Humans gets a bit of a bad rap at times.
It's cool to want to save the planet these days. It's deemed good to use things that are less processed, less refined, have caused less trees to be chopped down, less coal to be burned... better to use things that are closer to their "natural" state.
And so the term "that's not natural" comes across our ears more and more.
The way we communicate electronically, the way we stare at glowing screens, the way we travel vast distances at ridiculously fast speeds... all deemed "unnatural" and the less we can partake in these activities the better off we'll be.
But to say our behaviour is not natural is a big call.
Usually what is meant by "that's not natural" is "if humans hadn't interfered that would never have occurred". And thus a better outcome will always occur if humans are not involved.
If a lion kills an animal it's natural, if a human does it he is destroying nature.
But by declaring such a thing, is to somehow decree that humans are not a part of nature.
Perhaps the conversation about what we need to do to care for our home, Earth, would be more robust if we acknowledged the privileged position we humans have as part of nature, not something separate from nature.
Indeed, not only do I personally consider humans a part of nature, or creation, or the environment, but also the only species that can altruistically choose to shape his environment for the betterment of others, not only himself.
Removing human activity from Earth would not restore the planet to some mythical "natural state". We know the Earth continuously changes drastically over time with no input from our species.
It may seem overly semantical, but to consider humans a part of nature impacting the future environment of the planet, as opposed to beings separate to nature impacting the future environment of the planet, may empower and embolden us to make the choices we need to to see a better outcome for future generations. As long as we talk about nature being something separate to ourselves, it will be difficult to enact habitual change a very base level. But if we spoke and thought about nature as something that is part of us, (to the same extent that we think of trees and birds as nature), then we may subliminally believe caring for nature to be simply caring for ourselves.
Perhaps a shift in how we speak and think is needed to help shift culturally ingrained behaviour.