> What we're working off of is the hypothesis that co2 affects the climate in a meaningful and measureable way--this is what climate models are trying to show.

> What we're working off of is the hypothesis that co2 affects the climate in a meaningful and measureable way--this is what climate models are trying to show. However, thus far the models have struggled to make accurate predictions. This recent meta-analysis found the opposite, that the models are generally fairly accurate: https://www.google.com/amp/s/climate.nasa.gov/news/2943/study-confirms-climate-models-are-getting-future-warming-projections-right.amp https://www.google.com/amp/s/climate.nasa.gov/news/2943/stud... Additionally, on a practical level, it doesn't matter if there were major warming spikes millions of years ago. Civilization has only existed for ~10k years, at most. It seems incredibly irresponsible to bet everything on the chance that human civilization won't suffer stability issues from the enormous changes across the planet and to our current way of life that a 4-5° (or more) rapid increase would cause. It's not unlikely that warming of those levels over the next ~100 years could result in hundreds of millions of desperate migrants, drought and other extreme weather, widespread ecosystem collapse, catastrophic breakdown of supply chains and basic infrastructure, major war, etc. Life on Earth can recover from that. It has done so before. Human civilization probably won't be so unfazed. Let's just fix the damn carbon emissions. It will be much, much easier than dealing with the global crises unchecked climate change will bring. And on the plus side, doing so will also result in new technological development and economic growth.