Correct me if I'm wrong. Timber rattlesnakes - right? I can understand the correlation between habitat destruction and dwindling populations, but melting glaciers and global warming should be dealt with easily. My Pythons living in their upstairs room with a temperature maintained above 75 would hate temps going down but could easily deal with increases and during the Summer they do.
To relate this to the environment(mine), not only do I get personal pleasure from them, but their manure in my garden discourages rodents and other varmints.

Chad, the science in support of global warming is pretty clear; however, policy response to potential threats to economy and politics is not part of the science. Anthropogenic forcing of climate is now increasingly apparent too, but climatologists and related scientist tend to avoid the subject except in the broadest terms. Most will readily admit to not having a clue about altering or much affecting human impacts other than to advocate policies toward reducing emission rates of greenhouse gases and to press for improved carbon sinking. Those are engineering and bioscientific matters better not left to climatologist and allied scientists.

Sure there are some frightening scenarios associated with proposed worst-case projections of climatological models. The odds of arriving at these worst-case scenarios are increasingly lower as one nears the worst possible case. Arguing over these scary projects is like arguing science fiction and possible imminent arrival of a colliding asteroid.

So I would not trust either extreme for predicting the course and severity of environmental changes. There are those that see humans as the scourge of the earth's biosphere, parasitic and blindly apathetic, and will always expect the worst. Then there are those on the other extreme that sees humans as stewards of all creatures and other parts of this earth to do what humans wish in meeting todays needs for space, resources, and the good life. Some of these folks hold to a higher value and practice good stewardship while other through blindness or willfulness, exploit the earth for humans only.

You will never get those two extremes to sit down together short of catastrophe, human or environmental.

What worries me more is the possibility that climates will "flip" to a new steady state over the course of decades rather than centuries or millenia. Such abrupt climate warming (or cooling) would put severe stresses on both the bioenvironment and on humankind. Humans have neither the social institutions nor the technological wherewithal to adjust to accommodate all humans to the changed habitats.