My position is the following: 1) the extent of past human interference with global climate is likely somewhat exaggerated, 2) the dangers of future human -
induced climate
change are greatly exaggerated (for example, I heard Ira Flatow a couple of weeks ago talking about the East coast being under water
in 50 years — which is complete piffle), 3) the numerical global climate do a poor
job of past reconstruction and are unlikely to be very reliable
in predicting the consequences of future human activity.
Even though it's impossible to forecast the exact pace of the
change induced by developments
in artificial intelligence as well as robotics, the odds are not looking great for many
jobs that are now considered normal elements of our economy.