>>I think we tend to believe the (false) story about the frog, who boils to death because he can’t decide when it’s too hot, because that’s us, that’s human nature.

Yeah. it’s false: we have intellect, and understand (minimally) that our current decisions affect future outcomes. I think we just don’t want to accept the responsibility that we bear for having f’d up the planet, and don’t have an appreciation for what it really means when it’s dead and gone.

Also we suck so badly at long and medium-long timescales and have no appreciation for how bad it will actually get before it dies. As I have said before (I sound like a broken record) it really doesn’t matter how good, bad or ugly the climate models are. The only thing the models do is provide timescale(s). There could be 1000% error in the model and it doesn’t matter. The precautionary principle[1] would tell you: “you only get one planet. When it is gone, it is gone permanently. Ugh … Too many competing interests and too little cooperation.

Unless we discover some completely new physics we aren’t getting out of this galaxy … and probably will be constrained to this solar system without an in-depth understanding of that new physics. I know, that makes me a pessimist. But I think it’s actually just the hammer of reality in play.

[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/precautionary-principle