Home financing ever possible? Probably not!

Are the dinosaurs perhaps only dead because temperature and CO2 concentration massively declined and the ecosystem at that time therefore massively lost "productivity"?

No, because of a catastrophic event, namely a meteorite impact. Please do not bring up this fallacious argument about the advantages of a warm world. It is advantageous for everyone who is born into already stable conditions in such a world. Then life flourishes. But the path to that, especially since it is geologically almost unprecedentedly fast, is marked by upheavals, which those who live in these interesting times have to manage. ( Disclaimer: It is of course true that a completely ice-free, warmer world, after the adaptation phase, is richer in species and more "productive". But that practically does not concern the corpses that pave the way there. )

Interesting point of view. So the Saudis are to blame because they extract the oil, not us because we burn it.
That would also mean Wüsthof is to blame if someone is stabbed with one of their kitchen knives.

It was about prosperity at the expense of others. If the Saudis had invested even part of the money from the oil (which happens to be there by chance) in renewables and research, and not in Ferraris, then we wouldn’t be debating anymore ;)

It was about prosperity at the expense of others. If the Saudis had invested the money from the oil (which coincidentally occurs there) even partially in renewables and research instead of Ferraris, we wouldn't be debating anymore ;)

If we had done that, the oil would be with us and not with the Saudis?

Do you have any idea how photovoltaic technology was in the 80s? Or wind turbines? Where was the energy supposed to come from? Everyone wants to travel, heat, and consume. How would you have kept up worldwide with the Americans, the Chinese, and co? How to convince everyone? Were the scientific knowledge about the climate even that advanced? Nuclear energy is now one of the best and cleanest energies. Unbelievable what has become possible, without much radioactive waste and CO2 neutral. Everyone around us recognizes that, only the Greens prefer to burn lignite. The biggest poison there is. Completely crazy!

How many billions do the aftermath of the reactor accidents in Chernobyl and Fukushima cost annually again? How many years will these costs still occur? But hey: luckily it didn’t happen in Germany, but far away abroad... Nuclear energy is therefore neither clean nor safe. With the coal wasted here, you could really push the expansion of renewables and would consequently have a benefit for decades.

How many billions do the remnants of the reactor accidents in Chernobyl and Fukushima still cost annually? How many more years will these costs continue to arise?

But hey: fortunately, it didn’t happen in Germany, but far away abroad...

Nuclear energy is therefore neither clean nor safe. With the money wasted on this, you could really advance the expansion of renewable energies and would consequently have a benefit for decades.

The new ones are 100% safe, meltdown and the like no longer possible. Not even a terrorist attack or anything else would be a problem. Feel free to take a look at dualFluid technology. Much of it is market ready.

Cutting down forests for wind turbines I consider nonsense. Likewise, disfiguring the landscape with them. Offshore is okay. But these are exactly the questions that need to be clarified.

Coal and oil are certainly no longer suitable for the future.

Nuclear energy is therefore neither clean nor safe. With the coal being wasted here, you could really push the expansion of renewables forward and would consequently have a benefit for decades.

It wouldn't have had to be new nuclear power plants, just continuing to operate existing ones. I still don't understand why we put up with this and why it was especially a black/yellow government that came up with the idea.

The new ones are 100% safe, meltdown and the like are no longer possible. Not even a terrorist attack or anything else would be a problem. Feel free to also take a look at dualFluid technology. Much of it is market-ready.

Cutting down forests for wind turbines I consider nonsense. Likewise messing up the landscape with them. Offshore is okay. But these are precisely the questions that need to be clarified.

Coal and oil are certainly no longer suitable for the future.

100% safe? Just because no faults could be imagined in the FM EAs, 100% safety will never exist.

Then no "forests are [cut down] for wind turbines." If anything, corridors and clearings are made in forests. We barely have any real forest in Germany except where you'd have to land the wind turbine with Elon's rockets. The spoiling of landscapes has already been accomplished by monocultures and the extraction of fossil fuels in Germany itself.