4 ms·
It's also true that there's no DEFINITIVE ABSOLUTE PROOF that pressing the nuclear launch button will clause a MAD-style nuclear escalation. But still, there's
by throwawayjava 9y ago
It's also true that there's no DEFINITIVE ABSOLUTE PROOF that pressing the nuclear launch button will clause a MAD-style nuclear escalation.
But still, there's good reason to believe it would, so it'd be irresponsible to push the button given other reasonable alternatives.
"You can't ever know FOR SURE that this destroy life as we know it!" has to be the least logical form and most confusing of climate change skepticism out there. The fact that anyone would consider this argument, on its own, even remotely compelling, is... oy.
- txsh 9y agoThat has nothing to do with what I quoted from the article. It would benefit you to suppress your religious fervor for a few minutes and examine the facts for yourself.
- throwawayjava 9y ago> That has nothing to do with what I quoted from the article. This has everything to do with your characterization of those quotes. "We don't know for certain, but shit could get bad" is a perfectly reasonable basis for precaution. The precautionary principle is not "anti-scientific". > It would benefit you to suppress your religious fervor for a few minutes and examine the facts for yourself. What are you trying to accomplish with this sentence?