America is vile litany of white Europeans destroying the culture, religion, language and history of the indigenous people.  The indigenous peoples of North America felt very much a part of nature. (iv)

     Enter capitalism.  Actually capitalism goes back to England and the Netherlands of the 17th century.  Many people believe that  capitalism is an “American” idea. Sorry to break the news. (v)  It was beneficial to capitalism to court government and religion.  Capitalism added the concept that nature is a resource (vi) only valued for the wealth it could bring.  If land could not be used to further one’s wealth it was considered useless even though it might be an immensely important part of an ecosystem.  A good example is how humans will drain “useless” swamp land to build or farm when in reality the swamp is critically important to all life – including human – as a source of clean water, air and food.  However, to the capitalist it isn’t worth anything unless it makes them money.  As a result we see places like the large area along the Grand Canyon that cannot be hiked because of the old uranium mines that have ruined the land and made it dangerous to all animals, including humans. (vii)  

     This theory then brings the three social systems; religion, government and capitalism; together as the perpetrators of the three most egregious falsehoods that (a) humans are superior to nature, (b) that human over-population, mega-farming, lumbering and industrialization do not hurt nature and therefore all living creatures, and (c) that nature is nothing more than a resource. 

     Today we see that there is little regard for nature unless it is providing profits or the raw materials to make a product to make a profit. Religion, which can be argued to be the first to disregard nature, relied for a long time on good relationships with the reigning government. We have seen that, since Citizens United v Federal Election Commission (viii), government has become dependent upon the wealthy capitalist for their continued power. This, then, ties religion, government and capitalism together.  Three great social systems run by an elite few for the benefit of an elite few. 

     Make no mistake.  We are not above nature.  Human history is filled with examples of nature, in little more than a blink of an eye, laying waste to humans’ sad monuments to their own glory, taking back what human have endeavored to destroy or control.  One of my favorite examples is how humans thought that they had taken control of the Mississippi River for the purpose of commerce on the river and farming in the low wetlands stolen from the river by a series of levees, the first being built in 1717 to create New Orleans.  The first time the levees  were taken out by nature was 1844 in the Great Flood.  In 2005 over fifty levees failed. (ix)  I happen to drive across one of the few roads and bridges that were high enough to go from the east to west side of the river.  I drove for almost twenty miles with the Mississippi on both sides of me.  Nature had prevailed, and nature will continue to prevail. 

     In her June 1st, 2020 New York Times article, Rachel Neuwer (x) reports that experts give us 10-15 years before we reach the critical point of no return. After that we will rapidly progress  toward the point where the earth is uninhabitable to animals such as homo sapiens. The down side is that we homo sapiens must bear the greatest guilt in hastening this mass extinction and are killing ourselves by making no effort to change our ways. The up-side is that nature will prevail. As long as the building blocks for life still remain, nature will clean the water, soil and air that we have fouled, create new life forms, and start anew. Nature will prevail, but human will probably not be a part of it. 

FOOTNOTES: 

(i)  See my essay on “What constitutes a social system?”        https://oldconservationist.blogspot.com/2020/03/what-constitutes-social-system.html

(ii)  First as a history major as an undergraduate, followed by three years of graduate school where I carefully studied the Abrahamic religions and read two of their three holy books in the original language. 

(iii)  Genesis 1:28 

(iv)  Hudson, Charles. (1976).  The Southeastern Indians.  Knoxville, TN.  University of Tennessee Press. 

(v)  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_capitalism

(vi)  resources =df  a stock or supply of money, materials, staff, and other assets that can be drawn on by a person or organization in order to function effectively. Similar: assets, funds, wealth, money, riches, capital. 

(vii)  https://www.grandcanyontrust.org/grand-canyon-uranium

(viii)  A copy of the actual Supreme Court opinion.   http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation/cu_sc08_opinion.pdf.

(ix)  https://www.mvd.usace.army.mil/Portals/52/docs/MRC/MRT_Levees.pdf?ver=2017-07-27-141912-910    -and-  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_levee_failures_in_Greater_New_Orleans#:~:text=On%20August%2029%2C%202005%2C%20there,Katrina%20and%20landfall%20in%20Mississippi.

(x)  https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/01/science/mass-extinctions-are-accelerating-scientists-report.html?fbclid=IwAR1yr9C3VW5JCmR6dd56Zbsu2USMGCVePY_vZLR6DKhq2moyN7uwYWwmixU