I’m beginning to understand how to communicate with you.
First I’m going to explain the points that you do not seem to understand.
I wrote: “Nuclear energy is kinetic energy”
you replied: “Not terribly relevant” I think that is very relevant. If atoms, molecules or other massive objects do not have enough kinetic energy in the form of linear motion or speed, then they cannot escape Earth’s gravitational influence, but if their velocity is increased by external energy and that energy is sufficient to increase the velocity of the atoms, molecules or other objects to go beyond that which is required to escape the Earth’s gravitational field, then those particles that travel that fast can escape the influence of Earth’s gravity. You agree with that assumption; so why is it not relevant?

Obtained from internet:
“Radioactive decay, also known as nuclear decay or radioactivity, is the process by which the nucleus of an unstable atom loses energy by emitting radiation, including alpha particles, beta particles, gamma rays and conversion electrons. A material that spontaneously emits such radiation is considered radioactive.”

Unstable atoms lose energy by emitting alpha particles, beta particles, gamma rays and electrons, since energy cannot be destroyed, the energy that is carried away by the speeding particles and rays, can interfere with the surrounding nonradioactive atoms, then those nonradioactive atoms have gained energy. Gained energy makes the atom or molecules move or vibrate faster; faster motion of molecules equals heat. If the gain of energy is sufficient the affected atoms may become radioactive, thereby spreading or perpetuating the radioactive process. (See breeder reactors)

If my explanation is not precise enough, could you please make it precise according to the laws of physics.

In your “back of the envelope” calculations; did you take into consideration the natural radioactivity, the radiation from the sun, the cosmic radiation, and the created radioactive elements that occur in all enhanced nuclear reactions?

My claim is very simple: If the Earth’s atmosphere becomes less dense due to this atomic or molecular escape method or some other known or unknown method, then various natural phenomenon will become more destructive.

If my hypothesis is correct, then no matter how much carbon is taken out of the atmosphere, it will make little no difference to the climate change.
We will see what happens eventually.