I don’t think it ignores it, rather the argument is precisely that that maximal substition won’t and can’t happen.

Baseless assertion that some tasks always require humans input

It’s really not that; it’s about how spending and employment patterns have changed historically in response to increased automation.

I want to see Mount Everest. Not climb it - I don’t want to be one of those guys who basically gets dragged up the mountain by sherpas - I just want to see it for real.

Alright, just a sun.

THE SUN.

Assuming we’re going back far enough, antibiotics. Cure one person of the bubonic plague or tuberculosis and people will start taking you seriously.

No. But physical proof is not the standard we use for determining someone’s historical existence.