Well I'm pleased you can do copy /paste and write your summary : "gets worse".
The tricky part is trying to express what gets worse.
hmmm?

Hi mhaze,
Don't know if I can answer your questions adequately - let alone to your satisfaction.
Optimal world human population - in my assessment, 4 billion. Why? Well, is more always better? I think not.
Our Mother Earth is exhibiting significant signs of distress - with accelerating species extinction, whales 'beaching' themselves (with no explanation from biological scientists), Beijing citizens suffocating with increasing frequency due to industrial air pollution, rivers and streams dying from toxic effluents from mining and industry (and from 'products' of excessive human population), unexplained 'mass' fish deaths, and plastics creating an oceanic pollution disaster.
We are such a 'clever' species, but can't even get out of our own way. 7.7 billion, and counting. When is enough, enough?

Posted by Philip S, 2 December 2018 8:51:40 PM (re G20):
"And here's what President Trump's doing.
21. The United States reiterates its decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, and affirms its strong commitment to economic growth and energy access and security, utilizing all energy sources and technologies, while protecting the environment."

Such a commitment to environmental 'husbandry' is staggering!

As for the latest exit from 'snowball earth' approx 17,700 years ago - we would certainly have to expect things to warm up after that, and for there to be subsequent climatic 'cycles' - including from periodic volcanic eruptions billowing CO2 - but fossil fuel combustion on a mass scale is surely an added and accelerating burden on nature's capacity to absorb such abuse, as evidenced, I repeat 'evidenced', by glacial and ice-cap shrinkage.
Not a 'proof' of 'detrimental' global temperature increase - or of anthropogenic climate change? Maybe not. But, a warning?
My contention is: 'responsible action' could only be beneficial - as long as measures employed don't exacerbate the current situation - and could well provide significant alleviation to severely stressed human and environmental global circumstances.
For some: If there is a God, and He/She advised 'Go forth and multiply', I suspect the hand-wringing would be causing blisters, and head-shaking at the destruction of 'Eden' causing a full-on migraine.

So, in not so much academic jargon what does the Parirs Climate Accord stipulate ?

The Accord is for Philip S heat from Radioactivity . " a new technology framework and an enhanced capacity building framework will be put in place, thus supporting action by developing countries and the most vulnerable countries," ( such as Antarctica which supplies ice to pubs and Sydney Fish Market). French nuclear processors will remove the radioactive rock from 3kms down and cool the earth by 4.3 degrees allowing Ardani coal to fire up.

Uranium is made from uranium . France invented it. Uranium was found to be radioactive by French physicist Henri Becquerel in 1896 . Antarctica was cold in 1896. France switched on Antarctica during its nuclear weapons testing which destroyed AGW.
They shrugged their shoulders saying "that's war".

Say, mhaze, (et al),

Did you catch Sir David Attenborough's assessment that "climate change is the world's greatest threat in millennia."?

He gets my vote. But no crowing, the games afoot, and question is "Where do we go from here"?
My preference is to enhance agricultural/horticultural/forestry development world-wide (ie maximised natural photosynthesis absorption processes) - including supporting struggling developing agronomist peoples and cultures, so as to reverse global deforestation and land degradation (particularly of major remaining forest habitats - Amazon, Borneo, Tasmania, West Aussie, Indonesia, Madagascar, Galapagos, India, Asia, Africa, America, Russia, Balkans ....).
Certainly we can embrace solar and hydro with gusto - and inland South Aussie is crying out for a super solar-concentrator facility (taking pumped sea water from the coast to distill or micro-sieve to provide floods of fresh water for irrigation, and to produce bulks of electricity by supporting steam generators.
Could solve SA's fresh drinking water and electricity demand problems for ... a millennium?
Go to it, Oz! We have a wide open country, and with confidence and vision we can help to save forests around the world and support developing nations to realize their potentials while still preserving and rehabilitating their unique environmental heritage - before it's all too late.