Technology will keep developing in ways we can’t predict yet. I think it’s unlikely we can save all our even most of humanity, but you never know what will happen. There is already research being done into options for geo engineering and the way things are going they will probably end up being tried. Even though that’s already technically possible to most people that would still be like magic.
Respectfully, this is the sort of thinking and arguing that got us into this mess in the first place.
Even a cursory exploration of climate geoengineering leads to the conclusion that it’s impractical and inadequate.
The world really is dying. It will correct itself. We are just along for the ride now. This year will be the panic year (look at the arctic ice extent right now, look at the average sea temp, look at the average air temp, now realize we’re just exiting la nina and heading to el nino this year)
Sorry if I’m being blunt, but there really is no way to save ourselves other than using way less energy, and that’s not going to happen at this point.
They said your statement was incorrect; either there’s a way to salvage the planet in a habitable form, or there isn’t — but “indistinguishable from magic” doesn’t come into it.
Personally, I think energy is only a portion of the problem space; we need to slow climate change enough that humanity can continue to adapt with it.
After all, we survived multiple ice ages; will the climate destroy our technological advances, or will those advances enable us to adapt to a changing world?
The world is likely highly overpopulated at the present, but we can lose a significant chunk of humanity and still preserve the body of knowledge and many of the technologies that we currently enjoy.
Collapses are inevitable, but total collapse is still avoidable.
You weren’t implying by saying that, that we could possibly have the magic technology to save ourselves 100 years from now? Sorry if I misunderstood.
Technology will keep developing in ways we can’t predict yet. I think it’s unlikely we can save all our even most of humanity, but you never know what will happen. There is already research being done into options for geo engineering and the way things are going they will probably end up being tried. Even though that’s already technically possible to most people that would still be like magic.
Respectfully, this is the sort of thinking and arguing that got us into this mess in the first place.
Even a cursory exploration of climate geoengineering leads to the conclusion that it’s impractical and inadequate.
The world really is dying. It will correct itself. We are just along for the ride now. This year will be the panic year (look at the arctic ice extent right now, look at the average sea temp, look at the average air temp, now realize we’re just exiting la nina and heading to el nino this year)
Sorry if I’m being blunt, but there really is no way to save ourselves other than using way less energy, and that’s not going to happen at this point.
Good luck out there! Live for today!
They said your statement was incorrect; either there’s a way to salvage the planet in a habitable form, or there isn’t — but “indistinguishable from magic” doesn’t come into it.
Personally, I think energy is only a portion of the problem space; we need to slow climate change enough that humanity can continue to adapt with it.
After all, we survived multiple ice ages; will the climate destroy our technological advances, or will those advances enable us to adapt to a changing world?
The world is likely highly overpopulated at the present, but we can lose a significant chunk of humanity and still preserve the body of knowledge and many of the technologies that we currently enjoy.
Collapses are inevitable, but total collapse is still avoidable.