Hello Daniil, thanks for writing a measured article that nevertheless will still result in you being excoriated for the simple reason that humans in general prefer simple to complex, black/white over shades of gray, and today the only acceptable PC view is the standard model. Not surprising given the right-wing dedication to denying everything in order to garner votes from people who want to run away and hide in an illusory 1950s.
I agree that Thunberg is at best an irrelevant distraction and at worst harms the cause of rational response to climate change. The media adore her because she’s the new and far more photogenic Mother Teresa; a necessary icon that can be slapped onto the front page of any article concerning climate change. No thought required.
While I am aware of the many issues regarding climate models, it does seem reasonable to limit the amount of greenhouse gasses we’re pumping daily into the atmosphere — as well as attempting to stem massive deforestation — because both lead to a huge reduction in the amount of O2 that can be created. And we depend on this poisonous gas for our lives. Ocean acidification (resulting from increased CO2 levels) will likely have a greater impact than Bolsonaro’s vandalism of the Amazon rain forest in this regard.
Unfortunately history shows conclusively that we homo sapiens aren’t much gifted with intellectual capacity, so the herd mentality will prevail, stupid policies will result, and most likely very little tangible will change at all with regards to mitigating our current practices. Just a few publicized but meaningless gestures to appease the middle classes, from whose number Thunberg comfortably comes.