I found that being frustrated with a problem usually makes you change your thinking, thus making the answer more attainable. As an analyzer of works we as students need to realize this and try to understand where the author is coming from. It extends beyond that and into the micro-world. DNA makes up and defines everything including micro-world. People are very skeptical about the invisible.
Humans are nature, and then there is the obvious nature.
We need to come up with a better distinction between what is and isn't natural. We should pursue more about the wildlife at Eastern and what has stayed the same and what has changed. I never really though of a comet as wild life. It felt like wilderness. The question of whether or not there is wilderness in Cheney should be pursued further because there could be wilderness in the ground, in the soil, although it is more on a smaller scale.