I have had another look at this article a couple few points that occur to me

First of all I think the attempt to classify people as either Humanist or Naturalist is a long way from reality, personally I trust science to provide the best options both for the environment and humans.

Secondly Dyson has totally lost the plot with his view of The UK environment. The woods around where I grew in Ireland had some fifty different types of birds on the other hand the moorland had no more ten that I can think off the top of my head. The only reason that UK still has a wide variety of plants and animals is due to the landed gentry keeping woods, hedges, and wetlands for their own enjoyment. Moorland existed in the UK on the hills long before humans made any impact. The first humans went in for wholesale destruction on arrival in the UK. They ring barked the trees often changing the environment from one with huge range of plants and animals to one of bogs with maybe only a few dozen types of plants and a very limited range of birds. Today the widespread use pesticides and insecticides has radically reduced the flora and fauna wildlife in some parts of the UK.

Nightingale down 95%
Common starling down 91%
Linnet down 89%
Lesser redpoll down 85%
Spotted flycatcher down 83%
Lesser spotted woodpecker down 82%
Whitethroat down 81%
Willow tit down 77%
Yellowhammer down 77%
European turtle dove down 76%
Tree pipit down 75%
Eurasian woodcock down 70%
Marsh tit down 68%
Common cuckoo down 63%
Dunnock down 57%
Willow warbler down 52%
Song thrush down 47%
Bullfinch down 39%

The last point is the use of a strawman argument when Don says energy is good therefore generating CO2 must also be good