When you only have a single Petri dish in which to make observations, and you also happen to eat your lunch out of that same dish, waiting for the science to lock into even greater certainty than that which has been established over the last fifty years or so is a less wise way to approach the matter. Observations of biodiversity loss are, for me, sufficient to move beyond the debating and towards the changing phase.
>I'm far more concerned about the effects of air pollution, acidification etc than a slight increase in temperatures (do not misinterpret: I say more concerned, both are concerning)
Also greatly concerning, but elements of the same whole which needs to be addressed. I think we’re on the same page here - my overall position is that singular focus on targeted solutions for only one aspect of the problem ignores the wider picture and will likely lead to second-order effects which cannot be foreseen.
CO2 as far as air pollution goes it is a nasty topic also. We’re starting to understand the impact of CO2 on human cognition at the local scale. If we consider that the removal of lead from petrol was linked to a significant down-turn in human aggression, what’s the world going to look like if the entire population runs 24/7 with the equivalent of a morning headache, effectively dropping the global IQ by a significant amount?
> Homo sapiens is extremely young, we are born of an ice age. 415ppm is among the lowest CO2 concentrations of all time, ever.
From an anthropogenic POV I’m not sure how this is a good thing. It’s higher than its ever been in the period that allowed humans to develop.
That’s assuming we’re talking about humankind and society as the thing we’re really seeking to save here.
We could also talk about biodiversity, but then the rate of change is probably a more significant element than the resting level. We’re spiking the level at a rate only previously seen during mass extinction events, and it follows that if we did want to draw back down to a lower level again for the purpose of allowing life to flourish again it probably couldn’t be at the same rate.