Sadly I believe we are well past the point of no return.
There is so much momentum, first, there is no way they will curb emissions in time to do anything, secondly, even if they stopped all emissions today, the boulder is already rolling downhill, the climate is changing, the pendulum is now swinging away from the side that human society developed in. No way we can save the billions of people, No way most would try.
We love maths, yet we don't see that the numbers are now against us.

And, the Earth will be just fine after we kill ourselves off.

The tundra is melting. We are way past the point of no return.

We passed "no return" a few decades ago.
All we can do now is hope to mitigate what's coming, regardless the source ( man made vs. natural )

...I can't tell if you're mocking the doomsayers or being earnest.

If it's the latter, it's spelt 'arsenic' and... For fuck's sakes, I really hope this is a case of the former.

I read an article from the Washington post. it said that the warm gulfstream in the north Atlantic is reduced with 15% becouse of the melting fresh water from Greenland wich pushes the salt water down. This happened a few centuries also and then there was a so called small ice age here in Europe. What will happen now? Will climate warming compensate the effects, or will it start up a more chaotic climate with more and more extremes. Last week we had days from 27 degrees celcius in Belgium, the hottest ever known in april.Every year there are more different extremes since the nineties. It is getting scarie.

One of the biggest tasks is reforestation, so if you've got money to throw at a charity, look at the Inga foundation - they've found a way to restore degraded soils and restore forest while also enabling permanent farming to take place in small plots of land, replacing the need for slash and burn agriculture.

I agree, but I am not sure exactly what we are going to do about it. Shouting in all caps doesn't do anything. Propose a viable solution. Solar, wind, hydoelectric, geothermal, and others all have their place. Ultimately, fusion holds the hope if generating more energy than you put in with helium as the only by product. We have plenty of uses for heliym besides making funny voices so we don't have to woory about radioactivity.

I know this is a long post but here's a chemistry/physics logical explanation:

Let’s do the math: Gasoline is a fossil fuel which was pulled out of the ground from deposits that if left undisturbed would stay underground forever. Gasoline is octane with a chemical formula C8H18. C8H18 has a molar mass of 114.23g/mole. Carbon has a molar mass of 12.01g. There are 8 moles of carbon in one mole of octane so 8X12.01 = 96.08g so 84.1% of the mass of gasoline is carbon. The average tank size of a car is 45L. Gasoline has a density of 0.703kg/L so a regular fill up weighs 31.6Kg. That means one fill up has 26.6kg of fossil carbon (31.6kg X 84.1%). The molecular weight of carbon dioxide (CO2) is 44.01g/mole. For every mole of CO2 there is one mole of carbon or 12.01g which means for every 44.01kg of CO2 there’s 12.01kg of carbon. How much CO2 do you make when burning one tank of gasoline having 26.6kg of carbon? (44.01 X 26.6)/12.01 or 97.5kg.

If 1 ton equals 1000kg, it requires about 10 tank fills of gasoline to make 1 ton of atmospheric CO2. How many times do you fill your car per year? How many cars are on the road? This does not account for fossil fuel energy and heating. All the carbon comes from millions of year old dormant reservoirs which chemically locks up atmospheric oxygen. For every elevation of new dormant fossil carbon in the atmosphere, the atmospheric oxygen depletes. How can elevated atmospheric carbon not be driven by human activity. There is more deforestation than reforestation which could mitigate carbon emission somewhat. I don’t get how people don’t get it.