When governments worldwide accept that climate change is doing avoidable harm, it is the ostriches who not only bury their heads in the sand but also ask of others to do so that peddle poison.

I wouldn't pay much mind to the public positions of governments, particularly when there's money on the line. Nothing is simple in geopolitics.

>while everything keeps getting better.

Are out of control wildfires, intense tropical storms, prolonged heat waves and rising sea levels a part of your analysis there?

To be fair, the chances of those events increasing in that way are pretty slim, even according to climate science.

Wildfires are getting worse because we've completely messed up forest management.

Tropical storms are getting worse because we keep building in vulnerable areas and destroying all the swampland that can actually buffer the storm.

We haven't had accurate weather measurements long enough to know what is and isn't an abnormal heat wave.

Sea levels move around quite a bit in the long term, which is why they always find remnants of fishing villages under water or up away from shore.

The world isn't static, and pretending that it is often causes more harm than good.

My standard measure for such claims is to ask myself whether I would believe someone from 1900 making the same predictions about present day.

Anything larger than a time scale of 5 to 10 years (maybe 20 at the very high end) is just people making predictions that they aren't going to be around to collect on.

Reminds me of the original 7th day adventists, who were sure they knew the day Jesus was coming back. They sold everything and lo and behold, Jesus didn't come back. So what did they do? Back to the drawing board and re-run the calculations.

Instead of following the data and seeing what the conclusion should be, people get caught up on picking their conclusion and doing their damnedest to make the data support it.