“It’s funny that scientists actually thought an ice nine type situation had a minuscule but non-zero chance of occurring” That without context doesn’t make any

“It’s funny that scientists actually thought an ice nine type situation had a minuscule but non-zero chance of occurring” That without context doesn’t make any sense. Adding “when they detonated the first nuclear bomb” tells when the ice nine situation could occur, when the scientists were still thinking that is not actually said. This whole thread has been about people unhappy that “at one time” was left out as below. “ It’s funny that [at one time] scientists actually thought an ice nine type situation had a minuscule but non-zero chance of occurring when they set off the first nuclear bomb: the entire atmosphere would ignite.” Does adding in the implied “at one time” help you see the ambiguity? Of course a thread will turn contentious when someone bluntly says “ No, they didn't.” when it’s a situation where they aren’t actually wrong about the main point. Those reply comments come off needlessly aggressive when in reality if they thought the timing was off, the commenter could have said “yeah they did consider that ice nine situation but ruled it out a few years before the first test”. Instead they went on how “no they didn’t, it was impossible because xyz”