Actual nuclear war or climate change really only damage the things currently living. Life will always succeed in some form, even if we don’t. I understand where you’re coming from tho
I’m really not sure where you think I said “End life on Earth”, “Destroy the planet” or any of the other possible phrasings you seem to be trying to react to.
I feel like you had this response in the chamber ready to go, saw the words “climate change” and immediately skipped reading everything else.
“Do more damage to life on earth than actual nuclear war would”
That’s a quote from your comment that I replied to. I think both would be equally disastrous for the life that currently lives here as true MAD would wipe out humanity and most animals and greatly alter living conditions, similar to how climate change will.
Actual nuclear war or climate change really only damage the things currently living. Life will always succeed in some form, even if we don’t. I understand where you’re coming from tho
I’m really not sure where you think I said “End life on Earth”, “Destroy the planet” or any of the other possible phrasings you seem to be trying to react to.
I feel like you had this response in the chamber ready to go, saw the words “climate change” and immediately skipped reading everything else.
“Do more damage to life on earth than actual nuclear war would”
That’s a quote from your comment that I replied to. I think both would be equally disastrous for the life that currently lives here as true MAD would wipe out humanity and most animals and greatly alter living conditions, similar to how climate change will.
Nuclear war’s effect on the biosphere would be orders of magnitude worse than the effects of climate change.
Doubling down on your own misunderstanding doesn’t make it any less of a misunderstanding.