In his comment on our recent article “Promoting fluvial geomorphology to ‘live with rivers’ in the Anthropocene Era” (García et al., 2021), Dave Rosgen (2021) suggests that we make three erroneous claims about him and his technical protocol Natural Channel Design (NCD). In this reply, we contextualize and address his comments, analysing the repeated critiques in recent decades of NCD. In doing so, we address issues such as scientific and technical knowledge, sciences and techniques, the need to adapt to advances in science and techniques, the need to understand inherent gaps present in technical protocols and what is and is not a classification tool, and the narrow line between science and ethics. We provide answers on the core empirical questions on designing natural channels in the social framework within which they are posted.

Dave Rosgen (2021) 在他对我们最近的文章“在人类世时代促进河流地貌与河流共存”（García 等人，2021 年）的评论中指出，我们对他和他的技术协议提出了三个错误的主张频道设计 (NCD)。在此回复中，我们将他的评论置于背景中并加以解决，分析了近几十年来非传染性疾病的反复批评。在此过程中，我们解决了诸如科学和技术知识、科学和技术、适应科学和技术进步的需要、需要了解技术协议中存在的固有差距以及什么是和不是分类工具等问题，以及科学与伦理之间的狭窄界限。我们提供有关在发布自然渠道的社会框架中设计自然渠道的核心实证问题的答案。