I'm also assuming that you're goodwill for other species ends at insects and bacteria
Likewise the biomass of humans and cattle have an impact that can definitely be considered at the extremes of what nature has to offer.
Do you think that a 1.5C+ increase in global temperature in a century is also something typical of the natural cycles?
Yes. By definition, we are part of nature. But it wouldn't matter even if it wasn't, my contention is that it won't be the apocalypse it's made out to be.
Against the evidence of every branch of the natural sciences that studies the problem from every conceivable angle and consistently say the effects are actually going to be much worse.
I don't hold it that you're the kind of person that goes out there every day pointing out issues in the ECMWF models, or telling biologists that their understanding of crop performance is actually _all wrong_ and crops will magically create new adaptability measures out of nowhere, or showing that the human body can actually stand nighttime temperatures that we already know it can't stand.
I'm not talking about meteorological outcomes but sociopolitical ones like massive migrations, outbreaks of political unrest. I also think climatologists step outside their remit when they make such claims.
I don't doubt 1.5c, I doubt the end of humanity
It's just too vague to rebuff...