"Natural systems are resilient and bounce back," said Susan Cutter, a geographer with the University of South Carolina. "The problem is when we try to control nature, rather than letting her do what she does."

The seas are rising, the planet is getting hotter and commercial and residential development is snowballing. Add those factors to a predicted increase in nasty hurricanes and what results is a recipe for potentially serious natural degradation, some say.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/01/28/hurricane.habitat.ap/index.html

duck and cover. get some supplies. are you ready?

Erm.... that link doesn't work any more, natural degradation like what? anyway if human intervention was just building a hurricain bunker in the back garden all would be solved sort of.

Natural systems are in fact resilient, but Ms. Cutter doesn't specify anything beyond the more arbitrary definition of "control." Is she trying to put down afforestation efforts worldwide? Or the eradication of introduced species?

I would need further information to pass judgement on this issue. There also needs to be an ecologist around here.

The Information that Andre provided about the flaws in the Hockystick Therory show that the assumptions derived on global warming and human causation are wrong, CK it out on google, and from what I see most of the global warming sinerios are based on the Hockystick, so any use of it to make policy on global warming is counter productive.