This is interesting but risks convincing non experts that they know everything, or at least enough to argue with actual experts, the delusionary individual believing that what they don't, know, they can just make the world become the way they want it to be. Especially if they have a lot of money at their disposal. Flying to Mars becomes something that the delusionary easily believes, whilst they dismiss the possibility that it might be possible to liquidise hydrogen at room temperature, for example.
The latter capability,I believe is physically within our reach, but flying to Mars, after we already lost the ability to fly to the moon, and fly commercially on supersonic aircraft, and even to fy back and forth into space by reusable shuttle, we lost all those, but they think we will fly to Mars one day soon.
I think they are dreaming, given the temperature of the Earth has already risen to a red line of Armageddon, and still it continues to rise, even accelerating.
I notice the delusional are all motivated by profit.
And look, when we trace what profit actually is, it's energy extracted from the planet, in all cases, bar none, it's energy extracted from the planet, which came at cost of destruction to the planet, and this has to be reflected by increase of temperature because destruction is increase of entropy.
And look, the argument that there is a blanket effect driving up temperature is null and void because the atmosphere is adiabatic, it's impossible for it to support any blanket effect.
So the temperature measurements are direct measures of increase of entropy, which again stacks up with our observations of desertification and loss of species.
But what has mainstream science done about this, believing it's all down to fossil fuels extraction (though that does play a large part), so more business for profit is created to address carbon capture etc, when actually, it's all down to how much profit is being made. Increase rate at which profit is being made and we increase rate of destruction and therefore temperature rise.
Mainstream science appears to be missing this because still it talks about renewable energy, net zero, carbon capture etc, because mainstream science is itself funded by profit.
Mainstream science appears incapable of questioning profit, therefore mainstream science is not capable if helping humanity avoid armageddon.
I would say much more but it's all captured and ignored in more than 400 stories I've written on what I call the global energy problem over the past seven years since running into it during PhD candidate work, 7 years ago, after a long career at the top of Systems Engineering before that.
Least anyone could do is buy the book summaring the main outcome, this gives a basic understanding I think.
https://www.amazon.com/Interview-Ai-Part-Multiplier-Framework-ebook/dp/B0CHGFKQVB