While that's a useful counterpoint, it doesn't really provide an estimate of the damage that could be done. I'm thinking of questions like: 1. Are there areas

While that's a useful counterpoint, it doesn't really provide an estimate of the damage that could be done. I'm thinking of questions like: 1. Are there areas where people currently live that shouldn't be inhabited? 2. What's the worst case death toll? I realize there's uncertainty, but a more concrete rebuttal would still be better.