> But in your previous message you implied that it is larger than it is by making a deceptively long list of items. No I didn’t. Your reading comprehension did

> But in your previous message you implied that it is larger than it is by making a deceptively long list of items. No I didn’t. Your reading comprehension did that. I was simply pointing out that a dipshit stance like “no energy source can have any emissions and be called green” actually rules everything out and destroys the nuanced discussions between green energies. The statement I replied to was literally “It is as simple as I originally stated”. > Implying that solar, nuclear or wind have emissions nowhere near gas or coal is not fair play. Wanna try that sentence again? I think you meant to say something else because solar, wind, and nuclear absolutely have emissions nowhere near gas or coal.