Yours is a pretty common take I see among climate skeptics, and it's getting downvoted without serious rebuttals, so I'll try a serious rebuttal. 1. If you're

Yours is a pretty common take I see among climate skeptics, and it's getting downvoted without serious rebuttals, so I'll try a serious rebuttal. 1. If you're not seeing how it's already happening, maybe you don't want to see it? Forest fires, extreme heat waves, coral bleaching, flooding, escalating storms, ... For sure there are denials of those things all over the internet ("it's always been this bad", "it's not actually that bad"), but those denials are wrong when you fact check them. And this is nothing really, we've barely had any consequences of global warming. If you go back and look at the IPCC predictions even from the 90's you'll find they were pretty accurate with where we are today. The current IPCC report is pretty much settled science, and the outlook is not good. 2. The BRIC countries definitely need to do their part, but "what about tommy" is not a defense in kindergarten and for sure is not one for grown up countries. Most of the carbon that's up there was put there by the west, and the west is still putting more up there year by year than ever before. The notion that the west already did its part is provably false. Western countries carry the largest responsibility because they're the ones that "spent" the carbon budget preventing others from industrializing in the same way. If and when they are doing their part, then and only then will they have the moral high ground to start demanding the same from other countries. 3. Greta Thunberg has a solid handle on climate science, a more solid grasp than most of her critics, and is mostly right about climate facts. She is also very extreme in her climate opinions, which has allowed others to dismiss her as a wacko. Usually her speeches when read in their entirety make a lot of sense, but the distortion that gets reported by popular press makes it easy to dismiss her. What I would suggest is to go straight to the source and read her climate book. It contains her actual views and the facts they are based on, and if nothing else it will allow you to empathize with her point of view, even if you don't end up agreeing with it. If you think she's a puppet or a wacko I feel confident in saying you know nothing about her at all, and have been forming your opinions based on misrepresentations of her in the media.