i too have questioned - in my mind - that signature.

i assume - always a bad move - that 'bush' means nature or the whole outdoors.

merriam's dictionary defines inert:

1: lacking the power to move

well, nature grows and while growing, moves. now of course nature doesn't move to cincinnati. but nature does overgrow anything in its path - see mayan or cambodian temples.

2: very slow to move or act : sluggish

now this fits nature.

3: deficient in active properties; especially : lacking a usual or anticipated chemical or biological action.

nature very much has a 'usual or anticipated chemical or biological action.' in many cases, extremely predictable.

so, in my mind, by definition, inert is a mixed bag. but i think it is incorrect.

now if he's trying to say that nature has no emotion and has no interest in any anticipated outcome, i would agree with that.

in my mind, nature - the bush - is what it is. it is not positive, it is not negative, it just is.

pretty heavy stuff for so early in the morning.