The perspective that nature, including the Everglades, should be "attractive or safe" for human convenience is profoundly misguided and chauvinistic. Nature does not exist for humanity's comfort or aesthetic preferences—its value and purpose are independent of human desires or perceptions. The Everglades is a complex, irreplaceable ecosystem essential for biodiversity, climate regulation, water filtration, and flood control. It hosts countless species found nowhere else on Earth, including apex predators like alligators, which are critical to the ecological balance.

To suggest draining such a vital natural landscape and replacing its inhabitants with "friendly" animals ignores the intricate interdependencies that sustain these ecosystems. This not only threatens extinction of unique species but undermines the health of the entire region, affecting millions of people who rely on its ecosystem services. Demanding nature conform to a sanitized or human-safe version reflects a narrow, anthropocentric arrogance.

The wildness of the Everglades is part of its profound purpose and beauty. Any view that diminishes this is reductive, environmentally ignorant, and ethically troubling. Nature is not a backdrop to human desires but a living system demanding protection, understanding, and awe.

▲

nlitened 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

> Nature does not exist for humanity's comfort or aesthetic preferences

To be fair, in most religions (including christianity and atheism) it kinda does

▲

Scarblac 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Atheism isn't a religion and as an atheist I find that an offensive statement.

Nature existed before we did and will exist after us, it can't be true that it exists for us.

▲

nlitened 4 days ago | parent [-]

> it can't be true that it exists for us

You're saying it as if you assume some external entity judging whether something exists for somebody or not.

As an atheist you would acknowledge that the entire concept of "existing for something/somebody" is entirely a construct of human mind, which human mentally applies to the observable universe around them. So for an atheistic human mind, everything exists for human, as there's nobody else to exist for.

	▲	4 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		[deleted]
	▲	rexpop 2 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		We're putting too much pressure on the word "for", here. There are no great truths to be found at this level of linguistic imprecision .

▲

goatlover 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Doesn't matter what those religions claim, nature existed long before humans and exists beyond humans and will exist long after us. On earth, there are living creatures with their own motivations that inhabit all the remote wildernesses and deep seas. And life may exist on other planets.

	▲	nlitened 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		> nature existed long before humans and exists beyond humans and will exist long after us If this is true (and I believe it is), then it does not really matter much what humanity does in the big picture. Might as well drain some swamps and seas to reclaim some land. > On earth, there are living creatures with their own motivations that inhabit all the remote wildernesses and deep seas You can both acknowledge that, and believe that human must do what's good for humans and animals that are good for humans.

▲

vixen99 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I have to say - thank you for that!