"It is incumbent upon us to proceed down a path of least risk to humanity"

The title above is taken from here in a posting by someone with the name of "Don B". He concludes that there are four options and that the only alternative that will really allow satisfaction of this post's title is "3."

His alternative courses of action (which are logically self evident) are:
1. The "Al Gore" camp is wrong and the world does nothing.
2. The "Al Gore" camp is wrong but the world assumes the opposite and does something.
3. The "Al Gore" camp is right and the world agrees and does something.
4. The "Al Gore" camp is right and the world does nothing.

The result of 1 is STATUS QUO.
The result of 2 is an EXPENSIVE but HEALTHIER ENVIRONMENT.
The result of 3 is a BETTER FUTURE and MILLIONS of LIVES SAVED.
The result of 4 is AT LEAST 2 BILLION DIE NEEDLESSLY.

But his logic which seems to appear in his identification of alternative courses of action doesn't follow.

1. To assume that the world (I guess he really means people) will do nothing is ridiculous. Humans have survived longer than the wooly mammoth because of our ability to adapt. Whether through invention or mobility, mankind has managed to survive tremendous upheaval. We would adapt.

2. and 3. Assumes that "doing something" is simple to the point of being simple-minded. It assumes that there is no net cost to "doing something". It does not consider that the economic disruption of "doing something" might result in the starvation of billions if food cannot be produced or distributed.

4. Assumes that there are no possible beneficial effects of "doing nothing" such as, for example, fewer people starving as a result of a greater ability to produce food in a warmer climate.

The title as it is borrowed from "Don B" is also fallacious in its point made. We accept risks as a species all the time because the costs of some safety measures are prohibitive. We could legislate for safety reasons, as an example, that all people never leave their homes because of the risk of getting hit by a car. A real example in history is the well publicized effect of saving people in Africa by ending the use of DDT, which has resulted in millions dying from malaria.

We should not quickly accept statements of attempted logic as having any validity, because as often as not, something that sounds rational, is not.