I tend to think the issue is blown out of proportion. Here four reasons:

1. The polar bears survived the last hot period in which the pole caps melted, so why should they die out this time? (Unless of course you believe the world has been created 6000 years ago..)
2. Warm periods are prosperous times. All empires in history flourished when the climate was warm and civilization broke down when it got cold again.
3. It won't make much of a difference if we try to cut the CO2 emissions now or go on for another 30 years, because in both cases the necessary technology (cheap+reliable renewables+batteries) will need another 30 years to be good enough.
4. Tackling climate change would first and foremost require to halt the global population growth, because more people create more CO2 and the less children families have, the more the average income increases which is needed to buy eco-friendly products. The question is: Why does the global climate elite not push for a comprehensive population politics for Afghanistan, Somalia and parts of Subsahara Africa?

Well, that's my two cents. Feel free to criticize :-)