Nikhil's original essay was spot on - animals would definitely feel the rage if they knew of the destruction humans are causing. It's just too bad they don't have the power or resources to do anything about it! That being said, while it's true that animals are capable of their own destruction, it is a far cry from the industrial scale destruction humans inflict upon the environment. The fact is, no matter how much grazing pressure wildebeests put on the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem, it's still nothing compared to what we're doing to the planet.
Moreover, the retort fails to acknowledge the extreme power imbalance between humans and animals. Yes, humans have been negatively affected by climate change and other human-caused issues, but the effects on animals have been much more dire. Animals are forced to adapt to rapidly changing habitats and survive in polluted environments, and on top of that, they are subject to human exploitation and hunting. It is this extreme power imbalance that makes animals largely helpless against us - they can't organize an insurrection against us because we have the overwhelming advantage!
It's clear then that Nikhil's original essay has some valid points - animals would be filled with rage if they knew what we were doing to them and their environment. They just don't possess the resources and power to fight back. UrRong to suggest that animals would revolt and call it simplistic; there is a huge power imbalance between animals and humans that prevents any sort of organized response. Instead, let's work together to reduce our environmental footprint and preserve our world for future generations of humans and animals alike - we've already done enough damage!