I agree with what you say; I think those downvoting don't understand important things. My take on these questions: > How much governmental intervention is hel

I agree with what you say; I think those downvoting don't understand important things. My take on these questions: > How much governmental intervention is helpful? Climate crisis is similar to slowly unfolding war with a powerful, but slow adversary. A world war. So our good experiences and lessons from how to win a war could be helpful, including questions regarding government. How much government intervention is helpful in WWII? > How accurate are predictions of what is coming? Nice question, but sort of beside the point. Can be answered, but it leads away from the problem. Suppose our predictions are not too accurate. Given the stakes, we still have to do a lot of efforts, since in case we overestimated the problem the downside isn't big - comparing to potential downside of doing nothing. The truth is that we don't really know the certainty of predictions. Last time I've heard the climatologists were trying to be conservative - they reported about problems they were fairly sure to see, to avoid being called alarmists. Now we see that predictions were rather rosy comparing to actual - more grim - situation. But that's what I've heard. > What is the most efficient way to prevent climate change and how effective will those actions be? Start running right now. Otherwise - imagine similar question asked to JFK, when he announced the Moon race. How long would you think people can debate rather silly and theoretical topic at the time of flying to the Moon? Given that USSR wasn't that keen to fly there in the first place, there were plenty of reasons to be reasonable and save a lot of efforts and money. Didn't USA have better things to do? We can debate about effectiveness, but only if we're already running. Before that we first need to start running, however counterintuitive it could sound.