> Please keep conspiracy theories out of your argument It's not a conspiracy theory. You will find plenty of scientists who participated in the IPCC process an

> Please keep conspiracy theories out of your argument It's not a conspiracy theory. You will find plenty of scientists who participated in the IPCC process and were disillusioned by it saying the same thing. I'm simply explaining why I don't accept the IPCC reports as scientific gospel the way you do. We obviously aren't going to reach agreement on that here. That said, as I have already pointed out, you're not even correctly describing what the IPCC reports say: > Humans adapt, but those adaptions are often deadly What I quoted from the IPCC says nothing about these "deadly" adaptations. It describes humans adapting through the ordinary peaceful processes of life and economics. > Humans can adapt in decades, ecosystems need millenia to adapt, and humans are dependent on their environment. Humans adapted to the warming at the end of the Younger Dryas, which was a much larger change than what is expected to occur to us by 2100 and was on the same time scale (about a century), with Stone Age technology. The idea that we cannot adapt to this much smaller change with 21st century technology without suffering a catastrophe is laughable. And if the world would expect a fraction as much effort on actually helping to adapt as it spends on wringing its hands about impending catastrophe, the adaptation would be even easier. The 20th century saw massive restructuring of the economies of the world due to two World Wars, continuing industrialization, computers, and the Internet. Adapting to climate change in the 21st century should be a no brainer.