Okay... who would judge those who want to do experiments to the global atmosphere from their country.
(though as another user points out this would diffuse globally, but still be concentrated locally)
(though as another user points out this would diffuse globally, but still be concentrated locally)
Replace "experiments" with the more general/relevant "atmosphere modifications," which includes pollution for amoral profit motive.
What makes "experiments" special? Is that reasoning morally justifiable, given the many millions who will die in the "business as usual" case?
Throwing a dead battery into a dump -> Battery acid gets dragged by the rain -> Polluting a river -> Flows polluting a sea -> Currents polluting all oceans.
Of course effects become smaller as scope grows, but still in many instances it's measurable, see Fukushima.
It's in Mexico's right to stop experiments on the global atmosphere from their country.
I think it’s also in Mexico’s right to authorize prototype experiments that could be potentially scaled up to have a material global effect.
As for the rest. I fully agree with sokoloff's reply.
The GP was clarifying the context. You refused to talk about the meat of their argument and instead opted to be pedantic about how the atmosphere diffuses.
Let's back up for a second. What percentage would you say this experiment has in being correct?
The point of the question is to ask whether you think this has 100% chance of not causing issues.
The next step of course would then be to say, okay if it isn't 100% safe then do you support Mexico's right to say, "hey this could cause us or the world harm, stop it".
In other words, do you think it was right for Mexico to stop this, or do you disagree with their actions?
Do I want this to be the state of affairs? No. Can I change it? No. So it doesn't matter.
So why comment in the first place if you think it doesn't matter?
What I think is... your thought was challenged so you backpedalled then just gave up and said the topic "didn't matter".
To show how it doesn't matter.
> What I think is... your thought was challenged so you backpedalled then just gave up and said the topic "didn't matter".
You know, what you think also doesn't matter.
It's counterproductive to talk about something that doesn't matter to you.
> You know, what you think also doesn't matter.
That's subjective. And it mattered enough for you to reply, and for countless others to read, and for me to write.
But what I'm asking them is.. do they believe it's in Mexico's right to ask a person to stop experimenting on the atmosphere (global or otherwise) from their country.