/sci/ - Science & Math

>>4159160
>No, no one is agreeing on that. Unless you can prove the existence of tens of thousands of factories causing a CO2 increase in fucking 1811 or some shit.

The emissions in 1811 were obviously much smaller than today.

See the graph in:
>>4158937

>>2821659
wat

>>2777914
That's -if- "free energy" existed (considering it's not being suppressed by some government or corporate entity), which it doesn't.

I'm all for the advancement of mankind, but the OP is completely full of meaningless babble.

>>2251829
>Hey niggers, could suicide be an adaptation to the fact that the human mind can now realize the inevitable failure of our programming (survival)? (Failure being death.)

What is this even supposed to mean? Death is an inevitability for most all living things (with that one sort of jellyfish possibly being a sort of exemption, its name eludes me), but that's just how life is. We're born, we live, and eventually we die. What you're implying is that people before could not realize the inevitability of this cycle, which is untrue. Even so, many certainly feared death, an end to the self, and thus we end up with these reincarnationist religions that persist even today, but that's not the point here.

> I mean it would basically solve all our problems, since life is the root of all problems. I'm not advocating suicide but from a purely logical point of view it seems to make sense.

"Suicide is a permanent solution to what is ultimately a temporary problem." Aside from that, what you're saying here seems to be rather irrelevant to the main subject.

>It seems all life is programmed to push on and on and procreate as a way of keeping everything going. But no other animal has the capacity to grasp the fact of it's own inevitable death, and the fact of it's own inevitable extinction as a species in the future.

If you really want to slap a "purpose" or a "meaning" onto life in general, sure, this may certainly be it. One could also argue that life itself, its mere existence in the universe, is its own purpose. Or it could all be meaningless, but what does that matter in the end?

(cont)

>>1424782