we cannot be certain that human life will remain possible on the planet without being completely dependent on artificial habitats, food, water sources etc.

I already gave the examples of the Sahara an high arctic tundra as places humans can survive. We lived there just fine without advanced technology, even - the Inuit and Bedouin for example.

Again, is the whole entire Earth going to be worse than those places?

[–] chaitae3@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm telling you that if nothing is done about it, global warming, the extinction of species and other factors will raise the likelihood of humanity's extinction to a higher level than it has been in tens of thousands of years, over the course of the next few hundred years. We can only speculate about how earth will be like in three hundred years and if there are places left that remain inhabitable for humans.

The inuit rely on fish, which are on track to become extinct in this century even. People survive in the Sahara by bringing lifestock/food and water with from elsewhere, but the desert grows from year to year.

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You're "telling me." Okay. Got anything to back that up other than just your say-so, though?

[–] chaitae3@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Yes, lots of sources. They're easy to find if you start by thinking about who would know the most of a subject.

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 1 points 6 days ago

Go ahead, then.