Why Choosing Nature Will Only Advance Human Societies

Marco Torres, Prevent Disease
Waking Times 

We all have our opinions, principles and philosophies about life and we must be very careful about infringing on those of others. Every person should be able to follow that inner voice without external influences constantly telling them they’re wrong. However there is one choice we could all make right now that would transform our world to benefit all living things and the Earth itself.

That is, choosing nature and each other above all else. So many of us have been deschooled on this concept that it may take decades for the scales to tip so that we all start respecting our world again.

By embracing Mother Nature, we adopt the foundation of all she has to offer. We understand that she is never mistaken and will always do the right thing for Earth’s inhabitants.

Overpopulation: The Myth To End All Myths 

That means things like overpopulation, lack of resources, lack of food, lack of water or lack of anything else coming from the Earth is not only a myth but is impossible reality. Man-made depopulation of the earth is a ridiculous concept since Mother Nature knows exactly what to do with the planet and its inhabitants to maintain balance at anytime.

Thomas Malthus argued that population growth, by the poor, inevitably outstrips food production and leads to a massive retaliation from Mother Nature (i.e., Malthusian Controls). His infamous “Malthusian Controls” which are taught to every first year sociology student, has become a cornerstone belief for many modern day globalists who advocate population control by any means necessary. This radical and dangerous idea promotes the unproven notion that the poor deserve to die because there are too many of them for the Earth to adequately support. Malthus believed that higher wages and welfare should be withheld from the great unwashed because he believed that these two factors would allow the poor to survive and exponentially breed, thus compounding the overpopulation problem.

Overpopulation is a radical and dangerous myth promoted by elite and international societies. The unproven notion, as Malthus believed, that higher wages and welfare should be withheld from the great unwashed because he believed that these two factors would allow the poor to survive and exponentially breed, thus compounding the overpopulation problem.

Overpopulation is a misnomer. A problem that exists only in dramatically erroneous theories that are not mathematically based. It is simply one of the most flawed concepts right up there with global warming. The theories are based on myths, not science or accurate statistical correlations or causation principles.

The theories can never be translated to any practical applications because they cannot exist in a close system designed to maintain homeostatic balance. This is what Mother Earth does for us. She balances our entire planet with all the resources required to maintain the status quo. Should that population exceed the necessary resources, the Earth will naturally purge as all macro-ecosystems do.

Those who believe in overpopulation have an enormous lack of understanding the natural tendencies of the Earth. This stems from myths, misinformation and a very ignorant approach to complex ecosystems of all sizes.

The Flawed Arguments of Naturalistic Fallacy

There have been many opponents to the branch of ethics dealing with embracing nature. Some such as British philosopher G. E. Moore who labeled the philosophy naturalistic fallacy. He argued it would be fallacious to explain that which is good reductively, in terms of natural properties such as “pleasant” or “desirable”. Others insist that those who appeal to nature claim that what is natural is inherently good or right, and that what is unnatural is inherently bad or wrong.

For example, many proponents of naturalistic fallacy will state that Earth has many toxic elements so all that is natural is not good. Aluminum is one of the Earth’s most natural abundant elements, yet putting it in your coffee may cause a host of health problems. While this is true, this is not how human beings naturally interact with aluminum. The argument stated is that aluminum is natural and bad for the human body so there goes the argument that all within nature is good right? Anything can be taken out of context and those advocates of naturalistic fallacy are experts at it.

The most common group of minerals in the Earth’s crust are aluminosilicates and native aluminum metal can only be found in the interiors of certain volcanoes. So there is a big difference between this type of interaction of metal with human populations and those that, for instance, are injected inside an infant through a vaccine.

Another example would be uranium which is naturally in very low concentrations of a few parts per million in soil and water. All natural uranium also has emitting alpha particles, but to achieve toxic levels found in concentrated man-made energy sources, man must intervene.

In their natural states, these elements do not cause problems. When corporations or governments find themselves taking these elements out of their natural states, we find ourselves polluting the environment and our bodies.

