Shamino79

Shamino79 t1_j284r3m wrote

To drive ourselves to extinction we would pretty much have to blow up the planet. Possibly we’re back to bugs or fish or microbes. Won’t be monkeys or cats or something with a brain and it won’t really have to evolve to take over. Just survive. And I guess there’s a chance nothing would evolve to reach our level again.

8

Shamino79 t1_j1wwtwx wrote

You may have butchered that with “science isn’t the evidence”? I’d suggest that science is the process by which way we examine the evidence to see if it’s valid and meaningful.

Maybe “Because you don’t understand the scientific evidence is no reason to believe that the science isn’t based on valid evidence.”

0

Shamino79 t1_iugv7nb wrote

Point very well taken. Was a bit triggered by the idea of indoor farming based on other articles I’ve read about vertical farming. Hydroponics in greenhouses is very well established and is a growing industry. And there’s nothing to say that writhing these facilities you couldn’t also get split levels with sun. And if there is an practical ability to grow something fresh that can’t be preserved in the middle of winter in extreme climates then it would be of benefit to those communities.

1

Shamino79 t1_iuf999s wrote

Weed used to get grown underground so no one could see it and was under lock and key. Don’t need that for lettuce and tomato. And I do get that greenhouses can use supplementary lights, insulation and heating to extend a season or control flowering. Taking it into a fully sealed building feels like it’s crossed a tipping point. Seems to me at some point food preservation and transport of canned goods could still be a good alternative.

1

Shamino79 t1_iucyv0m wrote

Greenhouses no. Those purpose build bunkers with LED lights everywhere yes. I have no idea why that as a viable concept is even a thing. But greenhouses that let the sun in to do its thing are already economical and beneficial for production. Which is why they are used extensively.

3