Not acting until you have a good idea of any adverse consequences

Products are tested before they go to market,

Because there's a chance that they're not.

But it's difficult to remove all concerns about the risks associated with every

single action. Let alone those based on the complex series of tests and observations

And here we run into some confusion about how science works.

Some say global warming and evolution aren't facts,

In science the word theory doesn't mean 'I reckon' it means a well tested rule, which

is based on logic, explains repeated observations, and has been used to make

Newton's theory of gravitational attraction, is a theory.

It explains how objects with mass move the way they do.

It's a theory so useful that some three hundred years after it was first

published, it's still used to send objects from Earth

to the far reaches of the solar system. Observable or proven facts are only part

When we're faced with the risks, it's natural to want to wait until there's a hundred

The best that can be achieved is that given all our current theories, repeated

testing, logic, and the facts, that we're reasonably confident something is safe.

And this is where the precautionary principle can be misused.

Waiting for more information is useful but waiting for that unattainable one

hundred percent certainty, prevents anybody from doing anything.

Consider mobile phones and fears that their radiation emissions may cause cancer.

If we choose to wait until mobile phones were proven to be one hundred percent safe,

we would have no mobile phone technology.

Cancer is not something to be taken lightly, and concerns should never be

But waiting for irrefutable data, which is logically impossible, is a bad way to

And by doing so, we may lose amazing opportunities or encounter new risks.

Asking about risks is sensible. But demanding one hundred percent safety,

Subtitles ListPlay Video

Critical Thinking Part 6: A Precautionary Tale