Are we interfering with nature when it comes to catastrophes?

Question

Each decade we strive to save millions of lives by the provision of vast amounts of money whenever droughts strike in countries that drought is a natural occurance. Some say that Nature herself allows such events to keep the worlds population on an even keel?

Are we really doing the right thing for humanity, not that it will affect you and I now. But the earths future generations could well pay the price?.

Answer 1

So your saying if a natural catastrophe is going to kill millions, let it happen? This way the world population will be kept at a reasonable population margin.

Hmm.... i wonder if you would say this if you lived in a coastal town and a mega tsunami was heading towards you at 400mph.

Answer 2

problem is that historically humans wouldn't have stayed in places of drought.  when a drought struk the people would get up and move somewhere with a more readily supply of food and water (hence why humans spread around the world) however now that we have countries with borders these people are stuck where they are, so we should help them because we are not letting them behave as nature would have intended

Answer 3

This is where there is a danger of Nazism and Environmentalism joining hands. I don't have any problem with population control. I would just like the mechanism to be the criminal justice system and the death penalty rather than fire and floods etc. That way civilization advances.

Answer 4

Nature is going to kill man as long as we continue to be stupid. Most places with droughts like Ethiopia for instance are drought ridden due to their own fault so why should we help, let them get on with it in their own way and look after your own kind first

Answer 5

You may find that these countries include first world ones:

Much of the USA is experienceing drought at the moment. (Other parts are having floods or snow due to its size and diverse geography.) These drought and pressure on water resources are likely to become more intense this century.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/...

And

http://www.wwaytv3.com/blog/sonya_steven...

As for aid. Its now well known that La Nina's brings floods to parts of Mozambique (amongst other things). It's now also tried and tested that what works best to get the country back to normal quickly is short term emergency relief (tents, food etc) followed by enough seed  for the farmers to replant their crops and become self sufficient once the waters subside.

Nature doesn't 'allow' anything. The Earth, the atmosphere, the oceans etc are not conscious or intelligent. It does not have a grand plan.

You could argue that war is the humans way of culling populations. But no-one argues we should have wars just to thin out the population or create a better housing market.

As for humanitarian aid. The key word here is 'humanitarian'.

I know many who refused to donate even to the UK flood appeals last year. It's selfish, but their choice; but many more did choose to contribute.

Answer 6

I agree and I think it is affecting us now, look at antibiotics.

I agree in some cases antibiotics are necessary, but not as often as they are prescribed.

Ohh, I am going to be hated for what I am about to say!!!!

Because of interfering, we have people walking this planet who should be dead and what's worse these folks are reproducing!

They are messing with an already defunct gene pool!

This is the logical part of me talking, the moral part of me says that we can't deny some one the right to live if they can be saved.

Answer 7

We should try to control local weather.... Ex. Seeding rain clouds to a safe extent to water arid areas as well as keeping enough for lowland basins.

Answer 8

Every organism has a right to survive.Do u think we can interfere nature's catostrophes ..?WE CANT ,we are just saving our butts

Answer 9

Yes i think nature should take its course and Natural selection should be respected. Please get  in the way of ...lets say a ...very small, very tiny meteorite!