Many people confuse absence of evidence (of insecurity) with evidence of absence (of insecurity). Just look at the SARS-CoV-2 reporting in January and February,

Many people confuse absence of evidence (of insecurity) with evidence of absence (of insecurity). Just look at the SARS-CoV-2 reporting in January and February, where every major media outlet copied stories about how the flu is much worse and that we should really be worrying about the flu. It was patently ridiculous to be making such assertions as the only thing certain at the time was the depth of our uncertainty. The dilemma is that equating absence of evidence with evidence of absence is actually a good long-term strategy in our day-to-day lives. Without this strategy we'd be paralyzed by our own ignorance; particularly, paradoxically, those aware of their ignorance. It's a meta-skill to be able to identify when the heuristic should be discarded in favor of more rigorous analytical thinking. A capacity for analytical thinking isn't sufficient by itself, thus making such an error in judgement doesn't necessarily imply an absence of strong analytical thinking skills. (At least, that's what I tell myself ;)