Denying the scientific reality in the name of 'beneficial climate messaging' is just as bad as doing it in the name of 'beneficial fossil fuel messaging'. The

Denying the scientific reality in the name of 'beneficial climate messaging' is just as bad as doing it in the name of 'beneficial fossil fuel messaging'. The so-called 'tipping point' has come and gone and now the planet is committed to steady long-term warming. Eliminating fossil fuel use would not result in not reaching 2 degrees (which is a global average, so the poles would be significantly warmer by tens of degrees) - even this paper doesn't claim that, they merely note that it might be pushed back some decades past 2100. Warming is unavoidable so major expenditure on whatever adaptations are possible is just as necessary as getting off fossil fuels, and ignoring that reality will set many areas up for long-term disasters in the near future. Another uncomfortable reality is that politicians in all fossil-fuel producing nations may give lip service to climate concerns, but in reality none of them are going to try to shut down the most profitable economic activity in their countries. That's what the record shows in the USA as well.