When I called in yesterday about man's inability to affect the atmosphere of the planet, Mark countered (after I was off the air) that man
definitely can and he used nuclear weapons as his "proof" that man can change our planetary environment.
Now while I will concede that the only way we can currently have any chance of modifying our environment would be with nuclear or biological means, I would like to make the point that even with those two methods, our ability to "destroy" our planet is less than what we have been led to believe. Yes, nuclear bombs going off all over would indeed to some serious damage to life on this planet, however, even that great destruction is survivable and life would continue after such an event.
http://www.oism.org/nwss/s73p912.htmHere I have to cite some infallible logic I heard from a caller on The Power Hour who simply brought up the point that if nuclear weapons render and area to be totally uninhabitable then why are there people living at "ground zero" in Nagasaki and Hiroshima?
There is no doubt that a nuclear war would really really really really (is that enough "really's"?) mess up the planet, we have (again) been lied to about the aftermath of a war using nuclear weapons...