Quote from: RE on Mar 11, 2025, 05:34 AMPractically all discussion regarding resources since publication of the Limits to Growth study in the 1970s has focused on the fact you can't have infinite growth in a finite world.Practically all discussion about that study ranges from calling it alarmism to a kooky eugenics manifesto. Here's an excerpt from the NYT review of the paper on the year of publication:
"The Limits to Growth," in our view, is an empty and misleading work. Its imposing apparatus of computer technology and systems jargon conceals a kind of intellectual Rube Goldberg device—one which takes arbitrary assumptions, shakes them up and comes out with arbitrary conclusions that have the ring of science. "Limits" pretends to a degree of certainty so exaggerated as to obscure the few modest (and unoriginal) insights that it genuinely con tains. Less than pseudoscience and little more than polemical fiction, "The Limits to Growth" is best summarized not as a rediscovery of the laws of nature but as a rediscovery of the oldest maxim of computer science: Garbage In, Garbage Out.
https://www.nytimes.com/1972/04/02/archives/the-limits-to-growth-a-report-for-the-club-of-romes-project-on-the.html
Surprisingly, and hilariously, this is the exact same ad hom accusation of supposedly sterile non-human computer logic that isn't even worth engaging with that both of you have just directed at me.