"It's worse than we thought." Sound familiar?

[AverageJoe90]

60. Well.....

Neither of these situations apply to fossil fuel use. It is the lifeblood of the global economy; replacements are not available; if replacements do become available it will require changes to global energy infrastructure; nations see a competitive advantage in not agreeing to restrictions or changes, and have a sovereign right to refuse;

Some of this may be true to some extent, but there's a demonstrated, accepted risk with ACC, too(even though the deniers will claim otherwise!). And there certainly are viable replacements to fossil fuels. Hemp is just one of the more popular examples. Had it not been for the dirty dealings of certain parties over the years, alternative fuels would likely already be readily available on a large scale as well.

The biggest problem remains to be the status quo; the one bit of good news is that Hurricane Sandy appears to have provided a major blow in favor of US, for once.

Hell, even someone like you, who claims to get it, steadfastly refuses to allow worst-case scenarios into the conversation and urges caution in accepting dire projections.

Caution, yes, but not the kind you're thinking of. What I DO caution against, is telling people that the worst-case scenarios are inevitable and that there's nothing we do can about it, sort of like what irresponsible muttonheads like Guy McPherson and Malcolm P.R. Light have been throwing around lately.
My personal stance is, yes, we should keep the worst-case scenarios in mind, but not to let it really dominate our thinking at the same time, while also keeping the "Precautionary Principle" in mind: The worst-case scenarios(6-7*C if most or all feedbacks play out by 2100 or so) may not come to pass but it is rather prudent to be prepared for the worst anyhow.