I seriously miss your point. I think your graph suggests a very different conclusion as far as humans are concerned. What’s fine for the CO2 may be horrible for humans. I think you’ve heard the term “Anthropocene”. It is the time of humanity in geologic terms… a very small period shown at the end of your graph (which by the way conspicuously doesn’t suggest that there have ever been ice ages). It’s been a time of climate stability which was important to human development, particularly of relatively constant ocean levels. Notice that it’s fairly cool, only about 60% of the typical temperature shown in the graph. It’s a lot nicer than that 22c temperature dominating the graph. Now if the temperature rises… and the ice melts, all the coastal plains where the majority of humanity lives… will be underwater. Do we have a cost estimate on that? Since there are essentially no yearly freezes, the insects will thrive as well as some diseases. You can’t have human-style agriculture when the insects rule. A lot of humanity is dependant on glacial ice providing water during the summer… That will be gone. One of the points of my larger study is how blunt and brutal nature is compared to how humans plan and like things. Your graph suggests that the current CO2 levels and temperatures are a lot nicer than is common on Earth. I think you have suggested what the scientists have been saying. Increased CO2 levels are going to make things miserable.