You clarified, it makes sense, I'm fine with that.
If a longer-term horizon is employed for global warming, similar things can be said about the Y2K bug and global warming.
I.e.,
The problem is real.
Left unaddressed, there could be serious consequences.
Some/many of the most serious consequences are over-hyped and are not realistic scenarios.
That doesn't mean nothing should be done about it. The problem with global warming is identifying the most effective "fixes". With the Y2K bug, the cause was obvious, and the mitigation procedures could be clearly defined. Not so for climate.
I'm glad we could reach an understanding somewhere.
Thanks for understanding. Sometimes i don't realize how my words will come out until I read them back. Again, I apologize.
With both Y2k and GW, I'd suggest the same pattern is in effect - the press finds something that is a normal part of the system. They then over-dramatize the story to grab viewers.
Climate change is real, I agree. It is always either warming or cooling, it never stays the same. The press' insistence this is a) the end of the world as we know it and b) human caused is all hype.
The press takes a normal part of life and hype it up to mythic proportions.