When we talk about climate change, I have often been a little sceptical. Because even though nature is a place that I know I go to find G-d, the simplistic idea that all nature is intertwined and is G-d did not seem right to me.

Let me give you an example. When I walked the Camino de Santiago, that is a pilgrimage to a church in Spain (before I converted to Judaism) I had this amazing experience at the end of the walk. The Camino is an arduous trial you give yourself, and in the process of walking you sometimes get revelations.

Just before I reached the final church, I walked through a glade of eucalyptus. It was a sunny afternoon, the birds sang, it smelled of the sweet smell of green eucalyptus, and I just got the most important revelation there in the glade. This was my church, so to say. The glade was the true church, in the sense, that nature in its beauty, is where G-d really resides.

You go back to the whole discussion of climate change, this is really what it is all about right? We revere nature as where to truly find G-d. And we try to protect the creation of G-d against the rape and destruction often brought to nature by mankind.

This is both right and wrong. Right in the sense, that G-d is nature and resides in nature, wrong in the sense, that in nature there is not only G-d there is also destruction and misery.

This is where we go wrong I think. We take all nature as the residence of G-d, and we fail to see, that in nature materialism is there as well.

The dog eats dog process is also what nature is. So taming nature is sometimes to the benefit of spiritual development in nature, so to speak.

To heighten our understanding of nature is, I believe we need another model of it than what we have already.

Nature is driven, according to Darwin by two forces, firstly by the selection of the fittest live within a habitat, and secondly by sexual choice.

These two principles are better described by another natural philosopher, in my mind Empedocles (the same philosopher who invented progressive tax). He says that nature is like sphere, in the centre is love at the fringes is strife. The development of nature goes as a tidal wave between love and strife. At a specific stage there is strife in nature and in other stages there is love.

In a sense it is the same theory as the either-or idea of Kierkegaard. Saying that you either go with your needs (seduction) or with you spiritual self (forgivness). In other words, there is materialism (strife) and spirituality (love) in nature as such, not only in us humans.

This is really the realisation I think we should make. We should not support material and destructive tendencies in nature, but support where nature seeks for love and beauty, in order to enhance spirit in nature.

Take my little glade of Eucalyptus. G-d was there, and I felt in connection with G-d. If we do the same as environmentalists. That is find where G-d is most present in nature and protect those places maybe even enlarge them, we will do a service to nature, G-d and ourselves, because these places will be the most vivid places of worship for us.

But I think we should also make the connection to ourselves as well. Finding spirituality in nature is also about ourselves. We are G-d in the sense, that we have the ability to support at lifestyle that is pure and virgin. If we take that road, we get closer to G-d.

G-d bless the creator.