A wild 'freakosystem' has been born in Hawaii

Degradation vs. Novelty in Ecosystems

• One camp argues the article assumes without proof that “novel” ecosystems are degraded, romanticizing a pre-human baseline and ignoring that nature is continual crisis and change.
• Others counter that the problem isn’t novelty per se but the disappearance of unique native species and the resulting global loss of biodiversity.
• There’s disagreement over whether fewer species and more extinctions on human timescales should be treated as clear degradation or just another phase in Earth’s long history.

Humans, ‘Nature’, and ‘Unnatural’

• Several commenters reject framing human-made ecosystems as “freakish” or “unnatural,” stressing humans are products of evolution like beavers or ants modifying their habitats.
• Others defend a distinction: humans operate at vastly greater scale and speed, create new elements and technologies, and uniquely understand (and can choose to alter) their impact.
• Some suggest “natural” vs “unnatural” is better seen as emergent vs deliberately designed, rather than human vs non-human.

Biodiversity, Extinction, and Timescales

• Pro‑biodiversity arguments emphasize intrinsic value of species, ecosystem “balance,” and practical value of genetic diversity for medicine, science, and resilience.
• Critics respond that new, self-sustaining, human-benefiting ecologies may be a reasonable tradeoff and that expectations of ecological equilibrium create unnecessary anxiety.
• There’s debate over how unprecedented our impact is: comparisons to ancient oxygenation events and mass extinctions vs emphasis on how fast modern change is.

Invasives and Novel Ecosystems in Practice

• Examples: Canadian goldenrod forming monocultures in Poland; planted forests in Belgium now being cut for “restoration”; rural abandonment in Eastern Europe sometimes reducing biodiversity.
• Novel ecosystems in cities are cited as something to accept and “treasure,” while non-urban transformations are seen as more ethically fraught.
• Some note tropical systems may absorb introduced species more robustly than, say, boreal or savanna ecosystems, which can collapse from a single aggressive invader.

‘Natural’ vs Synthetic and Risk Perception

• A long side-thread debates “too many chemicals” in food: one side mocks the natural/artificial divide (everything is chemicals), the other stresses that processing and additives can change health outcomes even when components are individually “safe.”
• This parallels the ecosystem debate: skepticism of reflexive “natural = good, artificial = bad,” but also caution about rapid, poorly understood human alterations.