Quote from: RE on Mar 12, 2025, 03:37 AM

Quote from: jupiviv on Mar 12, 2025, 03:19 AMAll I got from that is you've invented a very interesting form ad hominem - ai-generated accusations of other people writing or talking like ai, and it's a follow up to the earlier, more affective troll accusation you made through that bot account. You have a problem with me bc you don't like what I'm saying yet can't articulate that beyond criticizing my use of terms you're unfamiliar with, which backfired. Stop being chickenshit and just blatantly say that and then we can start talking like humans.

Do you deny your post was AI generated?

RE

You admit to being an idiot or you used AI.  Which is it?  You deny using AI, and take credit full credit for the ridiculous bullshit you put out then.  Fine, admit to being a shill then.

Your 1972 article was pure hack contrarian garbage.  There is nothing that can be disagreed with concerning the Limits to Growth study.  The Limits to Growth study is pure math.  System dynamics applied to real world data.  You can disagree with reality, and be an idiot, or not.  That is your choice.  But denying reality is not just another point of view.  That is only what children and men in black get paid to do.

Concerning LTG you do not get to disagree with the study in the Diner.  I have more respect for myself than to let you.  I put at least a hundred hours duplicating the computer program the LTG study used from the original MIT Dynamo manual, and here it is.  To  say I understand the LTG study is a gross understatement.  I can duplicate the fucking work.

https://chasingthesquirrel.com/dynamo.php

The actual manual can be seen under the book icon.

* My AI really is bigger than your AI.  Curtis Yarvin has nothing on me.  Far as that goes compared to me, the ignorant mofo is a wanna be.