Hyperbolic titles like that don't make me click, they make me irritated and hesitant.
The world doesn't need saving, it will adapt and overcome as it has before (potentially even after being sterilized down to the continental mud off the coast by a nearby star becoming a quasar and its emission grazing the Earth but they don't really know for sure because they are just making guesses based on rocks half a billion years old after all), its human society that needs to be "saved" though this sort of millenarian Abrahamic religious notion is a little bit much still in terms of hyperbolic nonsense that is playing off emotional cues not rational ones. This must work on other people, but I find it childish and revolting in the extreme.
None the less, fungi based technology or anything in which we return to our original technological innovation, which is the channeling of nature to serve purposes useful to us (using macroscopic tools over long periods not microscopes and chemistry over shorter periods) is a good idea. Why? Because billions of years of evolution is definitely a better engineer than all the doctorate holders alive in aggregate, taking advantage of it (especially instead of pretending ourselves to know better) is always a wise choice as we take advantage of that *extremely mature ecosystem obviously*.
The world doesn't need saving, it will adapt and overcome as it has before (potentially even after being sterilized down to the continental mud off the coast by a nearby star becoming a quasar and its emission grazing the Earth but they don't really know for sure because they are just making guesses based on rocks half a billion years old after all), its human society that needs to be "saved" though this sort of millenarian Abrahamic religious notion is a little bit much still in terms of hyperbolic nonsense that is playing off emotional cues not rational ones. This must work on other people, but I find it childish and revolting in the extreme.
None the less, fungi based technology or anything in which we return to our original technological innovation, which is the channeling of nature to serve purposes useful to us (using macroscopic tools over long periods not microscopes and chemistry over shorter periods) is a good idea. Why? Because billions of years of evolution is definitely a better engineer than all the doctorate holders alive in aggregate, taking advantage of it (especially instead of pretending ourselves to know better) is always a wise choice as we take advantage of that *extremely mature ecosystem obviously*.