Which is moving the goalposts and changing the question. He's asking if a "hypothetical human time traveler" could survive hundreds of millions of years ago, and based off historical CO2 data, it could be possible.
You are picking pedantic arguments instead of focusing on the actually important themes, which isn't productive or useful
Let's get everything on the table. Are you actually okay with dozens of millions to hundreds of millions of people dying -- and many others suffering immense drops in quality of life -- as a result of human-caused climate change? Despite the fact that we have the capacity to heavily mitigate such risks?
