Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (1566728)	10/20/2025 4:25:10 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Respond to of 1570711

CJ, most of the flaws in Pascal's Wager and Occam's Razor come from people who misapply those philosophies. However, one way in which I like to apply these philosophies is by figuring out who has the burden of proof. For example, when it comes to Pascal's Wager and climate change, it's easy to show that policies that try to deal with climate change have benefits even if the negative effects of climate change are incorrect or greatly exaggerated. Moving us off of fossil fuels and onto "renewable energy" may or may not stop the climate from changing, but it has many other benefits, including bankrupting RuZZia, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, three nations that don't have good track records in human rights. Based on this, the burden of proof is on the "Drill Baby Drill" crowd to show that policies to deal with climate change are more harmful than beneficial, even when climate change is taken out of the picture. I once argued on the side of "Drill Baby Drill" knowing that the burden of proof was on me. These days, with the advances in solar and wind energy, I'm not so big on "Drill Baby Drill" anymore. The depressed global prices of oil and coal are also reflecting these advances, it seems. Tenchusatsu