Cost worth trying to address fallable long term global warming predictions?

The thing people overlook is that global warming scientists have been showing off data from the past, but it has been inaccurate in terms of predicting the future. Relatively, the long term global temperature predictions have so far been as accurate as trying to predict the weather one month from now. Popular speakers on the left basically have said it would take destroying our economy to decrease the carbon emissions to prevent a most likely inaccurate projection of what the global temperature will be in the future, and the current economic crisis has supported them by being able to bring carbon emissions below Kyoto Protocol limits when everything else has failed. So the main question everybody should be asking is if the cost of the destruction of our economy worth trying to address fallible long term predictions? If you are perfectly happy with the economy now and don't mind it getting worse, you should pursue the suggestions of the left full force.