The Economist is a superb newspaper. They are clear about their liberal position and their free market economic position.
They also are willing to do journalism that others dont bother with. This is a great article - its not about wether its right or wrong, its about what is going to happen and how it will affect the world.
I had no idea that the Arctic could be 100% ice free by 2030.
The Economist is a superb newspaper.
lmao. There’s nothing “clear” about openly advocating for a dangerous pseudo-scientific ideology. It’s just the Epoch Times for libs and fash.
its about what is going to happen
Yes, these nostradamuses are pushing Stage 4 and Stage 5 climate denialism
I keep pointing out that this is the reason for Trump’s interest in Greenland.
The ghouls went from denying climate change, skipped right past trying to stop or manage it, and have now landed on trying to profit from it. Disgusting.
Oh they will. Once unlimited energy is able to be tapped, they will have fences that go into the heavens. They’ll put a roof over our head and allow a simulation of stars for a subscription.
They’ve been working on that already, hasn’t panned out yet though.
https://www.thomasnet.com/insights/russia-wants-to-advertise-in-space-with-orbital-billboards/
https://www.space.com/pepsi-drops-orbital-billboard-plans.html
https://futurism.com/the-byte/spacex-orbital-billboard-tiny
I’m sure they’ll just keep throwing money at it till it happens.
Here’s one for … selling sunlight, via a network of sats with mirrors:
It just goes to show you how stupid people at the top really are.
They don’t understand scale at all, so they propose something like this, someone goes “uh… Guys? Know those banners they fly at the beach? Those are like the size of a neighborhood road, and the plane flies low so you can read it. You’re talking about building megastructures”
And then they just… Never really acknowledge that the math doesn’t math. They just keep going around proposing it, because it’s this cool idea they came up with all on their own and definitely wasn’t part of a cautionary sci-fi tale
Further demonstrating that the pseudo-science of “economics” is just crypto-fascism.
Karl Marx and Keynes were also economists… That is a broad scientific/philosphical field we are talking about. But there are many opportunists and demagogues in that field.
I used to work in science in hydrology and did read a lot of papers from macroeconomists (they use similar apporaches). There are defintly serious scientists in macroecomics. Tbf, I have my doubts when it comes to business economics.
I wouldn’t go so far as Economics being pseudoscience, it’s obviously not as foundational as math or physics, i.e. it builds on top of math and social sciences.
Also you should definitely differ between political/macro economics and business economics.
Former I would certainly put into the science category, and there are a lot of scientists that advocate towards radical changes in politics because of climate change. Latter is certainly debatable and certainly less “sciency”…