You're right, you didn't prove my point. You only personify the example of the reactionary I described in my initial point.

You want to focus on blaming neighbors who have woodstoves while ignoring that everything we buy is shipped on ships burning the dirtiest fuel we currently refine, with zero emissions/efficiency standards for the ships that burn it, while we continue to increase annual shipping miles every single year. Better still you seem to have no understanding of annual global shipping emissions, which continue to increase year over year, or interest in changing it. If you did, woodstoves would not have been your chosen rebuttal.

Instead you jump at a comment about woodstoves as your point of contention. You aren't responding based on data, but reacting based on your emotional understanding of something you don't like; woodstoves or wood burners.

How can I make such a projection? Because you only want to react to rightful discounting of the global impact of woodstoves by getting defensive or declaring I am ignorant to their impact.

In the context of environmental impact you're tripping over dollars to point at pennies; A low information reactionary.

Yeah, Maine has already been overrun by them.

We can discuss the per annum increase in air miles, and lack of emissions/efficiency standards on commercial and private jets some other time. They too dwarf any impact that the average North American wood stove reliant resident has on the environment at large.