These examples demonstrate a dichotomy in the level of understanding of how nature interacts with humans and how humans interact with nature. Many misunderstandings relate to these very extreme views in an attempt to interpret what the majority of those who choose nature subscribe to. Although some groups who subscribe to natural principles have these views, the majority do not.

The Big Difference Between Knowledge and Wisdom

Knowledge may empower people to change the way the world works, but if they don’t really know how it works, how useful is that knowledge? Wisdom begins with the dawn of reason, an understanding of the knowledge and principles whereby we may know the true meaning of things.

A better method of comparatively defining a belief system based on natural principles is this difference between knowledge and wisdom. It has little to do with choosing what is “right” or “good” or “pleasant”, and more about following the wisdom this planet has attained through billions of years of existence. We must agree to learn from the wisdom attained by Mother Earth and all our ancestors who have had solutions to many of the problems we face today.

Our existence on the planet is a mere speck compared to how long the Earth has been here. Plants and herbs are some of the oldest living things on the planet. How can a tobacco or a therapeutic cannabis plant be harmful to a human being? Unless a plant contains poisons, and is not meant to be ingested, it will never harm the human body. Only our instincts and the wisdom from our elders and ancestral populations can tell us that, not our governments.

The problem is, we have our schools, institutions and employers telling us to ignore these instincts and instead encourage us to follow what we have been programmed to learned, rather than what we know deep down inside is true.

We have such an overwhelming disconnection from nature, that we simply lack the comprehension that everything…absolutely everything is cyclical. Our environment, community, municipality, region, state, nation and world are only reflections of ourselves. If you want to understand what is happening to the Earth, look in the mirror.

As many as 60% of patients with symptoms that they attribute to environmental pollutants are in fact suffering from psychological problems. That doesn’t mean these problems don’t exist, but we can’t correct them from a position of victim/perpetrator because it only enforces that reality.

Change starts first from within. It is impossible to accept the beauty of nature and others if we cannot accept our own beauty and the inherent goodness in all living things.

It’s time to stop blaming everybody else and start taking responsibility for our collective consciousness. We did it all together…the good and the bad.

Choosing Nature Above All Else

What does this mean? It means respecting your wisdom, your instincts and a respect for all living things.

It means:

– Choosing real food that grows from the earth, meaning eating dead processed foods is not within your consideration.

– Choosing health, not disease, meaning you reject all artificial substances or mechanisms that claim to heal the human body. You are your best Doctor and nobody knows your body better than you do. Food is your medicine and only you can heal yourself.

– Choosing the human body’s wisdom in all its perfection, meaning you don’t alter the body, inject it or harm it with anything and you extend that to all others.

– Choosing love, respect, kindness and support, meaning we help others even if they don’t help us because we know everything is cyclical and we will reap the benefits regardless of timing.

– Choosing life, not death, meaning we don’t kill anything unless we absolutely must to survive. That doesn’t mean we can’t eat plants or animals or anything else. If we need these things to survive, we do what is necessary within our instincts and the harmony that exists between ourselves and our environment.

– Choosing the Earth, meaning Mother Nature knows best. She will never lead us down the wrong path. She will always be there for us, providing us sustenance, shelter, and every single resource we will ever need to survive.

Have a little faith in Mother Nature. She knows what she’s doing and she will do what she needs to, regardless of human emotions, actions or events. She has a tiny bit of experience on this planet. Give her the respect she deserves.

About the Author

Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy.

~~ Help Waking Times to raise the vibration by sharing this article with the buttons below…

  • Solange

    Nature prevails,….always.

  • scoaste

    If overpopulation is a myth, then why is species extinction at the highest level since the asteroid wiped out the dinosaurs… without currently an asteroid?

