[Whiskeyjim]

The argument is full of holes. If this is the best Friedman can do, he needs to stop writing.

[Whiskeyjim]

Cheney argued that even low probability suspects in the war on terror should be investigated. NSA capability is vast and capital cost is sunk, therefore the marginal cost of investigating leads is zero compared with the imminent danger of millions dead caused by a motivated enemy. Seems like a logical argument.

Friedman likens anthropogenic global warming (AGW) legislation to Cheney's argument; citizens should commission a vast global redistribution of trillions of dollars with questionable measurement without the benefit of the world's largest 'polluters' (destroying any guarantee of a positive result) against a distant fear of calamity which by IPCC predictions becomes less dire with every iterative model. The fallacy of comparing the two arguments is clear to any fifth grader. I critique his whole argument on my website.