Buh bye. Cool.

I am right.

“Actually in practise” isn’t what this post is about.

and at -1 I’ll be pedantic.

I am correct. Equivocate as you will. But I am right.

At -1 I feel the need to state, I am right though, no?

Much and not at all are two vastly varying definitions in science.

And in this, I am right. Downvotes or not. Hill=dying.

As an example, steel before 1940s didn’t have minuscule traces of atmospheric radiation in it.

Research conducted after the atmosphere had increased radiation would be different to research conducted after, in that vein.

Scavenging WW1 wrecks for non-contaminated steel for use in things like medical equipment is still ongoing, as an example.

Time can certainly change the answer to a question without any input from the individual user.

An aside: I wonder how much the global population-increase will lower once we get tech like holodecks.