[pittsburgh gop guy]

"I bet he wouldn't have been able to write all those excellent books without cigarettes. how much will our civilization lose if the smoking nazis have their way."

Your post makes no sense.
But this question does:

How many more excellent books could he have written if he were not a smoker and died of lung cancer at such a young age?

Smoking had nothing to do with his ability to write great books. Great books have been written by smokers and nonsmokers alike. But smoking did kill him, and he wanted it that way and did not complain about it or sue the tobacco companies as many former smokers have.

[Red Jones]

your analysis makes no sense.

I don't know whether you're aware of it or not, but nicotine does effect the nervous system. For smokers it makes them better able to face their work sometimes. We don't know if Ambrose would've been as successful as he was without it.

It also opens up a question about Winston Churchill. During the war years he used to sleep late and spend the first 2-3 hours of each day in bed reading newspapers. His secretary was required to bring those newspapers into his bedroom each morning along with a large bottle of brandy. He didn't get out of bed in the morning without that first glass of brandy. He didn't go to bed at night until he had finished that entire bottle. So, we can presume that without that brandy he probably wouldn't have performed so well during those years.

He was in fact drunk for every one of his great speeches. Likewise, without nicotine in Ambrose's blood we don't know if his genius would've come out so well or not.