One of the more annoying phrases I hear from time to time I believe is from Carl Sagan. I believe it goes, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”.
This defies logic in many ways. For one, all claims are extraordinary to someone. But more importantly, either a thing stands the tests of proof or not. You don’t have extra proofs for ones you have trouble processing. For example. If someone had said the Nazis had a plan to exterminate all the Jews by putting them in rail cars after telling them they were going to resort locations will the war was over, and then work them to death, often by poison gas, the evidence for that should be exactly the same as evidence for any other claim. Because it seems horrifically unlikely, should have no bearing on the standards of proof. In fact, applying a tougher standard of evidence could in this hypothetical case, lead to the deaths of millions of people.
In that spirit, let’s hear him out. And then decide which way the precautionary principle should roll.