We're not yet 30% into the next century from 1990, so mean 0.3°C per decade is still possible.
Given how things are going, about 1°C by 2025 is still possible. Also, there was a slowing in temperature increase from 1998 to 2012. But now we're back at the long-term trend. I suspect that Chinese SOx emissions from coal played a role, by increasing cloudiness. Cuts in SOx emissions in the 70s arguably increased the warming rate. And if that's true, the shit will hit the fan as China cuts coal use. Because the residence halflife for SOx is so much lower than that for CO2.
I don't know the water stress stuff. But California has been pretty screwed. Let's see what happens in the US Southwest over the next decade or so.
Maybe we still have Himalayan glaciers, but high-altitude glaciers have generally not fared so well, I think.
You're misusing that data on area burned by fires. The page actually says ...
> The ongoing transition from nomadic cultures to settled lifestyles and intensifying agriculture has led to a steep drop not only in the use of fire on local lands, but in the prevalence of fire worldwide, researchers found.
... and ...
> Across Africa, fires typically burn an area about half the size of the continental United States every year, said Niels Andela, a research scientist at Goddard and lead author on the paper. In traditional savanna cultures with common lands, people often set fires to keep grazing lands productive and free of shrubs. As many of these communities have shifted to cultivate more permanent fields and to build more houses, roads and villages, the use of fire declines. As economic development continues, the landscape becomes more fragmented, communities often enact legislation to control fires and the burned area declines even more.
The recent experience in Russia, northern Europe, California, etc does seem consistent with predictions. But I agree that there's not enough data to be confident yet.