This Must Be...The Future!

[Anonymous No.11122668]

Think of the Earth's ecosystems and human civilization like, the inner workings of a nuclear reactor. Well, the reactor is starting to melt down, some fuckwit named Homo sapiens pressed all the wrong buttons. So, what do you do? You safely run through all the procedures to turn off the reactor (human civilization) to bring it down to a state of neutral energy output/input so you can later come in and build a better design that isn't as flimsy. We basically need to dismantle what we have been doing, because we've been doing it wrong, or out of ignorance at least. So, hyperproductivity rat race culture, the 40 hour work week, money, consumerism, even the way we power things has to go. We need to bring our own civilization into harmony and balance with the planetary system at large, because the planet is not our civilization's, our civilization is the planet's. And if we want to survive we need to reimagine how we do things, drastically. I only say we should willingly do this because it will happen in any case, if the ecosystems collapse most humans will die, along with the wildlife, and the survivors will have to rebuild anyway, and they most assuredly will, and they will do it knowing what their ancestors have brought upon the planet, and they will do better than we have.

[Anonymous No.11122829]

could biomass be a good start?

[Anonymous No.11123088]

>>11122668
Fuck the planet, let's go to space!

[Anonymous No.11123189]

>>11122668
What we're doing absolutely PALES in comparison to other life-caused planet wide disasters like the Oxygen Holocaust. AGW isn't a planet ender. It's merely a bad inconvenience.

[Anonymous No.11123204]

>>11123088
We are in space you noob. Except our spaceship is bigger and better than that spindly little shit.

[Anonymous No.11123259]

>>11123204
Pros:
>Stronk
>Good gravity
>Shitloads of radiation shielding
>Highly functional and maintenance free life support systems
>Can support billions of humans
>Day/night cycle
Cons:
>Cannot change trajectory
>Disembarking is difficult

[Anonymous No.11123597]

>>11122668
There is no way to turn off the reactor safely. Turning it off means letting billions of the poorest people starve to death and causing wars. It would most likely be more destructive than literally doing nothing and just letting global warming play out.
The idea of inventing an actual solution, like fusion/cheap renewables + energy storage/cheap and safe nuclear AFTER regressing decades in terms of technology and infrastructure and staying there is just absurd.
You blow the importance of consumerism and other normie tier garbage way out of proportion. Consumerism didn't put CO2 in the atmosphere, our fundamental inability to replace fossil fuels with zero-emissions technologies in time did. Consumerism didn't put plastic and shit in the ocean, putting plastic and shit in the ocean put plastic and shit in the ocean.

[Anonymous No.11123772]

>>11123597
>. Turning it off means letting billions of the poorest people starve to death
You're so fucking full of shit. Phrasing your selfish 'but muh cool lifestyle' bullshit in a virtue-signalling esque tier 'its for muh poor people'. It's fucking gross. You are fucking gross.
The poor are in a far better position to come out of it than the rich.

[Anonymous No.11123776]

>>11123597
>Consumerism didn't put CO2 in the atmosphere
And the bullshit continues to spew forth with the force of a thousand geysers of putrid vomit.

lets see what's next in this truly mind blowing post

[Anonymous No.11123778]

>>11123597
>Consumerism didn't put plastic and shit in the ocean
BWAHA AHHA HAH AH HAH AHA
fucking asshat

[Anonymous No.11123819]

>>11123597
You're like the Easter islander that was fighting like hell to convince everyone to cut down the last remaining stand of trees.