On 13/01/2021 19:23, Jim H wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 13:38:06 +0000, in ,
> The Natural Philosopher  wrote:
>
>> On 12/01/2021 21:08, Jim H wrote:
>>> If something can't be used until it's been in safe use for 10 years,
>>> it will never be used.
>>
>> LOL, That's the 'precautionary principle' in full flight there, then.
>
> You snipped the context needed for my statement. One might suspect it
> was done intentionally, or due to not reading for comprehension.
>
> Go back and read ... the remarks by
> TimS and the material he was remarking on.
>
>> Modern health and safety regulations would have banned fire, stone axes
>> and indeed the Wheel.
>>
>> And is well on its way to doing so today.
>

I said that. Not Tim.


> Gross exaggeration to illustrate a viewpoint is a really poor debate
> tactic.
>
I think not,. It's only the logical equivalent of the Calculus.
Argumentum ad absurdum...is a totally valid methodology

I merely pointed out that the logical conclusions of the precautionary
principle is that no one ever does anything at all for fear it might
have unknown unseen and unforeseeable results.


Your statement was humorous, because taken at face value it basically is
an oxymoron.


--
Renewable energy: Expensive solutions that don't work to a problem that
doesn't exist instituted by self legalising protection rackets that
don't protect,  masquerading as public servants who don't serve the public.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05