Oh, trust me, climate scientists don’t ignore these feedbacks - they spend a lot of time studying them. The model runs for the next IPCC report are just starting to come in, and the representation of some of these feedbacks is much better in the new generation of models, which means in turn that the latest generation of models are showing higher sensitivity to increased GHGs. So the next IPCC report will certainly say it’s worse than we thought.
But a good scientist won’t report things that they don’t have data to support, and won’t talk about concepts that don’t have a clear definition. That’s not stupid, it’s pretty wise - scientists who do this lose their credibility fast. What’s stupid is that we never trained a generation of journalists & commentators in the science, ready to explain the science to a lay audience and talk clearly and rationally about the implications.
