Climate realists - the question is what can be accomplished at a personal level

I tripped into a climate conversation when visiting family. I mentioned that oil company scientists used models that predicted 400+ ppm of CO2 in the air. I thought the accuracy of modelling was interesting. Back in the '80s greenhouse effects were pretty well known but it seems like people equate the '80s with the 1880s (where the greenhouse effect was also known).

I was interesting to hear the talking points brought out - I could refute them because I was aware of them.

There was the scientists disagree point - I said 97% of the scientists who study climate agree that this human driven. I was interested in finding out how much is human driven and it's ... all of it. In the '80s, there was talk of cooling because the natural climate cycle of Earth indicated we were due for a cooling cycle. Response was what about volcanoes! I asked if they seriously though there is more volcano activity than before. No answer.

There was profiting by environmentalists. When I asked who I was told Suzuki and Gore. Especially Gore with his movie (Inconvenient Truth); look at how he got laughed at. I said climate scientists never laughed at the movie and they are the ones who study climate.

The problem with saying the world is ending in the next few decades from climate. I agreed that was silly, of course the world would still be here. We would just have more and more extreme events like fires and flooding and our resources (aka taxes) would be used on rebuilding rather than new things. Old people talk about the economy - which is worse, leaving a debt or a debt AND no way to move forward on it.

It boils down to the effort needed. It's hard for people who are doing what they can - recycling, not changing homes and tech frequently etc - to understand they aren't doing enough. And rightly so IMHO. You have to make staying on the same path harder/more expensive than the change you want. Give people an excuse not to do something and they'll take it. In the end the argument was that oil/gas gave good paying jobs - so selling the environment when they won't be around to pay the price.