Dr. Andrew Huff

And this is why it splits the scientific community.

So one camp says, there's no use to this.

I don't understand why we're doing it in the first place.

Therefore, we shouldn't do it.

The other camp argues, well, if we can predict how these viruses will mutate, then we can develop countermeasures, vaccines, or drugs to counter the threat before it emerges.

And that opinion, and I've always held this belief that the people who have that opinion are wrong.

And the reason why they're wrong is that you have to be like God and you have to know and be able to predict how something will genetically evolve over time.

And if you look back through human history, it's always humans trying to correct nature, which have failed.

The introduction of the brown snake in Guam.

I mean, there's all these things where they've, that was a hitchhiker scenario, but where they try to introduce some kind of predator to eliminate some kind of bad pest.

Oh, I know.

You see this repeatedly throughout history that we can correct a complex system, which is nature.

And it's... Well, that's interesting that you bring that up.

So I used to work with the geoengineers and I wonder how much scale it's actually occurring.

So...

And, you know, people talk about contrails and, you know, that being geoengineering.

It's not.

And most of these stations are ground-based.

But it's very expensive from a scientific and engineering perspective.

If you were going to launch a large-scale geoengineering project that was...