Commercial flying remains the safest way to travel, and it continues to get safer. That's not to minimise your reluctance to fly. I get it: if something goes wrong it's 99.9% sure you're going to die, and know about it long enough for your last moments to be horrifying. But the facts is the facts and the facts is that you're way more likely to die on a bicycle journey.
During a lightning storm, ozone can be found in large quantities. There is a fairly vast amount of it in the atmosphere. It is naturally occurring and fulfills your arbitrary criteria for what should be (but, in fact, isn't) a perfectly safe substance to breathe.
Methane occurs naturally in huge concentrations. Look it up, a little reading might be good for you!
So your amended assertion is:
"All forms of inhalation of [particulate] substances which aren't [naturally expected to be found in] air causes (sic) damage to the lungs and throat."
I'm sorry mate, but it's still not true .
Again, coffee vapour, water vapour, tea vapour, cooked rice vapour, long-chain hydrocarbons. None of these are naturally (i.e. without human activity) expected to be found in air, and none of them are at all harmful. Coffee and tea vapour even contain caffeine, a drug quite similar to nicotine, which is the active ingredient in vapes...
Alright, Mr Black-and-white. Ozone is naturally found in air, and is toxic, as is methane and any other number of organic particles that are released by natural processes.
Apart from your inaccurate use of language, you also made an unsupported assertion. I don't believe you're correct.
This is the issue. Vaping is great for ex smokers, but it should absolutely not be taken up for its own sake. Twenty years or so ago, we made a lot of progress, smoking looked like it was going to be phased out in mist countries. Now vaping itself is becoming an issue, hooking kids for life on nicotine.
Along with disposable vapes, marketing and selling to kids should be banned and strictly enforced.
But removing the lifeline from ex smokers will just push them back towards tobacco, because nicotine dependency is real.
The steam from coffee damages your lungs and throat, I never knew that. Are you sure about that?
What about aroma molecules, like sniffing a flower or perfume?
I have to draw this line because it's actually really important.
Smoking is when someone inhales smoke.
Vaping is when someone inhales vapour.
These are different in more ways than they are similar, but perhaps the most important is the difference in negative health outcomes. Smoking is about twenty times more harmful than vaping.
Vaping is a very effective path away from smoking for those with a nicotine dependency, and it's counterproductive to attach the same stigma to both, let alone to consider them equivalent.
My kid was the last one in their school year to get a smartphone. He was bullied for not having a smartphone. He used to ask me for one several times a day and I stuck to what I'd said, he'll get one on his birthday. I still feel it was far too early. He was 10 when he got it.
I desperately want to believe your optimistic reading of the Paradox. I hope you're right, and, thankfully, I can't honestly say with any certainty that you're not.
The mass extinction that killed off the dinosaurs might be quite rare, especially if it was some kind of orbital event. In which case we might have accelerated advancement in comparison to other Goldilocks planets.
Agree completely on a planetary scale. The chances are that we are very ordinary on a galactic scale, and that millions of other lifeforms on millions of other planets have risen to roughly this level of sophistication, and thereby become too powerful for their overwhelming stupidity, and died.
See: the Copernican Principle, the Great Filter, and Dissipation-driven Adaptation (in ascending order of how much time you've got)
Legend has it that babies born en caul, or "in their waters" will never drown at sea.