Specifically in the context of this bet, it's semi-bullshit, because we have no number of how inflated the estimate of danger is. You can't really say "Rees mu

Specifically in the context of this bet, it's semi-bullshit, because we have no number of how inflated the estimate of danger is. You can't really say "Rees must be having a cognitive bias, and his estimate of the bioterror/bioerror has to be grossly overstated". Rees is not a population. the Law of large doesn't apply. He might have been too optimistic. Even if he is overly pessimistic, maybe the inflation of risk isn't that significant. Or it is significant, but the risk is so great, that even after subtracting the inflation, it is still dangerous. The point is, applying a statistical heuristic without supplying the actual parameters is meaningless. The heuristic itself is not bullshit. The application in this case certainly is.