# Throwing logic out the window

Bear with me if you will, as we postulate a hypothetical scenario:

Let us firstly assume, unrealistically though it may seem, that a cure for cancer has been discovered that involves nothing more than eating well and doing exercise. No horrible side-effects, no drugs, no chemotherapy.

Now, keep that assumption in mind as we delve into the hypothetical corners of my mind…

Let’s say you feel a little under the weather, so you visit a doctor.
The doctor carries out some tests and says to you “Based on these results, it is evident that you have cancer. You must undergo the treatment that involves eating well and doing exercise, otherwise you will die.”

You feel somewhat skeptical about the whole thing, so you get a second opinon. Well, more than that, you get 100 opinions – and not just from any old doctor. You to go 100 doctors who have the latest in cancer detection equipment and are the leading authorities in the field of cancer research and treatment.

All 100 doctors produce the same results. They show you the scans and the outputs from all their fancy equipment, which you have little to no idea of how to interpret, and 99 of them tell you “Based on these results, it is evident that you have cancer. You must undergo the treatment that involves eating well and doing exercise, otherwise you will die.”
1 doctor however, tells you “Based on these results, there is no evidence to support the idea that you have cancer… and even if you did, it doesn’t matter, because you’re going to die anyway.”

Now, what do you do? Do you:
a) Ignore 99% of the doctors and carry on living your life as normal
b) Follow the advice of 99% of the doctors and make some changes to the way you eat and do some exercise (not so easy to do, but with no side-effects other than possibly making you healthier in general) so as not to risk dying prematurely.

Any mathematician, or gambler, will tell you to go for option b. It makes complete sense doesn’t it? It’s the logical option.

So… why is it then, when it comes to climate change, we go for option a?