Is that so? Please provide evidence. Here's mine:

https://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/research-news/2...

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adh2458

Even if that would be completely true, then we should know where the limit is and have a plan for it, not? But that the opposite is true can hardly be ignored anymore, still it is.. :(

Children are now born with plastic in their veins. We are already at the limits of growth and potentially beyond it so either some technological miracle enables further growth or we start facing the negative consequences of cancerous growth of the human population.

The limit is far away only if the technology catch up with the development without sacrificing the environment. And we r definitely not that technologically advanced yet

The absolute limits are very far away.

The limits within which disequilibriums utterly undo the recognizable modern world are very close and indeed some have possibly been passed already.

Mass death measured in 10s of millions and consequent even more massive migration is likely within our lifetimes and not particularly unlikely within the next 10 years.

The last few years have awoken many Americans to the fact that their particular locale is not, as many assumed or had the luxury of not considering at all, immune from or refuge from the direct and indirect consequences of such disequlibirum.

Will rich programmers be the first to die, or have our lives destroyed, or our communities?

Mostly not.

But we'll get there too.

Well, I just simply believe that you're wrong.

Do you believe thermodynamics is wrong?

No.

Good! You’ll be able to derive some upper limits from simple equations then. More complex equations bring those limits down.

Do you believe that thermodynamic equations require the outcomes that I responded to?

2.3% energy production growth per year boils our oceans off in 4 centuries. Columbus rediscovered America more centuries ago.

Due to what? CO2? Use nuclear. 4 centuries is an extremely long time at our current pace of technological advancement which I'm assuming you're holding steady since that is the biggest driver of a 2.3% increase in energy production and consumption. If that's true then most energy production and use will be off planet in significantly less than 4 centuries.

Waste heat that cannot be radiated away into space naturally.

Something completly weird: Imagine long vertical heatpipes reaching to space to cool down the planet. Dissipating heat into space.