CO2 is not a pollutant, and is like 10% of all atmospheric greenhouse gases. The science is weak and involves people overstating their arguments by claiming to

CO2 is not a pollutant, and is like 10% of all atmospheric greenhouse gases. The science is weak and involves people overstating their arguments by claiming to understand complex cycles of systems that they have minuscule amounts of data about. If you have 100 years of data for 1000 year cycle how can you claim to know what's going on? People concerned about climate change, should be researching crops that can grow in warmer temperatures and other risk mitigating fields. Energy research will of course continue, and we need better climate satellites so that we can understand what's going on. But, the massive boondoggle that targets individuals is a waste of resources. Instead target small areas that can have a big effect - cement production, iron & steel production, and energy generation. The "pro-pollution" argument is that there are many competing causes for us to spend our time and resources on. People are dying today from relatively simple problems that can be significantly alleviated with less effort than what's being wasted on trying to convince individuals to change their behavior.