There's plenty of science looking at those trajectories and arguing about if we are on schedule and what needs to be done to stick to the schedule and if its enough.
But its a bit more sophisticated than, if the line isn't going down today, we should just give up.
Another weird thing is that, it's fairly easy to make fossil fuels less carbon intense to eke them out a bit longer e.g. don't flare or leak raw methane which is much worse than the carbon you'd get from burning it. That's a good change that actually increases fossil fuel production and that we currently subsidize doing the opposite in the US.
Not to mention, we've recently seen things like Germany's Green government approving the construction of new coal-based power plants when they couldn't get enough gas from Russia, which really tells you how likely we are to move to renewables very quickly.
Most of the money going into renewables has been in addition to existing fossil fuel plants, so at best covering growth in energy demands. But to stop global warming at 2.5 degrees, we need a sharp decline in fossil fuel consumption, and that just isn't happening, not globally and not in most places in the world locally either.
Shipping industries plan:
https://www.globalmaritimeforum.org/getting-to-zero-coalitio...
Aviation's plan:
https://www.iata.org/en/programs/environment/flynetzero/
Road freight's plan:
https://www.weforum.org/projects/decarbonizing-road-freight-...
Where are you seeing this? In the last few years alone there has been hundreds of billions if not trillions put into renewable energy.