Is chess experiencing a weak era?

In my opinion the current field of top-level grandmasters is the weakest of all time.

There are no Fischers, Kasparov’s, Morphys, Capabalancas or Alapins in today’s game. There are not even any Tals or Karpovs. Even Magnus would not be able to compete with past greats. The only reason Magnus is world champion is because of the extremely low level of competition he faces today. 

The chess community needs and deserves the next great player to come along. We haven’t seen one since Kasparov.

I have given my opinion and now it’s your turn, are we currently experiencing the weakest era in chess history?

Magnus did not manage to win one single classical game against Caruana

with all the tech and books, chess moving to bored era

Carlsen wouldn’t be a top 10 player back in Fischer’s day. He’d have gotten eaten alive by Fischer, Spassky, Tal, Petrosian, etc.. 

Caruana and Karjakin wouldn’t be in the top 50 back then. 

The grandmasters are still very good

I don’t mean to insult Magnus. He’s a very strong player, the best of his generation and possibly even a top 25 player all time

That is not at all logical

It’s not. By your logic whoever is the current world champion would automatically be the greatest player of all time, which is obviously illogical and complete nonsense

Fischer would have beaten Karjakin and Caruana 7-0. Magnus managed to win exactly 1 out of 24 games against them. 

There’s no math involved. Just history. You can try to rewrite history if you’d like, but it doesn’t change the fact that Magnus managed to win only one out of 12 classical games against Karjakin and managed to win exactly zero against Caruana.

so stupid chess.com saays magnus is best of all time

I don't know about weakest. I would agree very different with the advent of chess engines, however.

Magnus Carlsen is an embarrassment. The worst player ever to hold the world title 

Well, I think that the current top level players are the strongest of all time. Unfortunately, neither of us can provide real evidence for our respective claims. But really, what makes you think that "Even Magnus would not be able to compete with past greats"? Any reason? I mean, any?

Too right you are in my opinion. Comparing eras is always interesting yet pointless and boring. It’s like Wilt v Shaq and so on. The “colorless” adjective is what caught my attention. It’s the same in boxing (once a truly epic sport), football (American), baseball, olympics, you name it. The era of information overload has taken all levels of competition into a different direction. You see it in every contest. The days of Muhammad Ali vs. Anybody, Bird vs. Magic, the Ryan Express, the Steel Curtain, the “just win baby” Raiders.... all gone, never to return. Now it’s all about percentages, metrics, information, nutrition, PEDs, “playing not to lose”, etc. @UrkedCrow is spot on! Uninteresting indeed. 

The greats of today would have great odds against the greats of the past. I'm willing to bet that grandmasters are generally stronger because they were able to train with computers. Their training was half the effort but twice the result, given the convenience of computers.

It doesn't work like that. Someone could play differently, or even blunder. I used to have the mentality but it went the opposite. So you could never know until you play someone.