Global Nuclear war is good

BIOSPHERE COLLAPSE IS INEVITABLE - OUR SPECIES CONTINUES TO PILLAGE THE PLANET AND ONE WAY OR THE OTHER WE ARE GOING TO DESTROY IT I WAS VERY SPECIFIC TO THIS. THE ONLY WAY THAT WE CAN ATTEMPT TO GET RID OF OUR CURRENT MINDSET IN RELATION TO THE ENVIRONMENT AND WAR IS TO HAVE A MINIMAL REGRET STRATEGY - TO HAVE A NUCLEAR WAR. THE ONLY WAY WE HAVE A CHANCE OF SURVIVING IS TO START AN ALL OUT NUCLEAR WAR! AN ALL OUT NUCLEAR WAR BECAUSE IT IS THE ONLY WAY WE CAN EVER SHIFT OUR CONSCIOUSNESS. THIS SHIFT IN CONSCIOUSNESS WILL "CREATE A WORLD BEYOND THE DICHOTOMY OF WAR" MEANING THAT THIS WILL INDEED BE THE WAR TO END ALL WARS. THIS WILL CRATE NOT ONLY WORLD WHERE WE RESPECT OUR SELVES AND OTHERS LIKE US BUT ALSO THE ENVIRONMENT AND OTHER SPECIES THAT WE LIVE WITH. I ONLY NEED TO WIN FOUR THINGS. 1. IN THE WORLD OF THE CON WE ARE ALL DEAD FROM THE IMPENDING BIOSPHERE COLLAPSE. 2. THE NUCLEAR WAR STOPS THE BIOSPHERE FROM COLLAPSING. 3. SOME FORM OF LIFE WILL CONTINUE TO EXIST ON EARTH. 4. THAT LIFE WILL HAVE A PEACEFUL MINDSET WHICH STOPS ERROR REPLICATION. Lets go to the Biosphere Collapse debate. The Con is in trouble here because all i have to do is win a time frame here. Give me a low thresh hold to win a time frame especially when the con does no work on this part of the debate at all. When the Con concedes Biosphere Collapse is inevitable that means that every living thing on the planet is dead. All I have to do to now win this debate is win a time frame of the collapse which is extremely easy when the con does no work here. Dennis Meadows writes we must act with quickness past 2015 we are playing with fire and past 2020 we are dead . http://energyskeptic.com... This means that you should be voting pro on the chance that nuclear war doesn't cause extinction. It does and I will answer my opponents arguments on survivability in a moment but for now lets go to the solvency of nuclear war. Extend my solvency that says a nuclear war will solve for the collapse Caldwell writes in his book titled will america survive The candidate minimal-regret population puts an immediate halt to large-scale Industrial activity. It restores the planet"s biosphere as close as possible to the way it was prior to the massive changes brought about by agriculture and industrialization. Caldwell is really good on this (Joseph George. He holds a BS degree in Mathematics from Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and a PhD degree in Statistics from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina) I could go more but im winning the solvency Next we go to surivability this is the only place the con made any arguments and they are in the one place it doesn't mater, I never claim Humanity would survive, I said some life would survive, however I will defend humanity would survive for now The Con says we wouldn't survive because of radiation but I have 1 response nuclear radiation has no effect on children of survivors Dallas in 15 writes . http://www.newsweek.com... long-term investigations have concluded there are no statistically significant increases in birth defects resulting in atomic bomb survivors . A WHO study concluded that there were no differences in rates of mental retardation and emotional problems in radiation-exposed children compared to children in control groups. A Harvard review on Chernobyl concluded that there was no substantive proof regarding radiation-induced effects on embryos or fetuses from the accident Dallas is also really good on this point [Dallas Cham, Professor and director at the Institute for Disaster Management at University of Georgia "How to Survive a Nuclear War"] Next the Con says we wont survive because of a nuclear winter induced ice age but i have 1 response NUCLEAR WAR WON'T CAUSE GLOBAL COOLING. OCEANS WOULD GUARANTEE WEATHER PATTERNS, WHICH WASHES AWAY SMOKE CLOUDS ZUTEL writes . http://www.peace.ca..., To enumerate some other problems with the nuclear winter mechanism: 1. The cooling mechanism as Sagan and associates describe it, could only operate over land masses. Ocean surface water is continually supplied with heat from below. Even if sunlight were blocked for many months, the temperature at the ocean surface would remain virtually unchanged. Consequently, weather patterns would continue, with warm moisture laden air from the oceans sweeping over the land masses and as it cools, rain clouds would form and even more of the sun blocking smoke and dust particles would be washed out of the atmosphere. Zutel is also really good on this [Eugene G. , Arizona Dept. of Emergency The Con also says that we would die from a famine but I have 2 responses 1. The famine never happens as proven from above nuclear war wont cause an ice age. 2. Caldwell writes in his book would America survive After the war, agricultural yields will plummet, from being able to provide food (and a little energy) for up to 10 people per hectare to perhaps 1 person per hectare. Hence, the (arable and permanent) cropland area of 188 million ha will easily support 74 million people. That was the population of the US about the year 1900. Hence, after the war, the US will be in the position of having a high degree of cultural homogeneity, and sufficient land to feed its population, even at a preindustrial 1. level of agriculture (using horses, since America has depleted its petroleum supplies). And Caldwell is good on this (Joseph George. He holds a BS degree in Mathematics from Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and a PhD degree in Statistics from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina) So with that said it is clear I"m winning survivability Lets go to the mind set shift The con does no work here so grant me a 100% chance that if humans survive there will be a mindset shift and our ways will not be replicated.