@Forgetful_Gynn @boeswilligkeit >The limited heat dissipation dictates how much energy the world can use per year before it overruns the heat sink capacity of the earth. This isn't global warming i'm talking about. The only means of staying under it perpetually are a steady state model where the standard of living drops significantly.
I don't think people supporting themselves with crafts and other physical labor, living in cozy cottages cooking real food with woodfire is a drop in standard of living. I'd consider it an improvement, actually.
>Rocks have fallen before and destroyed the planet. also super volcanoes like the one in India or Siberia.
And the odds of that happening again are miniscule. You are worried about things that, statistically, aren't a threat and won't be for thousands upon thousands of years, if humanity even lives that long.
>The foods people are able to/allowed to eat. They take tremendous resources that we agree are limited. Also, the amount of electricity each person has access to. In a steady-state system, it's about the level of your average african.
I don't like electricity. I'm forced to use it because I live in modern society. I don't actually see the problem with living in a close-knit tribe of people like you where homes are made from natural renewable resources as opposed to the atomized community-less world we live in today.
>Space can do far better.
Shitting in tubes is enough to argue otherwise
>Air is abundant in space via separation of water, which is extremely abundant. Food can easily be grown in space en masse.
Both of these require complex systems with many fail-states that appear very easily. Even hydroponic systems here on earth fail often compared to just digging a hole in dirt and planting seeds.
>Space Colonies also offer new chances for independent governments to form. Space Germany, anyone?
Okay so you watched gundam or star trek or something and actually believed it
>I've considered all sorts of scenarios where we just let people die off, and like people drowning, they tend to take anyone nearby with them. It will snowball something fierce and we should avoid it at all costs.
Why?
>Not at all, we've had the technology since the 1960's.
I'm gonna ignore your redditor science nerd wank after this sentence because the simple response is why don't we just do it if we have the technology?