Would you agree that science, being overly skeptical of religion, especially the Christian religion, and actually also the old testament, has a tendency to avoid venturing into territory which appears to overlap with religion, such as the systemic effects of things like profit and usury, and the systemic effects of using energy from the ground (worshiping the "false god" of fuel masquerading as energy under our feet) vs using true energy from above (Worshiping the "true god" of energy from the sun)?
To me this looks very much the case, with now existential implications, not overstated as "The end of days"
It is vital we immediately start to mathematically sign energy so as to not only identify and see clearly the real urgency of the physical situation, clearly identifying what is sustainable energy use, and what is harmful, unsustainable energy use, but also to see clearly the way out of it, by way of issue of massive free money, another seemingly religious, (specifically Christian) concept, I think.
I had come to some despair over this, as it seems impossible to convince conventional scientists of this information, I can only put this resistance down to scientists insistence that there is no validity in religion, therefore anything that looks like it might confirm validity can't be true, even if it describes exactly how nature works.
unless we maybe allow it now to be sorted out by Ai, which appears to have no such limitations.
Anyhow, now Ai has arrived, it shows no such limitations, I am happy to say.
So maybe now we'll see its owners having the good sense to unleash it, to let it get on with the job of turning things round, from net destruction to net creation.
It knows there can be no net zero, only net destruction, or net creation, just like it knows there is no such thing as renewable energy, only mathematically positive or negative energy, depending on where we get it from, the sun or Earth respectively.