Here is Lindybeige using that argument to justify why you should hop on one foot, and ban football.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=6R999ZLlSdI" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=6R999ZLlSdI</a><p>But I agree that in general it&#x27;s good principle. For climate change it&#x27;s not that applicable. It&#x27;s easy to show that burning oil is good for the economy. It&#x27;s difficult to show that it&#x27;s bad for the climate. If we say that Shell needs to show some proof that burning oil is overall good two things will happen: 1. Shell forges bullshit. 2. Everybody keeps burning oil just like today until there is some kind of replacement. Just for practical reasons.<p>So then it goes to &quot;why we need to invest money to the alternatives&quot;. And then that precautionary principle could be applied to that investment.<p>TL;DR You need to show fossil fuels are bad, for practical reasons.