It’s neat science and tech and a nice paycheck. So enough motivation. Few people are aware that our high technology civilisation has an expiration date, so let them party while they still can.
In my experience, only a small set of people thoroughly understand limits to growth on a finite planet. Most of them figure it out on their own. And it is a profoundly depressing experience.
Funny how you just happen to be one of these people, while the entire leadership of China, a nation best known for its long term planning, is just completely ignorant of all this. 🤣
Your theory presumes that people will continue to sustain grain on finite resources, to the point of collapse when those resources are gone. Do you have any evidence supporting such a specific outcome, or are you glooming over theoretical possibilities that would require a consensus in ignorance toward sustainability up to the very end?
Imagine thinking that all the scientists and engineers in China just haven’t considered these basic things before embarking on a huge megaproject.
It’s neat science and tech and a nice paycheck. So enough motivation. Few people are aware that our high technology civilisation has an expiration date, so let them party while they still can.
I absolutely love how you think you know more than everyone else. Enjoy living in your doomer cult.
In my experience, only a small set of people thoroughly understand limits to growth on a finite planet. Most of them figure it out on their own. And it is a profoundly depressing experience.
Enjoy living in your gaudy pollyanna bubble.
Funny how you just happen to be one of these people, while the entire leadership of China, a nation best known for its long term planning, is just completely ignorant of all this. 🤣
Perhaps China’s long term planning is not as good as you think it is. And arguments from authority ain’t.
What’s the point of this argument?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
And? The authority that shouldn’t be listened to is? China? Why? What alternative do you recommend then?
Perhaps, or perhaps you’re just some clueless troll. Given respective track records I’ll go with the latter.
Your theory presumes that people will continue to sustain grain on finite resources, to the point of collapse when those resources are gone. Do you have any evidence supporting such a specific outcome, or are you glooming over theoretical possibilities that would require a consensus in ignorance toward sustainability up to the very end?