It's the end of the world as we know it.

[JuliusHackebeil]

Vinther1991 said:

JuliusHackebeil said:

I also don't think that climate change is going to be a problem in any way comparable to a nuclear world war. Don't get me wrong, changing climates and warming will have negative consequences to a lot of people. But global nuclear winter is inconceivably worse in every way. Climate change stuff is mostly alarmist shouting in a highly politicised environment, almost more of an ideology than an actual environmental catastrophy of extinction level proportions.

Edit 1: REM rocks

There is however a lot more empirical evidence that supports the changing climate will lead to extinction level catastrophies than that a large scale nuclear war would lead to nuclear winter.

Don't know if I should take your word for it. There are a lot of climate crazy people out there. And I remember the proclamations of points of no return decades ago. People are too quick to judge an extremely complex problem without thinking about solutions potentially being worse than the problem at hand.

But this is somewhat besides the point anyways. Because even if nuclear winter does not follow after a global nuclear war, billions would be dead by the end of it. And then everything will be poisoned with radiation. All the food too. Everybody will be ill. And no chance for treatments. And hostilities would not just stop. It is hard to even imagine such a world. Compare that to climate getting warmer. Don't get me wrong, as I have said, a lot of people will suffer and die from this too. But going extinct? No, one is clearly way worse than the other.

I'd take climate change (even if unmitigated by humans) for the next 200 years before global nuclear war.

By the way, I know a lot of farmers and also some preppers and hope that they would share their stuff with me in the event of an extinction level catastrophy.