Thanks for posting but this comes as no surprise after we realise that the temperature rise is directly connected with profits made.
A reminder how it works, for anyone who hasn't seen before, our activity for profit results in energy being extracted from the planet for every profitable transaction, by money being energy always, it always has a price per KWhr in markets, so when money makes money, energy is also gained. That energy had to come from somewhere because energy can't be created or destroyed, just pushed around. The planet is the only thing that can yield more energy out than was put in, so the planet has to be the source of all energy gained by profit.
When we look closely at the extraction process, it involves far more energy lost to heat by the planet than energy gained. We never account for the loss to the planet in considerations of profit only what was gained or lost by the two participants trading in terms of money without consideration of energy in the transaction. The energy lost by the planet comes from the materials or non heat energy which is converted to heat quantifiable by E=MC squared.
What we are doing is constantly converting everything historically created by nature from the energy of the sun, back to the heat the energy would have become as if nature never used it. We are literally undoing everything done by nature and the temperature is actually a measurement how far we have gone in this destruction, towards the destruction of all life.
Obviously that has to change, and is changing, but not fast enough.
The much needed change happening is us switching to solar energy rather than any energy from the planet.
Our use of solar has the opposite effect of what we do by extracted energy, by this we are creating rather than destroying, hydrogen fuel from solar powrered electrolysis is a good example, there we are converting the energy of the sun to something other than heat, the material of hydrogen, again per E=MC squared.
We have massive potential to do that by domestic and community solar hydrogen, the more population could do this the better, we could easily rapidly functionally replace fossil by this, even keeping all planes in the air, in fact probably even bringing back some classic icons lost to profit such as concorde and space shuttle (soon also ISS given it too is scheduled to become scrap as things stand)
But we have to get rid of the need for profit, so as to stop the practice of profit.
We can't have both worlds, they can't work together there is no such thing as net zero, we can only have net positive or net negative. They are mathematical opposites, doing both would imply doing nothing, and all effort towards doing both has to manifest as actually more extracted energy used, thus more destruction / more heat generated.
This includes all carbon mitigation efforts, of course as long as they are fueled by extracted energy, they have to result in actually accelerating temperature rise. Recall all effort for profit can only be supplied the energy it uses from energy extracted from Earth.
Profit is physically incompatible with the energy of the sun because the sun can't be conned to give more energy than it already gives for free.
Sorry to harp on in response to your very important story, but it's important we all understand the fundamental action of profit, to understand how it connects exclusively to destruction, and temperature rise, carbon pollution is not the root cause of the temperature rise, just a multiplier of mathematically negative energy use.
I think conventional science does not know much about this, or if they do it is in private, because most scientists are locked into the profit driven system, they dare not question it for fear of losing their careers by being defunded.