  • molecule

    Right on! If we are to “save the whales,” refresh, clean and renew the oceans, and the creeks and rivers, and restore sweetness to the soil, and energy and vibrancy to the air, we have to dramatically increase empathic human populations and, the hard part, we need to take control away from the psychopathic Wall St. zombies. The reason the psychopaths are stealing our chicks is that they want to breed more zombies, and their capitalist -communist -zionist -ismismist “economics.” The age of perpetual deception has to come to an end, of bank fraud and profit, or Mother Earth is going to cut a gigantic fart and kill us all off. If empathic beings are allowed to organize we would not measure success in avarice … we would measure it in freshness of the ocean, sweetness of the soils, and vibrancy of the atmosphere … in the innocence of children, the happiness of women and their desire to be a part of better evolution, and the honor, dignity and courage of men. When the system turns men into corporate psychopaths the result is war even against the innocence of children.

  • Wendle

    As the article says; it is true that Earth will correct it’s balance – and I will elaborate on that myself; – since long term imbalance is impossible, but short term is.

    I don’t understand the meaning of the article. It can’t be that the author agrees in that the number of people on the planet today is not too high. Because even if we all gave up material commodities and started living on a material minimum, growing our own food, then still 7 billion people is too much for the Earth. Simply because the space we occupy is so great that the natural world has to step back. Harmony in our numbers was before agriculture was invented. And this is the balance that Earth will create sooner or later.

    Sure I can understand that if we stop viewing the Earth as over populated then we stop giving energy to that, and it should seize to be a problem. And then the different human populations should start to dwindle all by themselves and adapt to the local resources where everyone lives.

    However, people today are reminded about over population every single day of their life on a subconscious level even if they never formulate clear thoughts about it. When they drive home from work the traffic is jammed, when they take the subway home from work they experience the over population, when they buy an apartment or a house they can feel how the real estate market is to elbow your way in financially against others and get elbows in your face too.

    So if the thought gets in anyway, better to deal with that negative thinking on a conscious level instead. After all it is the human thought that is the leading edge of creation. And I don’t see the point in why thousands of species should die off and entire biotopes should be eradicated by humans before Nature rebalances everything.

  • keldoone

    While we do in fact mess up in cities it is not because of over population or size of the city… it is because we not are using space the way we could. For example in south Los Angeles, California, people are now – as we read this – planting gardens in open spaces and even between curb and side walk… and look at apartment windows… where are the boxes that could be growing vegetables as well as flowers… there are presently, two high rise buidlings going up in Milan, Italy that are architectually, using the opportunity to grow trees on every level with bushes and other plants… it is about time. They are quite atractive rendering by artists..
    It is largely the recognition that we have lost touch with Mother Earth… Far too many people have no idea how that steak (from birth of calf to steer) got into that package… or how that milk, chocolate at that, got into the carton…or what it takes to make a loaf of bread.
    Most of the people living in cites would die within a week or less if the grocery stores closed… they would panic and die of fear related stresses. Much like people having car problems in the desert and dying from thirst way before they should have… it is all about fear.
    People in cities can wake up. They can start growing their own foods. They can take back their connection to Mother Earth. And I say they must. Because if they all moved to the country… who is going to feed them there? They must learn where they are… and then expand from there.
    And I am in total agreement with this author…if you want to make a change in the world take a look at the person in the mirror and make that change…Everything is merely a reflection. Where you live is where are… moving to another location does not change anything but the horizon… the problems remain the same.

  • I am not sure of the over population diagnosis. Humans are out of balance with nature. We are grabbing all the resources bit by bit, leaving little wild soon. If “Nature” is going to provide the solution it can only be disaster or making humans immediately sterile. I see so many social ills come from too many people competing for resources. A large City seems so essentially unnatural.

    • fred

      If you replace “humans” with “Zionist bankers” and ‘we” with “they” I certainly agree.

      • Kukulkan

        You’re right fred. It has nothing to do with the present number of people and everything to do with a cancerous system set up by the few. A change in social direction to sustainablity instead of growth is all we need. But there is no profit in that…

Thank you for sharing. Follow us for the latest updates.

Send this to friend