With that line of thinking though it's like the story starts with the ending and works itself backwards to make sense.
For example if I said to myself that I want to be a AAA list movie star but I'm actually a lazy fat NEET, achieving that would be near impossible - but if I somehow could start off as an AAA list movie star but had to work backwards to the point I was originally at, it wouldn't be impossible.
If that is the case, if that means humans went to the brink of extinction and struggle only to never have to worry because there is a future in which we're totally masters of spess n shit - how is that possible.
It's like a story with a beginning and an ending but no middle.
>The future always existed.
In the film we're at the end of our tether, we're going to die. We need to find 'our' future. How do we find it? Worm Hole.
But the Worm Hole is there because we DID find our future - but we only found it because of the Worm Hole - you see but if we're talking about 'the first revision' of time, there isn't going to be a Worm Hole for us to get into.
It's like what is the difference in sitting in a ship in space and wishing for a solution to our problem and poof a fucking solution works itself out.
It would make sense if there were any other way to get the data needed, but there isn't. It relies on the Worm Hole, and it can't exist without them first getting that data. Everyone saying 'the future already existed, we already had the means because the story happened'. In the story we were fucked without that Worm Hole. It poofed into existence, because apparently we DID make it.
But this is what you aren't seeing, linear time or not, that data had to be acquired and transmitted through the means we see in the film - this is what allows us to survive into the future -- but before we had that data originally there couldn't have been a worm hole.
It's a beginning and an ending BUT NO FUCKING MIDDLE.