"The likely future of access to water in such a world is dark, indeed. George Monbiot of The Guardian writes that an increase in average global temperatures of 1.5° C—that is, a mere 0.7-0.8° C beyond the level relative to pre-industrial temperatures that has already been achieved due to historical emissions—exposes some 400 million humans to what he refers to rather dryly as water stress, while an average global temperature increase of 2.1° C is estimated to place between 2.3 and 3 billion people at risk of outright water shortages. Monbiot’s compatriot Mark Lynas finds a 2° C rise in average global temperatures to nearly eradicate the mountain glaciers on which the millions who currently reside in Peru, Ecuador, and Bolivia depend upon for their water, and he claims a 3° C such rise to imply a drastic reduction in the Himalayan glaciers that today provide life for more than half of humanity.
Without serious action aimed at mitigating the consequences of climate change in the near term, these average temperatures increases—to say nothing of even more apocalyptic ones—will likely come to pass. A poll conducted in April found nine out of ten climatologists to believe that humanity would fail to limit global warming to 2° C, while the UK Met Office recently concluded that a 4° C average-temperature increase—a temperature increase that Met scientists claim would threaten the water supply of half the world’s population—could well occur by the year 2060. Just two weeks ago, in fact, scientists with the Global Carbon Project found the prospect of a 6° C average-temperature increase by the end of the century—an eventuality that would problematize the existence of the vast majority of currently existing humanity—to be entirely within the realm of possibility.
With regard to climate change then, present reality seems far worse than even the most pessimistic observers could have imagined some time ago. Both the present concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere as well as their current rates of emission are far higher than they should be if much of humanity is to have a chance of flourishing in the foreseeable future. The world’s leaders, especially the most powerful among them, have decidedly failed to address this emergency with the sense of urgency it requires. The climate legislation proposed by the lawmaking body of the society most responsible for climate change—the United States—calls for reductions in carbon emissions on a scale entirely inadequate for preventing catastrophic climate change, and Barack Obama has recently expressed that no binding treaty should be expected from the decidedly critical Copenhagen climate summit that will take place next month. Parallels with other examples of imperial arrogance—the recent overwhelming rejection by U.S. legislators of the Goldstone report, for example, or the Obama administration’s caving on the question of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem—could be made."
The people opposed to doing anything about this, including all the Bloggers For Exxon and anybody who talks up 'Climategate' into a conspiracy, are nothing more than 'I'm all right Jack' sociopaths hiding behind a veneer of pseudo-scepticism in order to justify their selfishness. We see this pseudo-scepticism everywhere now, particularly in the United States - where American power has been thought to insulate Americans from the effects of the facts, including scientific facts - and it forms the basis of the creationist arguments that evolution is only a 'theory' and the refusnik vaccination nutters who can dabble with the alternative medicine quacks because they get a free immunological ride from the fact that moral and decent people have all been vaccinated. The climate sociopaths fear that it will be a few more cents more expensive to fill up the Hummer so they can drive the Hummer to the mountain so they can drive the ATV up the mountain so they can wreck the mountain driving motorcycles back down. Of course, psychopath corporations like Exxon don't like the science as the plans are to increase energy costs - therefore reducing demand - while not passing the excess profits to the producers, thus making their businesses less profitable (why is this so hard to understand? - selling less stuff at the same percentage profit levels equals less profit).
The phony scepticism has created a conspiracy theory that climate change is just a scam created for traders to make money. Of course, they will make money. The economic solutions have been devised by economists working within a capitalist system. If you have a problem with the economics of the solution you should be leading the revolution, not dooming most of the world with your selfishness.