And the implications of Rupert Sheldrake"s work on causality? :)
Reason why I think it could be important is this; if we don't think nature designs anything, then we have to lose the point of design. In that case we might not even perceive the requirement, for, or the necessity of a designed system solution.
I've worked on this long enough to see the full system solution, it is fully dictated by the problem, there is only one solution.
The full solution is domestic and community hydrogen backed solar.
With that we really can start winding the temperature rise back down. The key to getting on with it is solar indexed UBI. It's a lot of money, already owed for the historical economic product created to date by domestic and community solar since 2005.
But scientists not believing much in design, because they maybe don't see any design in nature, or in disciplines other than their specialism, like economics, and energy, both of which are essential to the problem, might not get this, and because everyone is looking to scientists for the way ahead, if scientists don't see the point in work like mine, it becomes almost impossible to bring to public attention, other than in forums like Medium and writing a few books which the profit driven algos immediately bury.
See the issue?