Isn't that a fully-general argument? I say that flywheels will cause a revolution in military affairs. You reply with, "Why haven't we seen flywheels used in war?" I reply that flywheels are such a potent weapon that armies are afraid to deploy them out of fear that their enemy will response by using flywheels against them, which would be just too terrible and might cause a global ecological catastrophe or a general breakdown of society.
You are going to die, going to happen to all of us, nothing we can do about it.
Now, the when is the part that gets the attention of our little monkey brains.
1. Within the next 15 minutes.
2. Sometime within the next 100 years.
Your scenario is a type 2 scenario. At some time in the ethereal future 'flywheels' may cause the death of mankind. Well, we're all going to die in the ethereal future anyway so who cares.
Nuclear weapons are a type 1 problem. It's like a gun being pointed at your head and someone screaming "give me the money", you're not going to be thinking about what's for dinner because the likelihood of dinner is low.
