Joscha Bach

Yeah, I think that's pretty much the story of the Club of Rome, the limits to growth. And the cliff that we are stepping over is at least one foot as the delayed feedback. Basically, we do things that have consequences that can be felt generations later, and the severity increases even after we stop doing the thing.

Yeah, I think that's pretty much the story of the Club of Rome, the limits to growth. And the cliff that we are stepping over is at least one foot as the delayed feedback. Basically, we do things that have consequences that can be felt generations later, and the severity increases even after we stop doing the thing.

I suspect that the original predictions that the climate scientists made were correct. So when they said that the tipping points were in the late 80s, they were probably in the late 80s. And if we would stop emission right now, we would not turn it back. Maybe there are ways for carbon capture. But so far, there is no sustainable carbon capture technology that we can deploy.

I suspect that the original predictions that the climate scientists made were correct. So when they said that the tipping points were in the late 80s, they were probably in the late 80s. And if we would stop emission right now, we would not turn it back. Maybe there are ways for carbon capture. But so far, there is no sustainable carbon capture technology that we can deploy.

I suspect that the original predictions that the climate scientists made were correct. So when they said that the tipping points were in the late 80s, they were probably in the late 80s. And if we would stop emission right now, we would not turn it back. Maybe there are ways for carbon capture. But so far, there is no sustainable carbon capture technology that we can deploy.

Maybe there's a way to put aerosols in the atmosphere to cool it down. Possibilities, right? But right now, per default, it seems that we will step into a situation where we feel that we've run too far. And going back is not something that we can do smoothly and gradually, but it's going to lead to a catastrophic event.

Maybe there's a way to put aerosols in the atmosphere to cool it down. Possibilities, right? But right now, per default, it seems that we will step into a situation where we feel that we've run too far. And going back is not something that we can do smoothly and gradually, but it's going to lead to a catastrophic event.

Maybe there's a way to put aerosols in the atmosphere to cool it down. Possibilities, right? But right now, per default, it seems that we will step into a situation where we feel that we've run too far. And going back is not something that we can do smoothly and gradually, but it's going to lead to a catastrophic event.

I think it's possible, but it doesn't seem to be likely. So I think this model that is being apparent in the simulations that we're making of

I think it's possible, but it doesn't seem to be likely. So I think this model that is being apparent in the simulations that we're making of

I think it's possible, but it doesn't seem to be likely. So I think this model that is being apparent in the simulations that we're making of

climate pollution economies and so on is that many effects are only visible with a significant delay and in that time the system is moving much more out of the equilibrium state or of the state where homeostasis is still possible and instead moves into a different state one that is going to harbor fewer people And that is basically the concern there. And again, it's a possibility.

climate pollution economies and so on is that many effects are only visible with a significant delay and in that time the system is moving much more out of the equilibrium state or of the state where homeostasis is still possible and instead moves into a different state one that is going to harbor fewer people And that is basically the concern there. And again, it's a possibility.

climate pollution economies and so on is that many effects are only visible with a significant delay and in that time the system is moving much more out of the equilibrium state or of the state where homeostasis is still possible and instead moves into a different state one that is going to harbor fewer people And that is basically the concern there. And again, it's a possibility.

And it's a possibility that is larger than the possibility that it's not happening, that we will be safe, that we will be able to dance back all the time.

And it's a possibility that is larger than the possibility that it's not happening, that we will be safe, that we will be able to dance back all the time.

And it's a possibility that is larger than the possibility that it's not happening, that we will be safe, that we will be able to dance back all the time.

There is also a thing that AI is probably going to happen, and it's going to make everything uncertain again. Because it is going to affect so many variables that it's very hard for us to make a projection into the future anymore. And maybe that's a good thing.

There is also a thing that AI is probably going to happen, and it's going to make everything uncertain again. Because it is going to affect so many variables that it's very hard for us to make a projection into the future anymore. And maybe that's a good thing.

There is also a thing that AI is probably going to happen, and it's going to make everything uncertain again. Because it is going to affect so many variables that it's very hard for us to make a projection into the future anymore. And maybe that's a good thing.