Bjørn Lomborg

And it's probably not going to do very much.

And even if you succeed it, it would only help future victims of future hurricane events in Florida a tiny, tiny bit at best.

So instead, let's try to focus on not getting people to build right on the waterfront where you're incredibly vulnerable and where you're

very likely to get hit where we subsidize people with federal insurance again, which is actually losing money.

So we're much more about saying it's not a science question.

I just take the science for granted.

Yes, there is a problem with climate change, but it's much more about saying, how can we make smart decisions?

So everyone will have to say, of course there must be blind spots.

But I don't know what they are.

Yeah, I'm sure Andy would probably be better at telling me what they are.

So we try to incorporate all of it, but obviously we're not successful.

You can't incorporate everything, for instance, in a cost-benefit analysis.

But the point is, in some way,

I would worry a lot about this if we were, you know, sort of close to perfection human race.

We're doing almost everything right, but we're not quite right.

Then we need to get the last digits right.

But I think it's much more of the, you know, and the point that I tried to make before.

That we're all focused on going to an electric car or something else rather than fracking.

We're all focused on cutting carbon emissions instead of reducing vulnerability.

So we're similarly getting orders of magnitude wrong.