I'll agree that there are certain things that warrant being a good steward for the betterment of our natural environment but I'm not convinced that anthropogenic factors (co2) warrant concern over a self-regulating climate.

Evidence obtained from research carried out has measured much greater volatility in the Earth's temperature and this happened before the use of abiotic fuel sources. Ascribing co2 to that is not only inaccurate, it's actually wrong.

Erroneously assessing anthropogenic effects by referencing the last few hundred years of the Holocene is not even referencing data from earlier times in the Cenozoic epoch (which has corroborated greater climatic variation and a greater degree of volatility.)

But we can agree to disagree on this until there is real scientific debate that lends credibility to the notion. As the situation stands, published scientific research and political overreach steer debate and attempt to gaslight public consensus.

IMO, peace and contentment can only be found in truth itself which will guide rationality and ultimately an equitable, symbiotic understanding of, and relationship with nature. Not trying to be divisive. I welcome debate.