Eh I feel like that is semantics. If we are specific and refer to how individuals adapt to be lactose tolerant, you could still say “humans evolved to drink milk” instead in reference to how the population of humans that could adapt and become lactose tolerant grew in relation to humans that couldn’t.
Don’t appeal to evolution, evolution is weird. Evolution just does whatever survival says. If we can survive drinking milk, evolution is cool with it. But evolution is weird, evolution will be all like “You like cows milk huh? That’s cool, have you considered shrinking down and losing your brain and most internal organs to become a nipple latching milk parasite? No? Ok, I’ll ask again later.”
A lot of what you just said is not true, fully bullshit, so I’ll just ignore all that. Dead birds? Cmon. Are we going to tear down all the skyscrapers in the world because birds run into them? Are we going to stop the entire logging industry because it takes away bird’s nesting space? Don’t spout anti-green energy propaganda like you are worried about the birds, if you were really worried about them, you would be pro green energy
If you consider the peripheral waste involved in their production it is only fair to do the same for everything else, and when you do, solar and wind still win. And it’s only going to get better, we are refining and recycling the rare materials involved better and better every year. We are kindof in the golden age of solar power improvements.
Wind and solar > nuclear > fossil fuels
Nothing really against nuclear except how it is being weilded as a distraction from better, cleaner, energy. We need to be going all in on converting everything to wind and solar, with batteries and other power storage like water pumping facilities filling the gaps.
Nuclear needs a few more issues figured out, like how to actually cheaply build and get power from all those touted newer cleaner reactor styles.
We may never have a good answer for why the gay nerdy communists love the colorful scifi communist space adventures