harmony in nature...what I meant

["Paul Cambridge" <pcambridge@explorer.org>]

I wrote: 

> > I am merely stating that I believe organisms have more importance than just 
> > being here. I guess I was coming from the viewpoint of a harmony in nature 
> > [...]. I believe ecological niches are not just a product, but a need to 
> > sustain life. Surely you all can understand that. 

"David Marjanovic" wrote:
                         
 > "No, I can't. Please explain. :-) What do you mean by harmony in nature? 
 > What exactly do you mean by ecological niches?"

What I mean by "harmony in nature" is basically the way things go. Not that 
there is a certain "plan", but rather the way things go are the way they go, 
and I think eco niches exist because of the animals which are there. A wolf in 
Yellowstone serves a very important niche to keep down deer populations. We 
know that specifically because when we took the wolf out, the deer 
overpopulated. That is what I mean by harmony. The wolf is "needed" to fill the 
niche. I'm not saying "GOD" put it there, I'm saying that, if you take out a 
valuable element to an ecosystem, you will obviously have consequences. That is 
why animals are needed. That is why they are important. Isn't that what 
evolution is about? Given time, I am sure another predator would fill the boots 
of the wolf, but not without the system experiencing problems. That is what I 
am saying. It really isn't that difficult to fathom.

Paul