> However, if you demand hard proof before taking any significant action, that's the same thing as demanding that no significant action be taken. We do have en

> However, if you demand hard proof before taking any significant action, that's the same thing as demanding that no significant action be taken. We do have enough hard evidence of many things to take action. And we have seen those actions result in positive outcomes. My gripe is about the many hot takes presented in this thread about what action we should take based on way more guessing than is needed and then presented as almost fact. It sounds like we both agree we "need to marshal the evidence we have, have our best experts extrapolate what we don't know and take our best guess as to the most effective course of actions".