If nicotine is as highly addictive as so many, including you now, claim it to be, why is it that so many people have no withdrawal effects for any forms of nicotine other than tobacco?
My reference to global warming had to do with the concept that it is "accepted science."
Smokers can absolutely be behaviorally addicted to smoking.
Thus proving that it is an habituation, not an addiction until the definition of the word was changed to include smoking - by the same people who decided homosexuality was not an abnormality.
Q: Do you consider yourself addicted to cigarettes or not?
A staggering 72% of smokers surveyed considered themselves addicted. (Of course this may be a coping mechanism...If it's addicting it isn't their fault.)
But caffeine is addictive....not as addictive as nicotine, but it is still addictive. Please see my definition for addiction in my previous response to you. You want to deny established science and something the medical community has understood for a long time.
Smoking is both behaviorally addicting and physiologically addicting. Again, you're denying legitimate science, but you will find plenty of company on the internet who live their lives in denial of sound science.
Again, human physiology is a remarkable thing. Some people are easily addicted to things that are only mildly addictive, while a small percentage of people are not affected by substances that are highly addictive. But these people represent a very small percentage of the overall population.
You're going to hurt yourself trying to stretch the acceptance of homosexuality with smoking being a habituation. Your denial of the addictive properties of nicotine flies in the face of well established science. You will continue to believe what you want to believe, science notwithstanding. That falls into the same category as believing that C02 is going to destroy the earth. Neither one is backed by legitimate science, but there are people who choose to believe it anyway.