Of course if there is, if the scientists are correct, and the right-wing-talking-heads are wrong, then we are all screwed.
The religious are sometimes fond of quoting Pascals Wager, as a reason for us all to believe in a god.
...since the existence of God cannot be proved or disproved through reason, and there is much to be gained from wagering that God exists and little to be gained from wagering that God doesn’t exist, a rational person should simply wager that God exists and live accordingly.[a]Why don't they apply the same reasoning to climate change:
Since you say the existence of climate change cannot be proved or disproved through reason, and there is much to be gained from wagering that it does*, and so much to be lost** from wagering that it doesn't, a rational person should simply wager that it is true and live accordingly.
*clean air, less pollution, less use of a dwindling supply of fossil fuels leading to greater economy of business resources, etc, etc, etc.
**planet wide flooding of low lying areas, rising temperatures making more land uninhabitable, crop loss due to temperature changes, damage to human health from pollution, etc., etc., etc..
[a] I actually find my wager much more convincing than Pascal's, as Pascal's is asking us to ignore science, and my wager is asking us to accept science.
More on methane release here.