• ClamDrinker@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    3 months ago

    You’re not making any sense unfortunately. Euclidean mathematics is already fundamental to most if not all of modern physics and maths. It’s by no means a new concept that hasn’t been explored yet. As @[email protected] put it in their response, science isn’t magic. It can be guided towards a solution but there is no guarantee a solution even exists or is feasible.

    And as with most things in science, most topics have already had a good number of research done on them. And the future does not look great for a breakthrough. Let alone one that can reverse all of climate change’s effects. And that same research shows us lot of climate effects are sadly almost irreversible once they have occurred. They can only be mitigated.

    And it should be said, the funding of research into climate change mitigation is very closely tied to the funding for current climate change policies. So if one isn’t taken seriously, the other one most likely will not receive much either. It makes it very easy for politicians to pretend they are working against climate change too, by under funding climate change mitigation research and then saying “well the scientists should fix the issue and they aren’t!”

    • Pissipissini Johnson 🩵! :D@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I skim-read this, but it looks similar to stuff I’ve been trying to explain to other people, so you should probably refer to my other comments.

      Any further questions can be clarified later.