> I'd probably be a whole lot less rational... I think you imagine that you are being very rational, because you've studied some climate science and believe yo

> I'd probably be a whole lot less rational... I think you imagine that you are being very rational, because you've studied some climate science and believe you're intelligent enough to form your own judgement, but you're wrong. It's extremely irrational to dismiss the consensus opinion of climate science researchers based on your own (epistomologically limited, non-professional-climate-scientist) assessment of their research. > it still looks like your typical doomsday story dressed up as science. And say the likelihood of this doomsday scenario being correct is 10% by your assessment: do you think a rational risk analysis would conclude that we should do nothing and go about business as usual? Do you also enjoy playing russian roulette when your not skimming climate science articles?