Accusing me of magical thinking and then elaborating on or reiterating your point sort of closes the door on this discussion.
I could copy and paste a bunch of stuff, add a bunch of links. I don’t think it would bring us closer.
The scientific consensus (as I understand it and you’ve yet to convince me otherwise) is that global freshwater supplies are unevenly distributed but far from depleting; crop failures are regional and gradually being mitigated by advances in agriculture; oceans can still continue absorbing heat with severe ecosystem impacts, but there isn’t any reason to use language like “full capacity” limits unless you’re misrepresenting the facts to scare people; population growth is slowing, with consumption patterns, not numbers, driving resource strains.
I want to reiterate: you are not helping the issue by telling people the end is nigh. You’re also not being honest, so long as you’re claiming to have kept abreast of the way experts in these fields are talking.
Burying your head in the sand thinking this polycrisis is salvageable, is making things worse for everyone.
There is no future. Fantasies about having a bunch of grandkids in socialist enclaves of community gardens, or whatever, is hopium propaganda. Each new person created for this future you keep talking about, is adding a truly huge amount of carbon, heat and pollution to the planet.
Talking about how bad the polycrisis is, is hopefully getting through to enough people and making them less likely to procreate on a dying planet.
Less children born = less resources depleted and less carbon and heat speeding shit up = fewer dying children and more time to come up with physics defying magic to solve entropy and restore our planet.
(Or idk, god or aliens or something equally as unlikely saves us. Surviving this is not my fantasy and you should pick something that appeals to you.)
Accusing me of magical thinking and then elaborating on or reiterating your point sort of closes the door on this discussion.
I could copy and paste a bunch of stuff, add a bunch of links. I don’t think it would bring us closer.
The scientific consensus (as I understand it and you’ve yet to convince me otherwise) is that global freshwater supplies are unevenly distributed but far from depleting; crop failures are regional and gradually being mitigated by advances in agriculture; oceans can still continue absorbing heat with severe ecosystem impacts, but there isn’t any reason to use language like “full capacity” limits unless you’re misrepresenting the facts to scare people; population growth is slowing, with consumption patterns, not numbers, driving resource strains.
I want to reiterate: you are not helping the issue by telling people the end is nigh. You’re also not being honest, so long as you’re claiming to have kept abreast of the way experts in these fields are talking.
Define ‘not helping’?
Burying your head in the sand thinking this polycrisis is salvageable, is making things worse for everyone.
There is no future. Fantasies about having a bunch of grandkids in socialist enclaves of community gardens, or whatever, is hopium propaganda. Each new person created for this future you keep talking about, is adding a truly huge amount of carbon, heat and pollution to the planet.
Talking about how bad the polycrisis is, is hopefully getting through to enough people and making them less likely to procreate on a dying planet.
Less children born = less resources depleted and less carbon and heat speeding shit up = fewer dying children and more time to come up with physics defying magic to solve entropy and restore our planet.
(Or idk, god or aliens or something equally as unlikely saves us. Surviving this is not my fantasy and you should pick something that appeals to you.)
People like you are why we never stood a chance. Our species deserves this timeline.