The most immediate implication is that far more attention needs to be paid to understanding atmospheric/ocean interplay before we rush blindly into policy options that will exact a severe cost for no measurable gain.
The suggestions also highlight how little we really do know about the most fundamental of relationships regarding global climate patterns: clarifying cause and effect accurately is both a fairly basic and critical step that the complexity of climate dynamics makes very challenging. It also is a step outside the present mandate of the IPCC process which is tasked only to consider the effects of anthropogenic impacts on climate. A step professional climatologists take with a fair degree of caution and consideration of career and personal integrity.
Everyone keeps saying how fundamental climate is to the future of the planet. If we accept this premise, is it not also too important to constrain within a self-fulfilling prophecy and dogma that is ideologically driven rather than reflective of scientific conjecture and refutation?