[Pilfer]

>A hypothetical human time traveler, however, wouldn't survive a hypothetical time travel back to [the Cambrian explosion].

I assume you are referencing about CO2 levels. Yes, around ~500 million years ago, CO2 levels reached 10,000ppm, which would be hazardous (but not fatal) to a human traveler. However if you pick a point between 300 million years ago and today, when CO2 levels were at 1000-2000ppm, a human traveler would have no problem surviving in that environment. Heck, it is even possible to hit those CO2 levels in a modern day warehouse or office that is poorly ventilated.

Increased CO2 levels are very survivable and do not mean the end of the human race.

[epistasis]

The question isn't whether some humans will survive or not, but where they will survive, and how expensive it is to adjust to that change.

[Pilfer]

Which is moving the goalposts and changing the question. He's asking if a "hypothetical human time traveler" could survive hundreds of millions of years ago, and based off historical CO2 data, it could be possible.

[dwaltrip]

You are picking pedantic arguments instead of focusing on the actually important themes, which isn't productive or useful

Let's get everything on the table. Are you actually okay with dozens of millions to hundreds of millions of people dying -- and many others suffering immense drops in quality of life -- as a result of human-caused climate change? Despite the fact that we have the capacity to heavily mitigate such risks?

[gameswithgo]

obtuse levels are high here. goal posts moved on a goal post already moved. goal post was being moved back