Fires: poor management not climate., page-285

It's not about scientific certainty at all. You totally misunderstand what I'm saying here.

And I have experience with risk management and the law.

With risk management you try to assess the risk if you are optimistic (that climate change is not upon us, and doesn't involve massive events) vs the realistic (that climate change may indeed be upon us and does involve massive events.)

The uncertainty that exists is at the margins now.

The framework convention on climate change has at it's foundations the precautionary principle:

That is lack of scientific certainty should not be used as a reason not to take preventive measures.

Why RISK. The risk of being wrong, by not taking preventive measures were potentially catastrophic.

Now events have overtaken this.

You should try to get a handle on these distinctions and they will inform your views.

Certainly the insurance industry has. They understand risk and they understood the issues 30 years ago.