It's as if you can't see any gray area between something being totally good and being totally bad.
No, all I'm saying is that on balance, something is either totally good for you, or not. (I suppose a third possibility is that it could be neither a net benefit or loss, but that's really splitting hairs, and totally not the case with fossil fuels.)
No, all I'm saying is that on balance, something is either totally good for you, or not. (I suppose a third possibility is that it could be neither a net benefit or loss, but that's really splitting hairs, and totally not the case with fossil fuels.)