>>1907477Ok, and? By the same logic a suburb also allows some smaller flora and fauna to thrive. You'll still need to erode and develop more proper wilderness (PER CAPITA/PER UNIT OF PRODUCE) with suburbs and small farms than with dense cities and large farms.
>>1905327>most of the crops we grow is fed to animals that we later kill and eatThis (and ONLY this part of your post) is sad and true. Still humans are omnivores and need certain meat based amino acids to live a healthy life so shitty vegan diets are not an option. I'm more interested in the development of lab grown meat products: capitalism related concerns aside, "feeding" only the cells you're gonna eat is a lot less wasteful than feeding a whole cow.
Beware though: the risk is that, instead of farms being abandoned and eventually reclaimed by wilderness, all the excess food will fuel another world population boom.
>>1907116I'm not. What now retard?
>>1905367>gradual selective breeding over generations is the same as directly editing genesYes. Except the former involves more luck of the draw than the latter.
>>1905584The deal is really fucking simple. Assuming genocide of billions is not an option (again, if it were see
>>1902214 and related comments) you have two options: you can either pile people up one another, or spread them out over a large area. I have reasons to believe the former is the better of the two.
