Are you genuinely willing to be open to the possibility that climate change might be worse than you think? If you are curious about the science behind climate

Are you genuinely willing to be open to the possibility that climate change might be worse than you think? If you are curious about the science behind climate change, here: http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/371/2001/20120294#sec-8 http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/371/2001/2012... is a link to a paper by James Hansen from 2013, which provides a technical but good overview of the whole field. My favorite quote: "Burning all fossil fuels would produce a different, practically uninhabitable, planet. Let us first consider a 12 W m−2 greenhouse forcing, which we simulated with 8×CO2. ... Our calculated global warming in this case is 16°C, with warming at the poles approximately 30°C. Calculated warming over land areas averages approximately 20°C. Such temperatures would eliminate grain production in almost all agricultural regions in the world [130]. ... More ominously, global warming of that magnitude would make most of the planet uninhabitable by humans. The human body generates about 100 W of metabolic heat that must be carried away to maintain a core body temperature near 37°C, which implies that sustained wet bulb temperatures above 35°C can result in lethal hyperthermia. Today, the summer temperature varies widely over the Earth's surface, but wet bulb temperature is more narrowly confined by the effect of humidity, with the most common value of approximately 26–27°C and the highest approximately of 31°C. A warming of 10–12°C would put most of today's world population in regions with wet a bulb temperature above 35°C [132]." The reason this is not more well known has to do with the fact that climate denial is funded by very deep pocketed fossil fuel companies and ideological activists: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/feb/14/funding-climate-change-denial-thinktanks-network https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/feb/14/funding-... The problem here is that many people on the right have a deep set ideological, almost religious belief system that markets are rational and can solve every problem, when that is clearly and obviously not the case. Corporations only act to increase shareholder value; to the extent that they behave morally it's because of the legal framework they operate in. And if they can buy politicians to avoid paying the costs of pollution, and save money by doing so, then of course they will. And that's what is happening. If they are doing a cost benefit analysis, and the benefit of humanity at large is a cost to them, then they don't care.