It's a good thing I didn't take that job in NYC after all. It's like he thinks climate science is anti business science. In all of the climate science talks I went to or work I've done no one ever said anything about what businesses should or shouldn't do. It's simply studying the massive amounts of satellite and other real life evidence, trying to unravel cause and effect of dozens of trends.
Climate scientists are blessed with insanely large sample sizes to work with, far more so than many other branches of science. Working with just one month's worth of data from just 1 satellite I got in trouble for using 60% of a supercomputer's resources. The evidence is there, yet there are still many aspects to study.
He ignores all of the new cleaner technology that has been created in the name of it, and all of the sales and jobs that came along with said tech.
Whether you "believe" in climate change or not (which is stupid, you could just say you don't believe in almost any science, yet we are where we are because of it) who wants to live in excess pollution and breath in polluted air?
If we had simply implemented all of the current clean energy tech this wouldn't even be a debate. If there were enough solar and wind and hydroelectric plants we wouldn't bother burning coal. Building these plants would create jobs and remove dependence on some resources and give us cleaner air, what is wrong with this idea to any reasonable person? True climate scientists are not even directly suggesting this, they simply study and gather data with an honest and open mind.