This is a good point. I’ve long felt that the climate change debate is counter productive in the sense that in the last 20 years it has, to a large extent, replaced the broader conversation on the environment. At one time, campaigns to save the rainforests, save the whales, protect the watersheds, reduce waste and recycle were forefront in the environmental movement. More recently, the narrative has been reduced to a single note on climate change, a process that is inevitable with or without anthropogenic influence. When the public sees wealthy politicians and celebrity activists preaching responsible carbon use or pushing for carbon taxes, while jetting around to lavish conferences attended by the world’s elite who pat each other on the back and make speeches about the efficacy of their half-measures that fail to address the problem in a substantive manner, the natural reaction is to reject the hypocrisy and dismiss the issue entirely.
The world needs to address the ecological crisis at it root, and radically re-envision human relationships with local ecosystems until a sustainable global ecology is realized. The singular focus on climate change and carbon output is detrimental to achieving this goal. To me, this seems to be by design: distract the public from the real problem while pretending to address but one symptom of the current disharmony between man and his environment.