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.

What I would be doing is reconsider the sources I get my information from.

Yeah, the ones that'll tell you what you want to hear. 

Exactly. Thank you! Don't just look at the stuff confirming what you already think about something. Challenge yourself.

Deny it all ya want, it's happening. There is a point where things could accelerate rather fast, the sibirian permafrost melting for example which is a carbon prison. Estimates are drastically liberal. 

Say that to the many species going extinct due to climate change and other human issues like overfishing.

We’ve seen a lot of canaries dying in the coal mine.

Overpopulation is a big problem.
Water and ground pollution is a big problem.
Air pollution, oxygen depletion, and climate change are big problems.
So many of the world ignoring it because denial is more comfortable is a big problem.
Many religious people tend to want to aggressively ignore it, I think this is because many of them came to religion because they wanted a blanket to help them ignore their own mortality - and climate change denial is a similar blanket.

You don’t need scientific models to show what we’ve been seeing with our own eyes over the past 30 years.

People become more violent and more anxious as oxygen levels drop and CO2 levels rise. If that stuff is sticking around, we’re in a lot of trouble. This potential was considered by scientists at least by the 1990s.

I have no worries about a nuclear war, it's never going to happen. I have no worries about global warming to myself, but I do worry about my grandchildren if my kid ever has their own kid. If I lived in Florida I would worry about it a lot more, but I'm pretty safe up in Minnesota for the next 100 or so years. I'm not denying global warming changes, I believe it's a huge problem, but I don't believe it's a problem that's going to kill humans at the scale that a massive nuclear war or a bubonic plague type situation would kill in the next 50-100 years. I do think global warming is gong to be a major issues for future generations that is far more likely worry than nuclear war.