> Why fight nature? It's futile. You can't win in the long run.

What does that even really mean? Are modern childbirth techniques "fighting nature"? What about using soap? I challenge anyone to come up with a meaningful notion of "fighting nature".

Is it futile? Why? What's the justification for that claim?

>What does that even really mean?

My apologies, I should have specified.

By "fighting nature" I was referring to creating the worlds most powerful herbicide (that will become powerless in a few years because nature will force it to).

I was referring to spending hundreds of millions of dollars fighting the Asian Flying Carp species that literally are decimating our waterways in terms of enjoyment.

Stuff like that.

Everybody hates weeds, and nobody likes getting their neck broken when they are on a powerboat racing down the river because a fish flew up and hit them.

But we can't really stop the weeds from growing of the fish from spreading in the long run. So why bother?

It just seems like such a wasted effort.

It's amazing that we as humans haven't developed a built-in argument against suppression-resistance technologies. After at least a couple of decades of race conditions in antibiotics, now we're importing it to agriculture. It has to be seen as a dead end. A profitable dead end, but a dead end nonetheless.