You're right, some people do use the absence of absolute certainty as a reason to "wait and see." My position was that "Inaction" does not mean we take resources we were going to use to fight climate change and throw them into the sea. Those resources can make life better today. In particular I worry that the developing world will be forced to pay more for energy in hopes of benefitting of their grandchildren. The grandchildren might benefit more by allowing the developing world to develop with fewer hindrances. Look at the list of troubles above. Thousands of people killed by heat waves. Also: a fire in a park, Londoners sweating, some overheated computers, thirty vehicles damaged by wildfire with no injuries, strong rains. California has heat waves too. Is the present, urgent problem the inconvenience of Los Angeles automobile owners filing insurance claims, or the lack of air conditioning in the Indian subcontinent?Having some doubt doesn't mean the best course is to stand by and wait, but I think it is reasonable to ask if there is enough evidence to justify costly interventions and how much benefit they will provide.