The earth is not so green

We are living in a dangerous world, primarily because the catastrophic forces of nature have continuously challenged the survival of mankind on this planet since when this intelligent breed of living being evolved, and the most recent incident being the potentially destructive earthquake at a magnitude of 9 in Richter scale and a gigantic tsunami that tumbled Japan to its feet. Perhaps, in the history of Japan, this was the worst natural calamity that posed a classic question to the most technologically advanced nation – irrespective of material achievements however large by mankind, the nature has always the upper hands. The scale of devastation was enormous; over ten thousand people killed (the final figure may be manifold once Japan comes out with its reports) and millions of people fled away from their native places, many infrastructures including residential, transport, and industrial washed washed away, and the most horrific ones were the blasts at nuclear plants that followed hundreds of aftershocks. The economic loss to Japan, according to some agency estimates, ranging $171-183 billion, which can go even higher. The nature has always been unkind to this world. In the pursuit of excellence, human beings have ever been confronted by the evil forces of nature. The tug of war is as primitive as the evolution of living beings on the surface of earth. Many potential calamities we have endured, and many more to come, but the eternal conflict between living beings and natural forces will prevail till that final doomsday, post which neither the natural forces nor the living beings will wage a war against each other.

So, a fundamental question arises here: Are we safe on this planet despite our pro-nature stand, as many environmentalists and eco-activists have been fighting for long to save this planet? I have some serious doubts, which would certainly draw the ire of these activists. Well, to understand the essence of my share of doubts, let's sit on a time-wrap and go back to some 70-75 million years ago during which the last ice age in the eons of evolution of earth that wiped out 90% population of world then, my question is: Were those tribes antagonists of nature or did they do something grievous disservice to the nature? Certainly not. Even science and technology was not a subject of contempt then and people were as barbaric as animals and lived an animal life too. Foods, sex, and shelter were the predominant drivers for living beings. And of course, all those ancient tribes were nature lovers. Then why the nature played an end game. Let's consider another cataclysmic event when the entire dinosaur population annihilated from the surface of planet, what was the culpability of living organisms those suffered that terrible loss?

Remember, the genesis of this universe, as many scientific theories suggest, evolves from a big bang. If we look at the pattern of formation of earth and many other plants as well, they all have been the byproducts of a celestial cataclysmic event. In every creation there lives a complex chart of destructive forces that drives the nature of any planet, whether it's viable for living or not. Now, the crux of the debate is that the human being, who is often touted as the most intelligent creature on this planet, should take a deeper look into these defining moments of history and act intelligent to counter the imminent risks posed by the devastating natural calamities. I am sure, survival of the fittest would sound more rational in all these ironies of human sufferings. If we take enough precautionary measures, we can surely co-exist with the diabolic forces of nature, be it earthquake, tsunami, volcanic eruption, tornado, cyclone, or flood.