This is a thoughtful response, and shows that we're actually pretty close. The science is mixed on whether humanity is better off I think - there are winners an

This is a thoughtful response, and shows that we're actually pretty close. The science is mixed on whether humanity is better off I think - there are winners and losers for sure. However, despeciation gets me most as it seems most irreversible, that and whether or not there are other feedback loops that we're not thinking about. I agree that it's overhyped, but the question here in on the margin. If we could take the insurance payment and put it towards alt./nuclear energy research we'd be killing a few birds. I don't see how our economy would be crippled by the "insurance" even at $1T in debt funding (remember how big TARP and the Treasury's loans were). Currently, we're putting far far more than this into overspend on the military ($1.5T/year) - which is defending resource and shipping interests far more than anything else. Couldn't we just solve those problems with similar funding?