Andrew Bartlett is wrong
People are entitled to believe that the main scientific opinion regarding climate change is wrong, but with governments from virtually every country – as well as most scientists and the majority of the public - believing otherwise, the debate now has to be focussed 100 percent on what actions now need to be taken.
It is by no means certain that any money spent attempting to halt or even slow climate change will be money well spent. The way it looks, the planet is going to warm no matter what. So perhaps money would be better spent on adapting to a warmer Earth. Or perhaps expenditures should be calculated on the most cost effective mix of carbon emission reductions and climate change adaptations.
Total focus on emissions reductions is a classic example of "putting all of your eggs in one basket". If this money was to be spent on a certainty, fine, but it isn't.
There simply isn't enough money to both attempt to halt climate change and to fund strategies designed to help those most affected cope with a changing climate. The risks and benefits need to be carefully considered and funds allocated for the greatest overall benefit.