I'd venture that putting pavement all over the earth's surface, chopping down forests, turning all of the earth's surface into farm land, etc has done far more harm to other wildlife on earth. Humans are simply destroying everything in our path. A few degrees temperature change in the next 100 years is really fairly mild compared to everything else we're doing to mess with and destroy animals' habitats. This habitat destruction has happened far more rapidly, and there is absolutely zero political will to stop or reverse it as well.
Reversing habitat destruction and protecting species is one of Extinction Rebellion's main aims, but I'm guessing your definition of 'political will' excludes them. Pity the US branch is retarded.
Yeah, by "political will" I mean what is discussed and approved in the media, academia, politicians, corporations, etc. There are people and groups (and some outlier philanthropists devoted to conservation) who care about these issues and do have a desire to make massive societal changes towards conservation, but the elite will not tolerate or advocate any meaningful changes that interfere with the consumer economy. Mainstream environmental causes for them are essentially controlled opposition and merely a safety valve to prevent instability to the system and their control.
Humanity has endured ice ages, but a few degrees change would more than decimate many species, including humans.