Less Than Ideal Agreement is Consequential

Is the World going to end tomorrow, likely to end tomorrow? I would say based upon past experience no, but that said I can’t prove or disprove. I am a Christian, like a thief in the night as a concept is consequential.

Should I recycle, or should we just throw all of our trash in the ocean? I think we should recycle, protect our environment, that said if you think the world might end tomorrow, you might consider whether we recycle or drop trash in the ocean as less consequential.

The Bible says the World will end, and we won’t know when it will end. That was around 2000 years ago, and there has been prophets and claims throughout history. If the World does not end predictions might be up sold to they predicted wars, or natural disasters not actual cataclysmic world ending events.

Even if the World will end, the way it says in The Bible and I am not sure that is all literal, that might not be for another 98000 years. That is a lot of time to worry about plastic toxins in fish that feed future generations. Because I can’t guarantee the date, somewhere between tomorrow and 98,000 years from now or further, it might be up sold to likely, known as likely (in sharp contrast to won’t be known, like a thief in the night).

Thus if I take the median of my numbers (that are not ideal in the first place) say the world ends 50,000 years from now – we project based upon unknowns and knowns, trustworthy data and known data is less than ideal. That is a lot of time for potential problems in the World caused by not protecting the environment.

We know landmines, landmines like in Cambodia are a problem for leaving for future generations. What about piles of trash and plastic in the oceans and in landfills? What about CO2 and Methane emissions that might make brutally hot Texas summers even hotter?

The World has shown historic precedent for progress and throughput matters, and the future which I cannot predict is not my problem, not always worth factoring in. Less to clean up matters, less than ideally turned up. 1900 no threat of nuclear Armageddon, 2024 real threat of nuclear Armageddon. Our capacity to destroy ourselves grows at a faster rate than our capacity to support each other, foster better peace and comprehension is less than ideal value added. Hospitals are harder to build, take longer to add value yet weapons of war subtract value in near real time – moments, not months or years.

Potential for World ending events, problems like war and great threats to life and personal protection are not always ideal protection for decision making, decision making that factors into a cleaner environment for future generations. The population is 8 billion now, gains we make today factor into more solid ground for when population reaches 16 billion, 32 billion, etc. Time seen like the wake on a boat, we leave a bigger trail than we always realize for both good and bad? Low impact and sustainability not always considered and factored in.

Leave a comment