I'm not sure what a "touchpoint" is. But I think you're saying that the aggressive stance towards nature isn't self-evidently justified, that we shouldn't be so resentful or fearing of nature's alienness.

The thing is that I often mean to portray this kind of humanistic progress in the most blunt terms to spark a reaction, to get the reader to question modern societies. In my mind I'm clear about the difference between describing and prescribing something. It's just that if something is described bluntly or even hyperbolically, the description could be construed as a prescription. But I've pointed out elsewhere that I'm ambivalent about whether civilization's triumphing over the wilderness is a good thing. It's obviously an enormous, multifaceted question that I'm still exploring.