An economics professor and one of her students are walking down the street together. The student says “Hey, look, there’s a $20 bill on the sidewalk!” The professor replies by saying “That’s impossible- if it really were a $20 bill, it would have been picked up by now."
I found you point to be, because economists who have done many years of study are stupid and won't pick up $20 because of their many many years of study in the subject would for some reason ditch logic and not pick up a $20 bill.
They are stupid people who study at university who reduce brain capacity.
Maybe I'm stupid too but, if wind power worked there then that can be the project, no need to add the agriculture on top of it.Why the hell make it harder and use it on only a untested (For viability) growing machine that might make peoples lives better?
> By that reasoning, it makes no sense to install wind power anywhere, because surely in most other cases there were existing power plants, too.
The difference is installing wind power for general purpose use, vs installing it specifically for a single project.
Installing some new power source specially for one project is a red flag, exactly like he says. If it was a good idea it would be installed for general use.
So people who try new experiments should keep mum about it until they've proven complete and total success ? If we didn't combine our knowledge to improve on unsuccessful attempts we'd still be hunting and gathering.
He's saying that installing some new unproven power source at the same time that you are installing some new unproven hydroponics system is a red flag.
You don't do two risky things at the same time when you don't have to.
