First off you don't get to just handwave away the conclusions of a group with a 72 year track record of engaging some of the best minds in the world to reach th

First off you don't get to just handwave away the conclusions of a group with a 72 year track record of engaging some of the best minds in the world to reach their conclusions. I urge you to take a little bit more time and familiarize yourself with the organization, it's goals, and it's methodologies before making baseless assertions that their conclusions are equivalent to astrology. Your claims regarding the reliability of food and medicine sources are questionable. They are predicated on a fragile system of international logistics that if disrupted would result in mass starvation worldwide. Geopolitical instability raises the odds of just such a disruption. Your assertion that existential threats like the threat of nuclear war were worse in the 90s is objectively false. All three of the world nuclear superpowers have active military operations with theater overlap. With these militaries operating in close proximity and occasionally bumping into each other the odds of an accidental escalation are greatly increased. The fact that the majority of the world has identified global warming as an existential threat is heartening but as other commenters have pointed out the world industrial superpowers have to get on board and start pursuing aggressive policy changes for meaningful change to take place. Unless or until that happens what the rest of the world chooses is largely irrelevant. TL;DR: I'm glad things are better for you now. It's not about you.