Meta Post

Many of the launch posts and query posts bring up good points from the reading and video to ask how we can live with nature, or if we even can. The posters seem to be concerned with how to define nature- should we look at it how McKibben does, how Marris does, or even a combination of the two? It seems as if this question doesn't have an easy answer for the other posters, but they eventually settle on a mix of both views.

They acknowledge that damage has been done to nature, but they also acknowledge that we are taking steps to preserve and clean up nature. They also seem to think that nature isn't as easily defined as McKibben and Marris make it out to be.

Some of the posters did some research after looking at the material for the blog to aid their decisions, and offer potential ways to preserve nature, or "love" it. In this way, they are concerned with how to tackle this problem, and are already looking at how other areas of nature are affected than just what was discussed (such as the ocean). Many of the posts agree that steps have to be taken to save nature and that lies largely in our hands, especially how we introduce nature.