The AI environmental conversation has a grammar: a cost is named, a solution is proposed, the conversation moves to implementation. That grammar has held across institutional coverage, industry reporting, and most community debate. What the Bluesky post did was refuse to speak it. By asking why nobody is simply saying no — not proposing a better metric, not calling for a moratorium with conditions — it stepped outside the conversational frame entirely. The broad agreement it attracted is not evidence that a new argument has won; it is…