>>8795139>Are we beyond the point of no returnThere is no clearly defined "
point of no return". Instead, there's a sliding scale of consequences, with a large lag in time. What level of consequences you would consider to be unacceptable determines where you would draw a "point of no return", which may well be in the past.
>quasi-orwellian controls on emissions, industry and people's everyday livesPollution controls aren't "quasi-orwellian", they're an accepted part of living in a functional society.
The tragedy of the commons is real, and all the libertarian tears in the world won't make it go away.
>>8795146>10 years ago they said we'd be underwater by nowWho is "they"?
>stupid doomsday cultDon't blame others for your shitty research skills.
>>8795165>what's the matter with a higher co2 environment anyway? Greenhouse warming will significantly reduce global crop yields, and some locations will see almost total collapse of all agriculture.
>with natural selection won't our kids just evolve/adapt to live with a slightly differently composed air?No, that's stupid.
>>8795175>It is rather too late for just emission controls to be effective.Nonsense. Emissions controls are nessisary to stop making the problem worse.'
>We also need to start geo engineeringNo proposed geo-engeneering idea is simultaneously affordable, actually effective, and likely to have side effects that are less than the warming it prevents.
>curb population of the developing world, China, and India.Basically all population demographics show that happening anyway. Birth rates are plummeting.
>>8795454>Never listen to scientists who say things I don't want to hear. 
