In 1954, Canadian artist Alex Colville finished what is probably his most famous painting. Horse and Train. Set against a stark, surrealistic background, the painting depicts a horse galloping down the middle of the railroad tracks toward an oncoming train. Colville's painting is subject to many interpretations, but whether the horse and the train symbolize instinct versus rationality, nature versus man, or ecology versus technology, the artist warns that unless something intervenes to alter the course, tragedy is imminent.

In 1972, the appearance of the book The Limits to Growth unleashed a controversy concerning the future of the planet. Commissioned by the Club of Rome and conducted by researchers/authors Donella Meadows, Jorgen Randers, Dennis Meadows, and William W. Behrens III, the project applied systems dynamics and computer modeling to simulate 12 scenarios based on the interactions of population, food production, industrial production, pollution, and consumption of non-renewable natural resources. Using the World3 computer model developed at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the authors projected the implications of the data input and concluded that if human society continued on the path of exponential growth, unrestrained consumption and resource exploitation, the planet's physical carrying capacity would be exceeded by the middle of the twenty-first century. The only way humanity could avoid inevitable collapse was to reduce its ecological footprint through far-reaching technological, cultural, and institutional changes. Although their predictions appeared dire, they believed that disaster was avoidable. They warned, however, that unless people and policy makers tackled the underlying causes of the problem - and the sooner the better- the less likely they would be to turn things around. The Limits to Growth's explicit message provoked strong reactions. Economist, politicians, and industrialists were outraged at the suggestion that people should have to impose constraints on their pursuit of growth, and more growth. Since the Industrial Revolution, growth has been driving the global socio economic system, and to this day, growth is still equated with progress, profit, improvement, prosperity, and success. To question growth, let alone challenge the corporate world's quest for unlimited profit, was next to heresy. Those who didn't deny The Limits to Growth's findings tried to debunk the team's methodology or disseminate scare stories based on misrepresentations and misinterpretations of the book's conclusions. One example is the false claim that the authors predicted global collapse by the end of the twentieth century.

Match the ideas expressed by the phrases in List I with the ideas expressed in List II.

Choose the correct answer from the options given below:

A-IV, B-II, C-I, D-III

The correct answer is Option (2) → A-IV, B-II, C-I, D-III

Certainly! Here's the explanation for the match between the ideas expressed in List I and List II:

A. Authors projected --> This corresponds to the idea expressed option IV - Exceeded limit of the planet: physical carrying capacity. This relates to the projection made by the authors in "The Limits to Growth" regarding the exceeding of the planet's physical carrying capacity due to exponential growth.

B. Economists --> This matches with the idea expressed in Option II- Outraged on the constraints of growth. Economists were outraged by the suggestion in "The Limits to Growth" that constraints should be imposed on growth, as growth has been traditionally seen as essential for progress and prosperity.

C. The limits to growth --> This aligns with the idea expressed in Option I - Unleashed a controversy about future and past. The book "The Limits to Growth" sparked controversy and debates about the future implications of exponential growth and resource depletion.

D. Horse and train --> This corresponds to the idea expressed in Option IV - Tragedy is imminent. The painting "Horse and Train" by Alex Colville, despite various interpretations, is often seen as a warning about imminent tragedy if something doesn't intervene to alter the course.

So, each phrase in List I matches with its corresponding idea expressed in List II, explaining the connection between them.