Evolution

"Humans have evolved to a point where we are in control of our own evolution." Professor Johnson made a statement like this last week. Does this mean we are no longer natural? Though, is it in our nature to evolve to a point where we are in control of our evolution (and are no longer moving along a natural evolutionary process)?; and therefore the evolution up to this point is natural, but is no longer? Can we have natural actions against nature? And have ethics evolved, or come about, because we have moved to this point (an unnatural point, perhaps), as Betsy considered?
..........

In determining superiority, if one would ever want to do such a thing, should one consider who is superior by measuring one single merit (such as speed or climbing prowess) or by abilities that no other species has. Cheetahs are faster than humans, but humans can run. Monkeys are better climbers, but humans can climb. Only humans can sit around and discuss the issue of environmental ethics, no other species can. I don't think it's how good a species can do something, but what one species can do that another cannot that should be used to determine superiority.
...........

I find it interesting that, according to Clare Palmer, Paul Taylor says that one can only have duties to individual organisms with a good of their own (and not things like rivers, for example), but also says that in our duty of restituive justice we should concentrate on ecosystems to maximize the good we give back to organisms we took good away from.