Are we down to earth in our connection to earth? If we are environmentalists concerned with “environmental crisis,” then does our guiding notion of “environment” (and the by necessity implied notion of a center—most often with a human there) get closely enough to the earth? Departing from either localism or cosmopolitanism in thinking earth, globe, and the environment, this chapter aims at a theoretical critique of the very notion of “environment” as the guiding notion of what the expression “environmental crisis” spells. Perhaps, “environmental crisis” is less a description of “our” situation, and more an indication of a problem formulated not strongly enough? The notion of “environment” and “environmental crisis” predetermines the currently regnant approaches to global warming, air and soil pollution, nature preservation, and reducing the human impact on the environment. At the same time, the notion of “environment” steers its adherents toward the modern natural science as both (1) the ultimate contributor to the environmental crisis due to technology and (2) the ultimate instrument to save us from the apocalyptic swirl, in which technology drives humanity. Linking environmental crisis to science, which is only an instrument of both its creation and management, forecloses a more fundamental human dimension of that crisis. This essay asks to attend to one element of that more fundamental dimension.