Sure... but the other side didn't get a chance, thanks to communication jamming.
Did you read the next line:
To be clear, the meaninglessness of cost benefit analyses also applies to analyses that say adaptation is a better option.
What I said is it is impossible to quantify future damages from climate change which makes any cost benefit analysis based on future damages an exercise in ideology - something that is true no matter what the opinion produced by said analyses.
I also went on to provide reasons for preferring adaptation as a strategy that does not require a cost benefit analysis.