no more beavers ... not that would be bad

There is some error in his logic. Suppose, Hitler alleges that the Jews will ruin the world unless we exterminate them all. The 2 rows on his whiteboard are 1 - The Jews will ruin the world OR 2 - They won't. Since we don't know and can't control that outcome, we shouldn't think about it. But, we can control our reaction (the columns). Hitler would argue that if we do nothing and the Jews do evil, we are ruined. If we do nothing and the Jews don't ruin the world, we guessed correctly. BUT - if we exterminate them, we save the world if the Jews really were that evil. And, if we guess incorrectly and exterminate them needlessly...you see my point? Hitler would argue that the only logical choice is the Holocaust. This video is persuasive, but the logic doesn't hold up for me.
DISCLAIMER: I am NOT comparing this fellow or anyone else holding to his viewpoint with Hitler. I am simply using Hitler to make a point. I trust that anyone reading this will respond with the maturity with which my comments are written.

If anyone is really interested in this topic, may I suggest this link?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15391426/site/newsweek/

It's a story about how the press was predicting massive global cooling back in the 70's.

Thanks for responding to my remarks in the same spirit in which I wrote them.

I suppose I should have said that the 2 rows are these: If you don't send me $1,000 I will destroy the world. Thus, I either will or won't. Using his logic, the only sane thing for you to do is to mail your check. (You MUST do your part to save the world!)

Let me know if you need my snail mail address. :-)